Old Bailey Proceedings.
15th August 1859
Reference Number: t18590815

ActionsCite this text | Print-friendly version | Report an error
Old Bailey Proceedings front matter.
15th August 1859
Reference Numberf18590815

Related Material



A star (*) denotes that prisoners have been previously in custody—two stars (**) that they have been more than once in custody—an obelisk (†) that they are known to be the associates of bad characters—the figures after the name in the indictment denote the prisoner's age.


OLD COURT.—Monday, August 15th, Tuesday, 16th Wednesday, 17th, Thursday, 18th, and Friday, 19th, 1859.


Before the Lord Chief Baron Pollock and the First Jury

For the case of THOMAS SMETHURST, indicted for the Wilful Murder of Isabella Bankes, see SURREY CASES.

NEW COURT.—Monday, August 15th, 1859.


Before Mr. Common Serjeant and the Second Jury.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-706
VerdictGuilty > unknown

Related Material

706. JAMES BUTCHER (28), and DANIEL FOX (25) , Stealing 1 watch, value 8l. of William Bayman from his person.

MR. COOPER conducted the Prosecution.

WILLIAM BAYMAN . I am a grocer—I was in Fenchurch-street on 19th July, a little before 3 o'clock—in passing a stationer's shop there were

several persons—I observed the two prisoners standing just at the edge of the kerb—I think they were near each other—one gave me a knock on the right shoulder, and I felt a snatch at my watch at the same time—I put my hand up, and my watch was gone—I caught the chain in my hand—Butcher immediately crossed the road into Leadenhall Market—Fox came to me immediately, and said, "Have you lost anything?"—I said, "Yes; my watch"—he said, "What a pity!"—I made him no answer—I walked on towards London-bridge—after I got a short distance I saw Fox watching me, and when he got a respectable distance he moved in another direction—I followed him, and never lost sight of him till Butcher joined him about Threadneedle-street—they walked a short distance on the pavement together, and hailed an omnibus, which stopped, and they got on the roof—I saw them mount—I saw the policeman, Baker, and communicated to him what I had lost—he and I followed the omnibus, and on getting to it he ordered it to stop, which it did immediately—Baker said to the prisoners, "Come down; you are my prisoners"—they came down, and he took them in custody—I afterwards saw Baker mount the omnibus, and he afterwards shewed me my watch—this is it.

Cross-examined by Mr. LILLEY. Q. How long did this take? A. The whole case might have taken two minutes—I saw the prisoners together in Threadneedle-street—they were about three times the length of this court from me.

CHARLES BAKER (City policeman, 653). I was on duty, and followed the omnibus in a cab—I stopped the omnibus, and saw the two prisoners outside—I spoke to them, and I saw Butcher do something—I told them to come down, and to consider themselves in custody on suspicion of stealing a gentleman's watch—Butcher said, "It was not me"—I gave them to another officer—I mounted the omnibus, looked under the cushion, and found this watch, which the prosecutor identified.

Cross-examined by Mr. LILLEY. Q. In what part was this? A. In the front of the omnibus—I believe the front was full, but my attention was directed more to the prisoners.

Cross-examined by Mr. SLEIGH. Q. Did Butcher say he was a stranger? A. Yes, and that he came from Brighton 2 or 3 days before—he did not say he happened to speak to the other man, and got on the omnibus with him—Fox had this coat on his arm—he gave his address, No. 10, Flower and Dean-street—I found on him 2 sovereigns, a black silk handkerchief, and a halfpenny.

GUILTY .— Confined Three Months each.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-707
VerdictGuilty > unknown

Related Material

707. ALBERT SIMPSON (23) , Stealing 1 watch of Robert Kay from his person.

ROBERT KAY . I came up by the railway to Fenchurch-street on 4th July, about 5 minutes past 10 o'clock in the evening—I was looking for a cab for myself and family—I saw the prisoner and others—the prisoner drew himself up to me, and I could not get along—there were four more about him—he looked me in the face, and I thought something was wrong—I put my hand down, and found my watch was gone—I seized hold of him, and said, "You thief, you have stolen my watch"—I saw him put his hand out, and my watch was in it—he did not get rid of it the first time, and he drew his hand in again, and gave a sign, and put his hand out again, and a party took it—they almost broke my arm—they tried to put my arm down—I was prevented from laying hold of the prisoner's hand that had my watch, but I held him, and gave him in charge—my watch was worth about 10

guineas—my chain was an Albert-chain; it was not a guard—it was dangling down without anything to it—the bow of the watch was gone—the chain was not broken.

Cross-examined by Mr. SHARPE. Q. Was this in Fenchurch-street? A. Yes—I held the prisoner in the same place till a policeman came up—there were 100 people, perhaps—I was examined at the Mansion-house—I did not say that I caught hold of the prisoner's hand—I did not catch hold of his hand, he would not have got my watch if I had—a man and woman caught hold of his hand, but the watch was gone then—I will swear that it was not before the watch was gone that they seized his hand—I called out "Police;" but I first said, "You thief, you have stolen my watch"—there was a man and a woman, one of our men and his wife, who came up after the prisoner had passed the watch—there were a great many people about, and they were preventing me from getting the prisoner's hand—20 or 30 were pushing on me, but I could observe what took place—I have never found my watch—I saw it in the prisoner's hand; I am sure of that—I said, "You thief, you have given my watch away now."

Mr. LILLEY. Q. When the prisoner first came to you, how many persons were there? A. When I was passing there might be 20 or 30—I met the prisoner—I was as though I was guarded to him—I cried out "Police" as soon as I saw him give the watch away—the man and woman did not lay hold of him till after the watch was gone.

SAMUEL WALLIS (City policeman, 578). I was on duty in Railway-place, Fenchurch-street, on the night of 4th July, about 5 minutes past 10 o'clock—I heard a cry of "Police"—went up to the spot, and saw the prosecutor holding the prisoner—he told me he had stolen his watch out of his pocket, and given it to some one else, and he would give him in charge—I took him to the station—he gave me an address, but he said afterwards it was no use my going, it was not his address, it would be a lost journey for me to go over to the Walworth-road, where he had given me the address, but he would not tell me where he did live.

Cross-examined. Q. Did he say that he did not wish it to be known where he lived that he was charged with stealing a watch, as his friends were respectable? A. Yes.

GUILTY .— Confined Three Months.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-708
VerdictGuilty > unknown

Related Material

708. EDWIN JONES (17) , Stealing 1 watch, value 10l. of John Antoine Colliard.

JOHN ANTOINE COLLIARD . I live in Soho-square, and am a wine-merchant—about a fortnight ago I was on a vessel—I had a watch fastened to this chain—Mr. Thomas spoke to me, and I found my watch was gone.

GEORGE THOMAS . I was on board the steam-boat on 1st August—there was a shove—I turned to see who pushed against me, and I saw the prisoner with this watch in his hand, which was clenched, and the handle of the watch was peeping out, and in the other hand he had the ring of a guard—he pushed against me, and I was close to the prosecutor—I collared the prisoner, and said, "You rascal, I have got you"—I saw him with the watch in his hand, and heard the ring snap from it—I seized him directly—he dropped the watch—I picked it up, and gave him and the watch to the constable—this is it.

JOHN ANTOINE COLLIARD re-examined. This is my watch—it was safe in my pocket—it was picked up, and given to me.

JOHN PACHEY (City policeman, 489). I was sent for, and took the prisoner—he said he was off the gangway at the time.

Prisoner's Defence. There was a great crowd of persons just as I was about to step off the boat—the gentleman seized me—I did not do it.

GUILTY .*— Confined Four Months.

THIRD COURT.—Monday, August 15th, 1859.


Before Mr. Common Serjeant and the Fifth Jury.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-709
VerdictGuilty > with recommendation

Related Material

709. WLLIAM ARMOUR (48), Was indicted for stealing 24 books and 1 oil painting, of Robert Greaves Ibbett.

ROBERT GREAVES IBBETT . I am a picture dealer at 29a, Jewin-street—I know the prisoner—he has been in the habit of coming to my shop—about a month ago I missed this oil painting and some books from the shop—the prisoner had no right to take them—a boy about 11 years old was in charge of the shop door.

JULIA PRATT . I am the wife of George Pratt, of 93, Cloth-fair—I buy old clothes and other things—the prisoner brought this picture and offered it for sale for a shilling, as the value of the frame—he said it was a portrait of his sister—I bought it—I afterwards took it to Mr. Ibbett.

Prisoner's Defence. The prosecutor has known me about 20 years; he knows that I am a man of strict honour and integrity: a small quantity of spirits affects my head. He has behaved very kindly to me and induced me some time ago to take the pledge, which I kept for 16 months. In an evil hour I broke it, and this is the fruit of it. When I possessed myself of the picture it was with no felonious intent; it was done under the insanity of drink. The case would have ended at Guildhall had not the magistrate told the prosecutor that I could bring an action against him if the case was dismissed; I had intended to avail myself of a defence that was prepared for me, showing that there was no evidence that I stole the picture; but after listening to the pious exhortations of the chaplain day after day I cannot consent to purchase my liberty at the sacrifice of truth.

Mr. IBBETT (re-examined.) I have known the prisoner for 20 years—I got him to sign the pledge, knowing he was dreadfully given to intemperance—I always believed him to be honest—he is related to the wife of Robert Burns the poet, and was at one time highly respected—seeing him fallen so low I set him up in business and kept him for 12 months—the last thing I expected was this—I think it must have been done in an evil hour—I told the magistrate I could not condone the matter; as I had given him in charge I must substantiate the truth of the thing or he might bring an action.

GUILTY. Recommended to mercy by the jury and prosecutor Confined Seven Days.

Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-710
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty

Related Material

710. GEORGE CARN (22) , Stealing 1 watch, 1 coat and other articles, value 5l. of Ernest Williams, in the dwelling-house of Thomas Morgan; to which he

PLEADED GUILTY .— Confined Six Months.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-711
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty

Related Material

711. THOMAS EVANS (50) , Stealing 1 pewter measure, value 1s., of Henry Shakleton Tubb, having been before convicted; to which he

PLEADD GUILTY .— Confined Twelve Months.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-712
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty

Related Material

712. WALTER MOONEY (17) , Stealing 6 bottles and 1 gallon of wine, value 30s., of William King; to which he

PLEADED GUILTY .— Confined Four Months.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-713
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty

Related Material

713. JOHN SMITH (23) , Stealing 1 coat, value 10s., and other articles, value 12s., of Henry Haggett; to which he

PLEADED GUILTY .— Confined Four Months.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-714
VerdictNot Guilty > directed

Related Material

714. CATHERINE HOLLAND, (21) , Stealing 1 veil, 1 parasol and 1 shawl, value 1l., of Thomas Robert Hafford Ross, her master.

Mr. PLATT conducted the Prosecution.

THOMAS ROBERT HAFFORD ROSS . I am an eating-house keeper of 94, Leadenhall-street—I employed the prisoner as charwoman for about 10 weeks—I missed a shawl, a veil, and a parasol of my wife's, about a week after she was last employed there, which was 18th June—I have seen this shawl on my wife's back—to the best of my belief it is her's—she is not well enough to be here—I know the parasol by the ring having been knocked out; I have it in my pocket—I have seen my wife wear this veil and have brought a piece of lace which corresponds with it.

THE COURT considered that this evidence was not sufficient.


15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-715
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty

Related Material

715. JOSEPH WARMINGTON (25) , Stealing three 10l. Bank notes, two 5l. Bank notes, and an order for the payment of 30l., of James Payne Lloyd, his master; to which he

PLEADED GUILTY.—Recommended to mercy by the Prosecutor who promised to take him into his employ again. Confined Twelve Months.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-716
VerdictGuilty > unknown; Guilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment; Imprisonment

Related Material

716. THOMAS HEMMINGS (24), and GEORGE CROCKETT (30) , Burglariously breaking and entering the dwelling-house of Amelia MacDonald and stealing therein 31bs. tobacco, 1 bottle and 1 pint of sherry, her property.

MR. BEST conducted the Prosecution.

WILLIAM FINLAYSON (Policeman, S 241). On Saturday morning, 30th July, between 1 and 2 o'clock, I was on duty at Uxbridge, opposite the General Elliott public house, and saw Crockett about six yards from the house going away from it—I went towards him, turned my light on him, and then went to the door and saw Hemmings scramble out of the cellar—I took him in custody; he kicked me, struck me several times in the face, and I was laid up for nine nights and could not do duty—while I was struggling with him Crockett came up, seized me by both arms behind, and they both escaped—I called the landlord down, and then went and told Taylor, my sergeant, about it; we went into the cellar and found 3 1/2 lbs. of tobacco and a bottle of wine at the bottom of the cellar flap where Hemmings came out—I went with Sergeant Neave and another officer, found Crockett in bed, and took him in custody.

Cross-examined by MR. SLEIGH. Q. Were you present when Neave took Hemmings? A. I was outside the house, at the back door, he was in bed

upstairs—there are two stories to the house—I heard the other officer call out "Tom" to somebody, but did not hear him speak to them—I have known the prisoners 12 months; one lives on Uxbridge Moor, and the other in Checkley-yard, about a mile apart—it was a very wet night—the General Elliott was shut up. I did not recognise Crockett till I turned my light on him and then I knew him, and I had a better chance of seeing who he was when he came and caught hold of me—I was 3 yards from the cellar when I saw Hemmings come out of it—he could not spring out, it was too deep—when I first saw him he had his head and shoulders above the level of the flap—one side of the flap was wrenched open—there are no steps—I was never asked before about seeing his head and shoulders out, but I said that I saw him come out and I tore his jacket here (producing it)—I said to the landlord that I did not know their names, but could give a full description of them—I told him how they were dressed, and he said "Oh, that is Thomas Hemmings and Crockett"—I had heard their names before, about the market-place, but could not think of them—I do not know that one has been in the service of the postmaster—I have heard that Hemmings was in the service of Page, the builder, and have heard that he was convicted 5 times in 5 months—I went to another place before I went to his mother's—I have never expressed the slightest doubt about the prisoners, not even to the landlord.

MR. BEST. Q. What description did you give of these men? A. I described their dress.

GEORG FRANCIS . I assist Mrs. Mac Donald, the landlady of the General Elliott, at Uxbridge—I fastened the house up on this Friday night at half-past 10 or 11 o'clock—there is a cellar door in the street with 2 flaps which fasten with 2 bolts inside—the cellar is under the parlour, and you can get out there up some steps and through a door—I was awoke by the police, and accompanied Finlayson into the cellar through the door—he was bleeding from the nose, and complained of being knocked about—we examined the cellar; one of the hasps was gone and the other was broken and torn nearly off—the flap was open—under the flap I found a bottle of sherry laid upon 3 1/2 lbs. of tobacco which had been on the corner of the lowest stair when I went to bed, and the wine was on a shelf over the tobacco—I have seen the prisoners together before.

Cross-examined. Q. Were they customers of yours? A. Not once in 3 months—I bolted and secured the trap that night—there is an outside passage into the cellar forming part and parcel of the house—Finlayson gave me a description of the men, their dress, and other things, upon which I mentioned their names, and he directly said "Those are the two men"—I had not a conversation with him next morning after they were locked up; he told me that Hemmings was locked up—he did not say that he had seen Crockett and was not quite sure he was the man—he never suggested anything of the sort—I know Mr. Page, of Uxbridge; he is a well-sinker, not a builder—I never heard that either of the prisoners were in his employ—I do not know that either of them did a day's work till after this, when Hemmings was out reaping with his two brothers.

WILLIAM NORRIS NEAVE . (Policeman, 28 J). I was stationed at Uxbridge—I accompanied Finlayson to Hemmings's house on Saturday morning, 30th July; I knocked at the door, enquired for Hemmings, and his brother said that he was not at home; the door was then shut and I went round, knocked at the front door; I saw the mother and asked to see her son Tom, she said "He is not within"—I ran round to the back, got up on a bench

by the back window and heard the mother say "Tom, what have you been after? the police are after you"—I afterwards went into the house and saw Hemmings standing down stairs dressed in a black coat the same as now—I told him I should take him for breaking into the General Elliott; he said "Very well"—I asked him where the cord jacket was that he came home in; he said that he had not got one—I took him in custody—I went up stairs and found one jacket on a bench by the side of the bed, and this cord jacket under the bed quite sodden with rain; there had been very heavy rain that night—I handed it to Finlayson.

JOSEPH HENRY TAYLOR (Policeman, J 115). I went with Sunbury, on the morning of July 30, and apprehended Crockett, at his lodgings, in Chequer-yard, Uxbridge, between 3 and 4 in the morning—he was in bed—I saw him dress, and his smock was very wet—I told him he was charged, with Tom Hennessey, with getting into the General Elliott public-house, and with rescuing Hennessey from the policeman—he asked me what time it was—I said, "About 1 o'clock"—he said, "I was in bed just after 12—this is the tobacco and sherry (produced).

RICHARD STUBBLE . I keep the Castle, at Uxbzidge, and know the prisoners—they were at my house on Friday night, 29th July, about two hours, drinking together—they left together as near half-past 12 as I can guess, but I did not look at the clock—it is about half a mile from my house to the General Elliott.

Cross-examined. Q. Do you pledge yourself to it being half-past 12? A. The clock struck 12 when they left, and they stood in the passage afterwards for, I think, nearly half an hour more, as it was raining—there were six or eight other men there, all drinking together, and they all left together.

CROCKETT— GUILTY .— Confined Six Months.

HEMMINGS— GUILTY .—He was further charged with having been before convicted.

FREDERICK FARLEY (Policeman, S 169). I produce a certificate (Read: "Clerkenwell Sessions.— William Wyman, convicted Feb., 1857.—Confined Five Months")—I was present—Hemmings is the person.

HEMMINGS—GUILTY.— Eighteen Months.

NEW COURT.—Tuesday, August 16th, 1859.


Before Mr. Common Serjeant, and the Third Jury.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-717
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty

Related Material

717. JOHN HARRISON (67) , Stealing 1 pewter pot of Amor Lindley, 1 pewter pot of John Wright, 1 pewter pot of Ellis Powell, and 1 pewter pot of William Wimbush; to which he

PLEADED GUILTY .— Confined Nine Months.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-718
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

718. HENRY M'BEAN (44) , Stealing 12 goblets, 6 glasses and 6 decanters, value 15s. of Jonas Defries, and others, his master's.

MR. SLEIGH conducted the Prosecution.

LEYTON LEVY . I am cashier to Mr. Jonas Defries and partners—the prisoner was a warehouseman at their establishment, in Houndsditch—he had been in their employ about a year—Mr. Hardy, of Croydon, was occasionally a customer, and the prisoner lives there—I produce the shop-book,

which I keep—the prisoner makes entries in it of all the sales he makes—here is an entry in it, dated 22d July, in the prisoner's writing: "Mr. Hardy, 1 dozen goblets, is. 4s. 7d.; 6 dram-glasses, 3s.; 6 decanters, 7s. 6d: 15s. 1d—we have no other customer named Hardy at Croydon—I saw the prisoner pack up these goods—I did not see him take them away—he packed them in a small basket with straw, ready to take away—there is no entry in this book whether the money was paid or not—the prisoner said he was going to take them to Croydon for Mr. Hardy—the amount of 15s. 1d. has never been paid to the firm by the prisoner—I am the receiving cashier—supposing the prisoner takes out goods and brings the money, he should bring it to me the next morning—he never paid me for these goods from Mr. Durant or Mrs. Baldwin—no person in the establishment has a right to deal on his own account, unless Mr. Defries gives his consent—I don't know of any authority given by Mr. Defries to the prisoner to sell goods on his own account—Mr. Morgan receives money when I am away or at my meals.

Cross-examined by Mr. LILLEY. Q. Have transactions similar to this occurred several times before. A. Yes; the prisoner has taken away the goods and brought back the money—there is a rule that when they return they ought to pay—if he has received money on the Friday evening, he has paid it to me on the Monday morning—I have not known instances when the money has been received on the Monday and it has been paid on the Wednesday or Thursday—it is a rule that when a man receives money he is to bring it to me immediately—I have been told that that is the rule by Mr. Defries and all his sons—in former instances, the prisoner reported to me the name of the person for whom the goods were obtained, and he brought back the money—there is another cashier—Mr. Wheelerby does not receive money; he is a book-keeper—he keeps the accounts—these goods were taken away on the Friday by the prisoner, and on the Thursday following he was given in custody—I know he was in the habit of drawing part of his wages whenever he wished to ask, I suppose—I don't know that he had drawn some money on the Thursday when he was taken—it is a rule that goods must be booked before they are taken away to the parties who order them.

THOMAS HARDY . I reside at Croydon, and am a licensed victualler—I have dealings with Mr. Defries—I did not, on or about 22d July, call at Mr. Defries and order from the prisoner or anybody else, a dozen of goblets, 6 dram-glasses, and 6 decanters—I did not receive them from anybody.

CHARLES DURANT . I am manager of the Vine Hotel, in Bishopsgate-street—I have known the prisoner some time, at Mr. Defries—I called on 21st July at Mr. Defries; I saw the prisoner, and told him I wanted a certain description of decanters—he replied they had none in the house, but when they came in he would inform me—on the evening of that day he called on me, and said that the decanters had been received—I said I would call in the morning and purchase some—he said, "If you will give me the order, I shall receive 5 per cent, commission on them, and it will, make no difference to you"—I said, "If that is the case, I have no objection to give you the order"—on the following evening he brought me 6 decanters, and told me the price was 8s.—I inquired of him if he had an invoice, he said that he had not, and I objected to pay him on the ground that I thought it was an irregular proceeding, and requested he would bring me the invoice—on the Monday morning he called on me with this invoice, which he handed to me—it was as it is now, but his signature was not to

it—he signed it and delivered it to me—he left the goods on the Friday evening, and called on Monday for the money—these are the decanters I bought—I made a communication to Mr. Defries.

Cross-examined. Q. When was it you paid the money? A. On Monday, 25th July, as near as I can tell, about 10 o'clock in the morning, or half-past; it was not much later.

ANN BALDWIN . I keep the Tamworth Arms, at Croydon—I know the prisoner; he resides in my neighbourhood—on Saturday, 23d July, he came to my establishment—(he had left a dozen of goblets, 6 wine-glasses, and a decanter on Friday evening, but I did not see him)—I said to him, "You have brought the goods"—he said, "Yes"—I counted them, and said, "How much are they?"—he said, 9s., and I paid him—I had ordered these goods, I believe, about a fortnight before—I did not know Mr. Defries—I did not know the prisoner was in any one's employ—he told me he sold on commission—he did not give me a receipt—these are the goods.

Cross-examined. Q. Where do you live? A. In Tamworth-road—I had ordered glasses of this sort, and in consequence of that these were brought.

LEYTON LEVY (re-examined). These are exactly similar glasses and decanters to those packed in the hamper, and there is the same number, 12 goblets, 6 dram-glasses, and 6 decanters—the prisoner was in business on the Monday after this, and on Tuesday, and every day up to the Thursday when he was taken—during those days he did not make any statement respecting this property.

Cross-examined. Q. Are you quite sure you did not hear the prisoner speak to Wheelerby about these decanters, and ask him to keep the account open for a day? A. I did not hear anything of the kind—those goblets are supplied to public-houses—we have hundreds of them in our establishment—they are common goblets for tavern purposes, which other manufacturers might keep in stock also.

MR. SLEIGH. Q. Was Mr. Wheelerby at the establishment at all at that time, or was he away ill? A. He was away ill some part of the time—I can't say whether he was there on the Monday.

JONAS DEFRIES . The prisoner was in my employ as a salesman. On the the Thursday after 22d July, in consequence of some information which had been conveyed to me, I addressed the prisoner, and directed his attention to this book—I said "Mc Bean, did you supply Mr. Hardy, of Croydon, with any goods last week?"—he said "Yes, Sir"—I said "And took them home to Mr. Hardy?"—he said "Yes, Sir"—I said "It is no use telling me a falsity; you did not take them to Mr. Hardy"—he said "I did, Sir"—I said "You did not take them to Mr. Hardy; you took them elsewhere"—he then said he had taken 6 decanters to Mr. Durant, in Bishopsgate-street; and the other portion of the goods he took to Mrs. Baldwin, at the Tamworth Arms, Croydon—I said "Have you received cash for them?" he said "No, Sir"—I said "You had better tell me the truth at once"—he has never paid any of the money for these goods—I never gave him authority to deal on his own account—we give no one authority to do that—we allow them a commission on what they do sell; but everything must go from the firm in the usual course of business—Wheelerby was not there on the Monday.

Cross-examined. Q. At what period did you tell him he had better tell all about it? A. After he had stated that Mr. Hardy had had the goods—we allow our travellers a commission as well as a salary—the prisoner was a traveller—he did not say he was just going to pay the 15s. 1d.; or was just about to pay it, and had drawn 5s. of Mr. Henry Defries to make up the amount; not in my hearing—I was not there all the time—my brother

was—the prisoner would draw money of Mr. Henry Defries—he did not say he was going to pay; but, when I accused him, he offered to pay—I did not see him searched—I did not go to the station—when I accused him, I sent for him from his department, in the glass warehouse, to a private room—I don't remember who I sent for him—when he offered the money I did not say I would make a case of it—I don't know that Wheelerby had been requested by him to keep the account open; he dare not do such a thing after being thirty years in our service—Wheelerby does not make the cash-book up—he merely books goods from this book to the ledger—I had a good character with the prisoner—he had been about fifteen months in our employ.

MR. SLEIGH. Q. When was it he offered to pay the amount? A. I think it was in the policeman's presence, or when the policeman was outside the door—it was after I told him I would give him in custody—he did not say one word about paying before I said I would send for a constable.


15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-719
VerdictGuilty > unknown

Related Material

719. HENRY CHADWICK (27) , Embezzling the sums of 10l. and 15l. 4s. 6d. of Alexander Nicholls.

MR. SLEIGH conducted the Prosecution.

ALEXANDER NICHOLLS . I am a worsted spinner. I have mills in Yorkshire—No. 8, Lillypot-lane, are my offices in London—I opened them in the spring—the prisoner was my clerk and manager there—I was in the habit of being very much out of town—the prisoner had the goods to receive—he had to sell, and to receive certain accounts, according to the instructions given him—there was a lad at Lillypot-lane, named Brierly—the prisoner kept the books, and received orders for goods, and he was to write to me if they were not in stock; but if goods were sold in London, it was his duty to enter them all—Brierly was a lad; I sent him out of the country—he was about 16 or 17 years old—the books were in the prisoner's charge—on the receipt of money, it was the prisoner's duty to take it to the bank the same evening, and send word down to me—he had a cash-book, and it was his duty to make an entry of the money received in the cash-book—I had a customer named Knight—I believe I was in London on 14th June—the prisoner suddenly disappeared about 14th or 15th June—I believe it was on the evening of the 15th, and I did not see him again till I saw him at Guildhall—I believe he was not taken till the latter end, or the middle of July—in this cash-book I believe there are entries in the prisoners writing, under the date of 4th June—here is no entry of the receipt of 10l. from Mr. Sibley on or about 4th June—the prisoner has never accounted to me for the receipt of 10l. from Mr. Sibley on that day—here is no entry in the day-book of goods sold to Mr. Knight on 7th June, 15l. 12s. 9d.—in the cash-book here is no entry on 7th June of 15l. odd, or any entry subsequent to it—the prisoner has never accounted to me for the payment of 15l. odd from Mr. Knight about that time—after the prisoner left I did not see him again till he was in custody—on the receipt of money it was the prisoner's duty to deposit it in the bank, if he received it before the bank closed, the same evening—it was not his duty to keep money and pay it in a lump—his duty was to pay it in whenever it amounted to 5l.—on the receipt of any money it was his duty to advise me of it's receipt the same evening, and to advise me of the sale of goods the next day—he did not advise me of the sale of goods to Mr. Knight, and the receipt of the money, or the receipt of the 10l. from Mr. Sibley—after 14th June the prisoner wrote to me from Gravesend.

Cross-examined by MR. RIBTON. Q. Did you receive a letter from him

from Gravesend. A. Yes—I don't know on what date—it was shortly after his disappearance—before that letter was received, I heard that some money had been found—it came to my knowledge, and I sent to the police-court, and received some of the money—I received upwards of 40l. in bank notes and sovereigns; Mr. De Jersey got it for me—I don't know whether it was by the drawers of the cheques being found that I was found—a few days after this letter was received by me (produced)—I answered it, and promised not to prosecute him—I was not aware of these other cases coming put—the books had all been balanced—the lad is about 17—I gave him directions to take charge of all the books, and Briefly was under his command—I believe Briefly made many entries of the goods sold—that was not by my direction—I don't see any of his entries in this cash-book—the prisoner received the money, and it would be his duty to make the entry in the cash-book—Brierly made entries of goods sold—I got advices every morning; sometimes from Brierly and sometimes from the prisoner—I don't know whether this page in this day-book is Chad wick's writing; I cannot swear to it—the writing ought to be made by Chadwick—this letter I received from him—it appears to me to be his writing—all the entries in this page of the daybook appear to be one writing, except two or three entries which appear to be the prisoner's writing—these entries of June 7th appear to be the same writing as this other—not the prisoner's—on June 6th it is the same except a few entries, and the same on 5th June—in the cash-book they are the prisoners writing—I don't see any of Brierly's here—this page from May 9th to 21st I think is by Brierly—I only come up once a month, and am only three or four hours with him—the whole affair has only been in about two months—the last money that was received, was paid into the bank—the prisoner was in the service of me and my partner, in Yorkshire, about twelve months, and then a dissolution took place, and he came to me—he was about two years in my service, and I sent him up to London to my agent.

MR. SLEIGH. Q. At the time you received this letter from the prisoner, had you any notion about this 10l. and this 15l. being missing? A. No; some of the entries in this cash-book are in the entry of the boy—he is not in my service now; I have dismissed him—if he made entries, it was not his duty to do so—it was the prisoner's duty—I complained about it—if the boy or any body else made entries, it was the prisoner's duty to see that they were correct.

HENRY KNIGHT . I live in Wellington-road, Bethnal-green, and am a trimming manufacturer—I know the prisoner as in the employ of Mr. Nicholls, of Lillypot-lane, who I am in the habit of buying goods of—on 7th June, I bought goods amounting to 15l. 12s. 9d.; the prisoner was not there when I bought them, only one of the lads in the warehouse—I bought them in the morning, and they were delivered to me in the afternoon—the prisoner came to me the same evening for the money; I paid him—he brought this invoice; I paid him the amount, less the discount—I paid him net 15l. 4s. 10d.—he receipted it in my presence.

Cross-examined. Q. Do you know the prisoner's writing? A. Yes; the body of this invoice is not his writing, but the receipt is—I paid it in gold and silver.

SAMUEL SIBLEY . I live in Albany-road, Camberwell—I was indebted to Mr. Nicholls 18l.—on 4th June the prisoner called and asked me for the amount—I said I could give him 10l.—I paid him 10l. and he gave me this receipt, which was written in my presence—I said I would pay the balance sometime, as soon as I could—he said that would do—I gave him a 5l. note and 5l. in cash.

EDWARD ANCELL . I reside at Norwood—I was engaged by Mr. Nicholls, in May and June, to look over his books—I know the prisoner and his writing—I have examined this cash-book; it was balanced on 11th June in the prisoner's writing—on 7th June there is only one entry in the prisoner's writing—there is no entry on 4th, 5th, or 6th June; nothing till the 7th, that is the prisoner's writing, and also on the 3d—in the day-book on 7th June there are several entries in the writing of a young man named Brierly—there is no entry of the prisoner's on that day.

Cross-examined. Q. Was this book kept in the desk. A. It was—the prisoner's wife came to me several times; she brought a letter from the prisoner to me—she did not bring a letter from Mr. Nicholls—she came, but I could not get the book; she did not bring the key—I have heard since that there was a correspondence between Mr. Nicholls and the prisoner, about the time that the money was lost—the desk was broken open before the money was found.

MR. DE JERSEY . I am the solicitor for the prosecution—the money was restored in a 10l. note and a cheque.

Cross-examined. Q. Do you know that they were found in a gutter? A. I heard that they were picked up in a gutter—I proved my title to it—I heard some person was getting into a cab, and two young men went across the road and picked up the parcel.

EDWARD KITCHEN (Policeman, 493 N). I took the prisoner on Wednesday, 29th June, at 11, Gordon-street, Islington, where he resided—I was in plain clothes—I told him I was an officer, and I had come to take him in charge for embezzling 10l. paid by Mr. Sibley, for and on account of Mr. Nicholls, his employer, and also 15l. 12s. 8d. on 7th Juno, paid by Mr. Knight—he asked if I knew the full amount of his defalcation—I told him I knew no more than that I came to apprehend him for—I took him to Bow-lane Station, and on searching him I found his pocket-book and a purse.

Cross-examined. Q. You took him at his residence? A. Yes; I went and asked his wife if he was at home—she said "No"—I told her I was a police constable—she did not ask me in, but I got in, and found the prisoner in bed—it was about half-past 8 o'clock in the morning.

GUILTY .— Confined Eighteen Months.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-720
VerdictGuilty > unknown

Related Material

720. BENJAMIN REDMAN (21) , Burglariously breaking and entering the dwelling-house of William Robertson, and stealing therein a purse, 1 order for payment of 20l. and 1 order for payment of 3l. 17s. 9d. and 4l. in money, the property of William Cousins.

MR. COOPER conducted the Prosecution.

WILLIAM COUSINS . I live at 26, Long Acre, and am a potato salesman, carrying on business in Covent-garden. On 11th July I went to bed with my wife about half-past 10 o'clock—the house was then fastened, and every window was down—about half-past 2 o'clock I heard a rustling noise, and thought I saw a man—I raised myself up, and found a person in the room—I got out of bed, collared the prisoner, and ordered my wife to go and raise an alarm in the front room—during that time the prisoner said to me, "My friend McIntosh is in the front room; you had better liberate me and go and look after him"—I would not do so—my wife gave an alarm in the front room, and during that time the prisoner tried to get away, but I held him till the policeman came, and gave him into his hands—I examined my trousers, and missed my purse, containing 2 cheques,

one for 20l. the other 3l. 14s. 9d., and 4 sovereigns—when the policeman came he pushed the prisoner back—I heard something drop, and the policeman stooped down and picked up my purse—I afterwards looked at the chest of drawers, and the drawers had been turned out—next morning I examined the outside of the window—I found one foot-mark and part of another in the gutter, which is immediately under the sill of the window—it forms part of the sill—there is a pipe from the gutter to carry the water to the sewer—there are windows open all night at the next house, which is a public-house—the back part is a dancing room—he could get out of that window to my window very easily—my window was shut, it shuts itself, it has no weight; it will not stay open—it was the sitting-room window that he got in at—the house belongs to Mr. William Robertson—I am a lodger there—it is in the parish of St. Martin.

Prisoner. Q. Did you find the money all right in your coat pocket? A. Yes—I did not go away and get a light as I had you in my possession—there was no light till the policeman brought his lantern—I was away for 10 minutes after we found the purse—I took you by the collar—I examined the front room before I put my trousers on—I don't know whether you were standing in the middle of the room when the policeman came.

COURT. Q. Are you sure that the noise you heard was the fall of something from him? A. Yes; the policeman took it up right from the side of his foot.

JAMES BUTT (Police-sergeant, S 13). I was on duty in Long-acre about half-past 2 o'clock that morning—I heard a call of police—went to the house and found the prisoner in Mr. Cousins's bed-room—Mr. Cousins was holding him—I took him in custody and searched him—when I came up he stood about the centre of the room—I heard a noise, pushed the prisoner on the bed, and looked down and found this purse—the prisoner said that his friend McIntosh was in the other room—I took the prisoner to the station.

Prisoner's Defence. I got into a public-house and got the worse for liquor. I remember speaking to some person; as to breaking in I don't know. The Magistrate asked if there were the marks of nails, they said "Yes," and I had no nails in my boots. The prosecutor said to me, "What do you do here?" I said, "Some person let me in;" he saw I was the worse for liquor. He went out of the room for ten minutes and came back and put on his stockings. The policeman searched me and said I had nothing, and when we got to the station he said, "What did you do with the sixpence you had?" I can swear I never saw the purse; it must have fallen out of his pocket after he had overhauled my clothes. I was in the house but I did not break in.

JAMES BUTT (re-examined). Q. Did you see any marks in the gutter? A. Yes; near the window; and in front there was a mark as if any one had been on the lead—they could have got out of the window of the Windsor Castle public-house and got in there.

GUILTY .*— Confined Twelve Months.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-721
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

721. JOHN THOMAS PALMER (28) , Stealing 5 quarts of beer, and 103 cigars, of Ann Maria Carter, his mistress.

MR. COOPER conducted the Prosecution.

HENRY WEBB (City policeman). I went to the Britannia public-house in Duke-street, Little Britain—the prisoner was cellarman and potman there—I had been watching there for eighteen nights, and on the night of 11th

August, between 11 and 12 o'clock, I was concealed in the wine-cellar with Scott, another officer—the prisoner came down stairs and unlocked the beer-cellar door—he unscrewed the connecting pipe of the beer-barrel—he then kneeled down and drank from the tap—he then fixed the bucket and drew it three parts full of beer—he took it into the outer cellar and went and hid it behind some barrels at the farther end of the cellar—he came back, locked the cellar door, and went up stairs—I followed him and called him into the bar parlour—I asked him what he had been doing in the cellar—he said he had been to put on the beer—I asked him what he drew a bucket of beer for—he said he had not—I told him I had seen him draw a bucket of beer and secrete it in the cellar—he considered some time and said he had not—I told him he had, and I had before seen him take seven buckets and fourteen bottles—he said he had never taken anything before, and what he drew the beer then for was to dissolve the sugar in the bucket, and in the morning he intended to put some water to it and put it into the barrel—I said, "Why did you take it out of the cellar?"—he said he did not know—I asked him what he had in his cupboard—he went in the tap-room, took the keys out of his pocket, unlocked his cupboard, and took from it a box of cigars and a bottle of brandy—I asked him to account for how he became possessed of the cigars—he said when he went to Whitbread's brewery to order the beer they gave him an order to go to the tap, and he went to a cigar shop opposite and had one or two cigars—that he had part of the order in beer and part in cigars in a cigar shop—I took him to the station and found 3l. 14s. 5d. on him—I examined the bucket of beer—there was no sugar in it whatever—I had seen him use that same bucket three or four times before.

Cross-examined by MR. METCALFE. Q. Are you the prosecutor? A. No—Mr. Kemp is the attorney—I gave him no instructions—I told him the particulars of the case—I did not take him to the prosecutrix—he spoke to me before he spoke to the prosecutrix—I have known him a number of years—he has prosecuted a great many cases here before—when I have a case I do not always go to him—I take some cases to Mr. Wontner and some to Mr. Humphreys—I don't know that the prosecutrix knew Mr. Kemp till I took him—when this beer was taken I followed the prisoner directly up stairs—I had a motive in asking him the question I did; but I don't know that I am obliged to state it—I gave the instructions for this indictment.

ANN MARIA CARTER . I keep the Britannia Hotel, Duke-street, Little Britain—I am single—the prisoner was in my employ as cellarman for the last sixteen months; he was paid 7s. a week, and had perquisites—I missed beer and spirits, and in consequence I sent for Webb—the prisoner sometimes went in the cellar to fine the beer—none was required to be fined on the night in question—it was not his duty to draw beer over night—he had no right at all to my cigars—these cigars (produced) are very much like those I had.

Cross-examined. Q. How do they fine the beer? A. I don't know any thing about that—I leave that to the cellarman—he had no occasion to go in the cellar that night—I do not give him orders to go down in the cellar to fine the beer; he knows himself when it wants fining, and he goes and does it—we do put sugar with it—that would be a proper mode to take some beer out and put the sugar in it—the prisoner had been in my service some time and he had been in the service of the person there before me—he went to America—I don't know whether begot some money there—on his return my sister sent for him—I did not employ an attorney in this case—I don't know who he is.

JOHN YOUNG . I keep a public-house nearly opposite Whitbread's were-house—the prisoner has frequently come with an order, and has had many cigars given him—he would have perhaps a glass, of ale and some cigars—he may have had as many us an hundred cigars.

The prisoner received a good character.


15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-722
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

722. PERCY ILLINGWORTH (25) , Stealing 1 handkerchief of Richard Davis, from his person.

RICHARD DAVIS . I am a clerk—on 27th July I was walking along Eastcheap about a quarter past 2 o'clock in the afternoon—I felt a sudden tug at my side coat pocket; I put my hand and found my handkerchief was gone—I turned quickly round, and saw the prisoner walking behind me with my handkerchief wiping his nose—I immediately seized him by the collar and said, "You have got my handkerchief"—he replied, "It is not your's; I picked it up"—I detained him till a policeman came, and gave him into custody.

Prisoner. Q. From which pocket did you lose your handkerchief? A. From my left hand pocket—I can't swear what distance you were from me—I don't know whether there were three men behind me—I saw you wiping your nose with the handkerchief—I may have asked some men if they saw the handkerchief taken—I saw some men after I detained you.

NOAH ANDREWS . (City policeman, 542). I took the prisoner in charge, and got the handkerchief; this is it.

RICHARD DAVIS . This is my handkerchief.

Prisoners Defence. I picked the handkerchief up. I was about four yards from him. There were three men standing facing him not a yard from him; he asked them if they saw the handkerchief taken from his pocket; they said, "No." They must have seen me take it if I did take it; he told them to hold me, and I said I would stand till the constable came, and I did so.

GUILTY .—He was further charged with having been before convicted.

CHARLES BAKER (City policeman, 653). I produce a certificate of the prisoner's conviction, (Read: Central Criminal Court; James Lawman, convicted, July 1858, of stealing a locket and other articles, Confined Nine Months.") The prisoner is the person.

GUILTY.— Four Years' Penal Servitude.

THIRD COURT.—Tuesday, August 16th, 1859.


Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq. and the Fifth Jury.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-723
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty

Related Material

723. HENRY LANGLEY (22), Unlawfully uttering counterfeit coin, having other counterfeit coin in his possession; to which he

PLEADED GUILTY .— Confined Nine Months.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-724
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty

Related Material

724. CHARLES SHIFLIER (56) , Unlawfully uttering counterfeit coin; to which he

PLEADED GUILTY .— Confined Six Months.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-725
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

725. WILLIAM WILKINSON, Feloniously uttering counterfeit coin after a previous conviction; to which he

PLEADED GUILTY .**— Ten Years Penal Servitude.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-726
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty

Related Material

726. ELIZA CLARKE (26) , Unlawfully uttering counterfeit coin, having other counterfeit coin in her possession; to which she

PLEDED GUILTY .— Confined Three Months.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-727
VerdictGuilty > unknown

Related Material

727. FRANK WEBB (34) , Unlawfully uttering counterfeit coin.

Messrs. BEST and POLAND conducted the prosecution.

ALFRED GREAVES . I am barman at the Elephant and Castle, Newington—on 2d July I was barman at the King's Head, Gerrard-street, Soho—the prisoner came about half-past 2 o'clock, and I served him with twopenny-worth of gin—he gave me a shilling—I bent it, and told him it was bad—he gave me a good one—I gave him change, and he left, taking the bad shilling with him—about a quarter to 6 the same evening I served him with three halfpenny worth of gin, and he gave me a bad shilling—I recognised him, bent it, told him that it was bad, that he had been there before, that that was the second bad one, and that I should send for a policeman—I did so, and gave him in custody, bent the second shilling, which was a Victoria one, gave it to Mr. Rolf, and saw him give it to the policeman—the first shilling was a George.

Prisoner. Q. Was it not a half crown that I gave you? A. No; 1s.—I did not give you 2s. 4d. change.

Mr. POLAND. Q. Did the first shilling bend readily? A. Yes; I am quite sure it was bad.

HENRY ALLEN (Policeman, C 20). I took the prisoner at the King's Head on 4th July, and received this shilling from Mr. Rolf, the landlord—he gave the name of Edward Walker at the station, and of Frank Webb before the Magistrate—I searched him at the station, and found on him 5 half crowns, 2s. and 5 1/2 d.

WILLIAM WEBSTER . I am Inspector of Coin to Her Majesty's Mint—this shilling is bad—bending is a test of badness.

Prisoners Defence. It is scarcely feasible that in the short space of two hours I should go and try a second shilling at the same house after his giving me one back. When he returned the shilling, I immediately went to a grocer's where I was well known, and bought some tea and sugar with it; the change found on me I got from Mr. Rolf in change for a half crown.

ALFRED GREAVES re-examined. The prisoner did not expostulate with me at all when he came in the second time—I charged him with having been there in the morning, and he denied it.

GUILTY .*— Confined Twelve Months.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-728
VerdictGuilty > unknown

Related Material

728. JAMES TEDDER (39) , Unlawfully uttering counterfeit coin, having another in his possession.

Messrs. BEST and POLAND conducted the Prosecution.

ELIZABETH DORRELL . I am barmaid at the Bell Size Tavern—on 11th July, between 3 and 4 o'clock, the prisoner came for a pint of ale, and gave me a shilling—I gave him change, and put it in the till—there was no other shilling there—shortly afterwards he asked for another pint of ale, and gave me another shilling—I gave him change for that, and put it into the till—he asked for another pint, gave me another shilling—I gave him change for that, and put that into the till—he then asked for another pint, and gave me fourth shilling—I thought it right to examine that, and found it was bad—I said, "This is bad"—he said, "It is not"—he showed his purse, and said, "You may as well say these are bad," shaking about 1l. worth of silver on the counter—I took 3 bad shillings out of the counter—a constable

was sent for, and when he came the prisoner put back the change I had given him on the counter—I gave the 4 bad shillings to the constable.

Prisoner. Q. Did anybody strike me in the face? A. Yes, a man who I do not know—you were not emptying the money out at that time.

JOHN PENWELL (Policeman, 362 s.) I was sent for, and found the prisoner in the taproom—I searched him there, and found these 5 bad shillings (produced) in his coat pocket, and this bad shilling in his trousers pocket—I received these 4 bad shillings from Miss Dorrell.

WILLIAM WEBSTER . These shillings are all bad—the single shilling is of the reign of George III. 1817, and from the same mould as one of these 3 from the till; these other 2 are of 1844 and 1845—this one from his trousers pocket is of 1844, and from the same mould as one of the other two—these 5 from his coat pocket are 2 of 1817, one of which is from the same mould as the other of that date, and 3 of 1844 from one mould—3 of those of 1817 are from the same mould, which has been broken, and the same shilling has been used to make another mould.

Prisoner's Defence. The man who was with me paid for the third pint of ale, and the witness told the policeman so. I was pulling out my money, to see what had I got, when some man struck me on the face. I am a gardener, and had changed a sovereign that morning, when I bought 4 plants of a costermonger.

ELIZABETH DORRELL re-examined. There was another man drinking with the prisoner—the prisoner said to him, "You pay for this; I have paid for two," and when I turned round the third shilling was on the counter, and the prisoner took up the change I gave for it.

GUILTY .*— Confined Eighteen Months.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-729
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

729. EDWIN JAMES (alias Underwald ) (17) , Feloniously uttering counterfeit coin.

Messrs. BEST and POLAND conducted the Prosecution.

THOMAS ALLEN (City policeman, 448). I produce a certificate (Read: "Central Criminal Court, September, 1858; Edwin James, convicted, on his own confession, of unlawfully uttering counterfeit coin. Confined Three Months). I was present at the trial—the prisoner is the person.

WILLIAM BARTLETT . I keep the York Arms, Curzon-street, May Fair—about six weeks or two months before the 22d May the prisoner came, and I served him with some soda-water and brandy, which came to 7d.—he gave me half-a-crown, which I threw into the till, and gave him change—he left, and I afterwards opened the till, and there was no other half-a-crown there—I examined it, and it was bad—no one had been to the till; I was alone in the bar—I threw it into the fire, and it melted immediately—on 26th May the prisoner came again—I recognised him the moment he entered the door—he asked my wife for some soda-water and brandy—I served him—he gave me half-a-crown—I told him it was bad, and returned it to him—he said that he was exceedingly sorry, and he could not imagine where he had been so unfortunate as to take it, tendering me a good one—I gave him the change—he wished to have it back, but I refused, and gave him in custody with the half-a-crown.

Cross-examined by Mr. LILLEY. Q. Have you a number of customers from morning till night? A. Yes—my wife also serves, and her sister., act as barmaid.

FREDERICK RILEY (Policeman, C 159). On 26th May I took the prisoner at Mr. Bartlett's, who gave me the half-crown. He was taken to Marlborough-street, where he gave the name of James Wilson—he was asked his address by the Magistrate and refused to give it—he was remanded and discharged.

SOPHIA ANN HILLIER . I live at Wellington Lodge, Hyde-park-comer; it is under the Statue and belongs to my brother—on 10th July the prisoner came there for a bottle of lemonade—I served him, and he gave me a bad half-crown—I said to my brother, "William, here is a bad half-crown"—he said, "It is a bad one"—the prisoner said, "I was not aware of it, I have just taken it"—I asked him where, and he made a rambling statement—he afterwards gave me a good one.

Cross-examined. Q. Are you a widow? A. Yes; I have numerous customers, and sell curds and whey—the prisoner was not out of my sight till he was given in custody.

WILLIAM TAYLOR . I live at Wellington Lodge, Hyde-park-corner—my sister gave me a bad halfcrown—I asked her who gave it her, and she said, "This gentleman," pointing to the prisoner—I asked him if he was aware it was bad—he said that he was not, and if it was he was very sorry; he had only just taken it—I asked him his name and address; he said, "Charles Underwood," or "Underwold, Sun-street, Kennington-park"—I said, "That is too far for me to go to ascertain the truth of it; the best thing is for me to give you in custody, and they will ascertain the truth of your statement at the Police Court—he afterwards said that he brought it from home, and asked me to return it to him and he would give me another—I refused, and gave him in custody with the half-crown which I marked.

Cross-examined. Q. How long ago was this? A. Five weeks last Sunday, I believe.

JACOB TURNER (Policeman, C 77). On Sunday, 10th July, I took the prisoner at Wellington Lodge, commonly called the Triumphal Arch, and received a half-crown from William Taylor—the prisoner said, "Do not take hold of me, I will go quietly," and from his appearance I was inclined to believe him—he went a very short distance to Eugene-street, Piccadilly, and then said, "I will not be locked up for nothing," and ran off—I saw him stopped a short distance off—he was only out of my sight an instant, whilst he was turning a corner.

WILLIAM WEBSTER . These half-crowns are both bad.

GUILTY .— Six Years Penal Servitude.

There was another indictment against the prisoner.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-730
VerdictGuilty > unknown

Related Material

730. JOHN MURPHY (36) , Unlawfully uttering counterfeit coin.

MESSRS. BEST and POLAND conducted the Prosecution.

EMMA BALDERSTON . I live at the Fox and Crown public-house, Highgate, kept by my uncle—on Wednesday afternoon, 13th July, I served the prisoner with a pint of porter and he gave me a bad half-crown which I gave to my aunt, Emma Elsey.

EMMA ELSEY . My husband keeps the Fox and Crown—on 13th July the last witness gave me a half-crown—I went to a prisoner, who was sitting outside on a form, and said, "Governour, you have given my girl a bad half-crown"—he said, "Is it? then I will give you another"—the next one he gave me was bad, and I discovered two more in his hand which I took out and handed to the people who were standing by—he said that he had just taken

it of Mr. Ward, the farmer, who lives close to me—I asked him for the change that my girl gave him—he returned me the 2s. 4d. but not the 2d. for the beer: but I was confused—I told him to take the money to Mr. Ward, and return it to him—I can say for certain that the money was bad—when the prisoner came back from Mr. Ward's he gave me two half-crowns, which I gave to Foster—I had not put them in the till; I kept them separate.

JAMES HOLLIS . I am potman at the Fox and Crown—on Wednesday afternoon, 13th July, I was at the door when the prisoner was served—my mistress spoke to him in my presence, and he said that he had taken it of Mr. Ward, the farmer—I went with him to Mr. Ward's, half a mile off, and he said that he had not given him any money for a fortnight; that he had left, him a fortnight, and he had always given him good money—the prisoner then said that he got it from Mr. Colley, at Finchley—he gave me two halfcrowns which I shewed to Mr. Ward and gave up to Mrs. Elsey—I had before seen her give them back to the prisoner—on the way back from Mr. Ward's the prisoner told me that he knew they were bad.

HENRY SAWYER . I am a greengrocer of Highgate—On Wednesday, 13th July, about eight in the evening, the prisoner came for some butter and cheese and half an ounce of tobacco, and tendered me a half-crown—I told him it was bad, and that I was very much surprised—he said, "I have just taken it of Mr. Colley, at Whetstone," and tendered me 1s.—I gave him the change and should have let him go, but received information, and gave him in custody with the halfcrown.

MARY GLOVER . I am the wife of John Glover, who keeps a lodging house at North End, Highgate—on 13th July the prisoner took a lodging for the night—he came about seven o'clock—the lodging was 3d.—he gave me a half-crown—I gave him 2s. 3d. back, and he went out to buy some potatoes for his supper—I did not find that the halfcrown was bed then—I kept it and afterwards gave it to Foster.

SPENCER FELLOWES (Policeman, S 305). On 13th April, I went to Mr. Sawyer's shop, and took the prisoner—I searched him, and found 5s. 1d. in good silver, 9 3/4 d. in copper, and two counterfeit shillings (produced)—I received this half-crown (produced) from Mr. Sawyer.

JOHN FOSTER (Policeman, S 285). I went with Follows to Mr. Sawyer's, and found the prisoner there—I found this bad half-crown (produced) in his coat-pocket—Mrs. Glover gave me this other, and Mrs. Elsey two more—this other I received from Mr. Taylor, a grocer, of Highgate.

ALFRED THOMAS CAMPBELL . I am errand-boy to Mr. Taylor, a grocer, of Highgate—about three weeks previous to 13th July, the prisoner came for half an ounce of tobacco—he gave me half-a-crown, and I gave him 1s. 10d. change—I afterwards examined the halfcrown, and found it was bad—I marked it, put it by itself at the corner of the till, and gave it to my master when he came home—this is it.

WILLIAM WEBSTR . This money is all bad—one of those two passed to Mrs. Elsey is from the same mould as that passed to Mr. Sawyer, and so is this one passed to Mr. Glover; the date of them is 1845—the other from Mrs. Elsey is from the same mould as this from Mr. Sawyer's; the date of them is 1819.

Prisoner's Defence. I worked for Mr. Ward, and eight days for Mr. Colley, at half-a-crown a day—those are the only two places I have worked at since I came from Yorkshire—I told Mr. Ward the money was bad, and he said you have been too long away, or I would exchange it for you—I did not know it was bad—I showed it to a respectable man in the room, who said that it was good.

GUILTY .— Confined Twelve Months.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-731
VerdictGuilty > unknown

Related Material

731. ANN KEENS (42), was indicted for a like offence.

Messrs. BEST and POLAND conducted the Prosecution.

JOHN WILLIAM CHUBB . I keep an oyster-shop, at 15, and a fish-shop, at 17, Tyler street, Regent-street—about a month before, the prisoner was taken she came to No. 17, and I served her with two pennyworth of oysters—she gave me a halfcrown, and I gave her the change—I examined it immediately she left, and it was bad—I put it in my pocket, took it up stairs, and placed it in an ornament on the sitting-room mantelpiece, and afterwards gave it to a policeman—I am sure it was the same—on Friday, 29th July, 1 was called from No. 15 to No. 17, and found the prisoner there—I recognised her directly I saw her, and said, "You are the woman who gave me the bad halfcrown"—she said, "I did not"—I said, "You did;" sent for a policeman, and gave her in custody—I am sure she is the woman; I knew her for she has given me three or four bad coins before.

ANN FROST . I am the niece of the last witness, and serve in the oyster-shop, No. 17—on 29th June, the prisoner came for two bloaters and a pint of winkles; they came to 6d.—she gave me half-a-crown—I gave her the change, and she left—I afterwards found it was bad, and put it in my pocket—I had no other half-crown there—I afterwards wrapped it in paper and put it in a drawer at No. 15—on 29th July, the prisoner came again for two Dutch herrings, which came to 3d., and gave me a bad half-crown—I said, "This is a bad halfcrown"—she said she would change it, but I refused, saying she had been there before, and gave me another—she said that I was mistaken—I fetched my uncle, and the bad half-crown the prisoner had passed to me before, and gave the two halfcrowns to the constable.

CHARLES BROWN (Policeman, A 304). I took the prisoner, and received these two halfcrowns (produced) from the last witness, and the other from Mr. Chubb.

WILLIAM WEBSTER . These coins are all bad.

GUILTY *.— Confined Six Months.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-732
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown; Guilty > unknown

Related Material

732. JAMES JOHNS (13) and GRACE JOHNS (64) , Unlawfully uttering counterfeit coin, having other counterfeit coin in their possession.

Messrs. BEST and POLAND conducted the prosecution.

JOSEPH JAMES ROBINSON . I am ten years old, and live with my father, a pork-butcher, of 46, Brick-lane, St. Luke's—on the evening of 22d July, the prisoner, James, came for two saveloys, which came to 4d.—he gave me a shilling—I said, "this is a bad one," and showed it to my mother, who bent it, and gave it to my father—I never lost sight of it—a constable was sent for.

JOSEPH ROBINON . My wife gave me a bad shilling in my son's and the prisoner James's presence—I afterwards gave it to Harvey—I asked James where he got it—he said that his mother gave it him—I called in a policeman, who asked me if I would give him in charge—I said, "No;" and he went off with James to try and find his mother.

JOHN HARVEY . On 22d July, I was passing, and was called into Mr. Robinson's shop, and James was given into my custody—he said that his grandmother sent him with it—I asked him where she was—he said, "Outside"—I said, "Come and show me where she is"—we went out together, walked up Brick-lane about 150 yards, and he said, "There she goes across Old-street; that is her with a plaid shawl on"—I hurried on, and overtook her in Golden-lane—she was walking as fast as she could, but could not walk fast, as she is very lame—she did not look behind her—her right hand was closed; I took hold of it, and asked her what she had got

in it—she said, "Nothing," and clasped it tight—I opened it by force, and found this shilling and two halfpence—I said, "This is a bad shilling, where did you get it?"—she said, "I have just picked it up in Golden-lane"—I said, "That is false, for I saw you cross Old-street, and you have never stopped"—I said to the boy, "Is this the woman that sent you?"—he said, "Yes, it is"—she said, "I never sent you in anywhere, but I met him in Brick-lane—I took her to the station, and asked her if she was his grandmother—she said, "Yes"—I produce the shilling I received from Mr. Robinson, and this one I found in her hand—6d. and 2 1/2 d. in copper, good money, was found upon her.

WILLIAM WEBSTER . These two shillings are bad, and from the same mould, 1820.


GRACE JOHNS— GUILTY† .— Confined Two Years.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-733
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty

Related Material

733. EMMA WRAGG (20) , Stealing one watch, value 2l. 10s. of Francis Rosman, from his person, to which she

PLEADED GUILTY .— Confined Six Month.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-734
VerdictGuilty > lesser offence

Related Material

734. ALFRED ELPHINSTONE (21) , Feloniously forging and uttering a request for the delivery of 3 yards of cloth, with intent to defraud.

MR. THOMPSON conducted the Prosecution.

EDWARD STEELE . I am in the employ of Thomas Howes and others, drapers, of 19, St. Paul's Churchyard—on 16th July, 1858, a person came and presented this order, saying, that it was for Haynes & Co., of Leicester-square—I communicated with Mr. Mead, junior, the son of the second partner, and let the person have the goods—(Order Read: "Gobby, Haines & Co. 2 & 3, Leicester-street, Regent-street. To Messrs. Mead & Co., July 6, 1858. Please let bearer have half a yard of super black cloth at 25s., ditto blue. W. Willie")—This is the cloth (produced)—it is worth about 3l. 10s.

Cross-examined by MR. RIBTON. Q. Did you ever see the prisoner before? A. Not before the policeman came to me and told me he had a man in custody—he introduced me to a number of men in the yard, and I identified the prisoner among them.

SAMUEL WALTER WILLIE . I am foreman to Messrs. Gobby and Haines, military tailors, Leicester-street—this is one of our bill-heads—this is not my signature—there is no other person named Willie in the establishment—I do not know the writing and did not receive the goods—the prisoner is the son of a man who worked for the firm some years—he used to come backwards and forwards to the shop with his father to work.

Cross-examined. Q. Is he a respectable man? A. I believe so, and his father also—a porter named Clifton left some months before this occurrence—he is about 20 years of age, and is not like the prisoner; he is thinner and taller—I never heard of one being mistaken for the other—the prisoner was a porter.

MR. THOMPSON. Q. Had any person authority from you to present this order? A. No.

WILLIAM WILDER . In July, 1858, I was assistant to Mr. Brown, a pawnbroker, of Ryder's-court—on 16th July, 1858, two remnants of cloth were pawned by the prisoner for 1l. 15s.—I produce the duplicate written by the youth who was there at the time—I saw him write it, and gave the ticket to the prisoner with the money—he said that he pledged it for another party, and wished it put in the name of John Butler, as it was not for his father or himself.

Cross-examined. Q. Are you sure it was the prisoner? A. Yes; I have known him from the time he was 6 years old—he volunteered the statement that it was for another party—it was not necessary for him to do so—it was about the middle of the day.

HENRY JOY (Policeman, 238 A). I took the prisoner on 16th July, 1859, near his father's door, in Rupert-street—I said, "Elphinstone, I want you, for obtaining various articles from Mead's, in St. Paul's Churchyard,"—he said that he did not obtain it, but another young man, named Clifton, gave it to him, and told him to pledge it for 35s. at Mr. Brown's, the pawnbroker, in Rider's-court—I took him to the station, went to Mr. Brown's, and found the cloth pledged in the name of Butler for 35s.

Cross-examined. Q. Do you know anybody of the name of Clifton? A. Yes; I am still looking out for him, and should like to find him—he is about the prisoner's age, but an inch and a half or two inches taller—his hair is black, and the prisoner's is brown—he is not at all like him; he is thin in the face—Clifton and the prisoner were living together at the time the goods were obtained, and they both left London—if I apprehend Clifton it will be for the forgery of this order, because I believe he is implicated.

MR. THOMPSON. Q. Had you been looking for the prisoner before? A. Yes; for 12 months on the very day I took him.

WILLIAM TAYLOR . I am assistant to Mr. Brown, pawnbroker—I produce some cloth from his shop—ho formerly carried on business at Ryder's-court.

THE COURT considered that there teas no evidence of the forgery. GUILTY of uttering. He received a good character.— Confined Three Months.

NEW COURT.—Wednesday, August 17th, 1859.


Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq., and the Second Jury.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-735
VerdictsGuilty > pleaded guilty

Related Material

735. HENRY JENNINGS (41) , Embezzling 6l. 11s. 4d., also 12l., 15l. 3s., 14l. 16s., 8s. 7d., 5l. 10s., 14l. 10s., and 11l. 8s. 7d., of Thomas Higgs and another, his masters; to which he

PLEADED GUILTY .— Confined Twelve Months.

Before Mr. Baron Martin.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-736
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

736. JOHN SCALES (22) , Stealing a post letter, containing 2 half sovereigns and 1 shilling, the property of Her Majesty's Post-master General; to which he

PLEADED GUILTY .— Three Years' Penal Servitude.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-737
VerdictGuilty > lesser offence

Related Material

737. CHARLES PETER DUVALL (17) , Feloniously shooting at Susannah Hinton, with intent to do her grievous bodily harm.

MR. BEST conducted the Prosecution.

SUSANNAH HINTON . I live in Pell-street—I sell tea and coffee—I have known the prisoner between three and four years—he came to my house on 18th June and inquired for Mr. Gibbons who used to lodge in the house—he asked me if I knew him—I said, yes, and that he was gone away—I had no quarrel with the prisoner—I saw him again on Monday, 20th June, in Jermyn-street,

about 1 o'clock—I felt something, and heard the report of a pistol—I put my hand behind me and felt blood running down from my neck—I staggered, and should have fallen, had not a gentleman caught hold of me—I saw the prisoner as I was falling, and saw him in the act of throwing the pistol in the road—I became nearly unconscious, but I heard him say that he meant to do it, or intended to do it, or words to that effect—I was taken to the police-station, and then to Marlborough-street, and after that to the hospital—I was attended there for a fortnight.

Cross-examined by MR. RIBTON. Q. Did you hear him say that he meant it? A. Yes, or words to that effect—that was the meaning of it—he did not say he did not mean to do it; he did mean to do it—I cannot exactly recollect the words—I lived in his mother's house, it might be for a year—I had no quarrel with him—I have heard that his father died in a lunatic asylum—I am not aware that he has two more relations in the asylum.

JOHN ARNOLD . I live at Newington, and am a waiter—I was in Jermyn-street about half past 1 o'clock that day—I heard the report of a pistol—I walked across the road and the prisoner threw it down—I took it up and it was warm—the prisoner was about three yards off—I went towards him—he said, "I have done it, and I give myself up"—he did not say anything about the pistol going off.

FREDERICK TOTHILL . I am a surgeon. On 20th June I went to the prosecutrix at the police-station—I examined her—I found a black spot at the back of her neck, about the size of a shilling—it was scorched, or burnt—it did not appear very deep at the moment—it was deep enough to destroy the outer skin—I saw no blood—it must have been caused by a pistol being discharged—it smelt of powder, just as one might expect from the wadding of a pistol.

Cross-examined. Q. Did you see the pistol? A. Yes; it had the appearance of having been loaded—it was impossible for me to tell whether there had been a shot or a bullet; I think the wound must have been caused by wadding—if it had been loaded with shot or a bullet, it must have struck her.

GUILTY of Unlawfully Wounding. Confined Four Months.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-738
VerdictGuilty > with recommendation
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

738. WILLIAM WEIGHT (28) , Stealing a letter containing 2 half sovereigns, the property of Her Majesty's Post-master General.

MESSRS. CLERK and METCALFE conducted the Prosecution.

JOHN GARDNER . I am a clerk in the General Post Office—in consequence of information I received, I made up a test letter on 12th July—I enclosed in it 2 half sovereigns, having previously marked them; I enclosed them in a paper and fastened that in a piece of gum paper—it was addressed to Mary Slade, at Mrs. Grimway's, the Priory, Leyton, Essex; I fastened the envelope with an adhesive seal—I gave that letter to Mr. Clare—if it were posted at the General Post-office it would go through the district where the prisoner was employed—I gave some directions to Mr. Bennett, at the North-Eastern Office—I subsequently went and met Mr. Bennett—I went to the office in Green-street, Bethnal-green, and the prisoner was brought to me just before 9 o'clock in the morning of the 13th, I asked him if he was on duty at the North-Eastern department that morning—he said he was—I asked him if he assisted at the sorting; he said he did not—I said, "Do you know anything of a money letter addressed to Mary Slade, Leyton?"—he said he did not—I then directed Bingham, the officer, to search him, and saw him take

from his pocket a half sovereign, a five-shilling piece, a half crown, four sixpences, and some copper money, making 9s. 6d. in silver, and some coppers—Bingham 4 said to him, "Is this all your's?"—he said, "Yes, it is; I saved it for my wife to go in the country"—I examined the half sovereign and found my private mark on it—I can state that that was one of the half sovereigns I had enclosed in the letter—I said to the prisoner, "This half sovereign and another were enclosed in the letter I have been inquiring about, where did you get it from?"—he said he found it at the bottom of the stairs by the water-closet, and he mentioned it to Hannan—I asked him why he did not give it up—he said because he did not know who to give it to—I then gave him into custody—the other half sovereign has also been shown to me, and I found my private mark on it; these are the two half sovereigns—the letter was addressed to a fictitious person—the money was the Post-master General's.

WILLIS CLARE . I am an inspector of letter-carriers—the prisoner has been about two years a letter carrier attached to the office—on 12th July I received a letter from Mr. Gardner, addressed to Mary Slade, Leyton—I saw that it contained something inside—I posted that letter the next morning at St. Martin's-le-grand, at 5 o'clock in the morning—it would be transmitted from there about a quarter past five—I went about 10 o'clock the same morning to the City of Paris Tavern, in Old Ford-road, kept by Mr. Keymer—he produced three half sovereigns to me, and amongst them I found one which Mr. Gardner identified.

Cross-examined by MR. BEST. Q. Do you know how long the prisoner had been employed? A. Nearly two years; I went to his house—the officer examined his place—I looked in a cupboard—nothing was found in it then; something was found afterwards.

JAMES BENNETT . I am the principal charge taker at the North-Eastern district, Bethnal-green; the prisoner was employed at that office as a letter carrier—he also assisted in sorting the letters—I received the mail-bag from the chief officer about half-past five in the morning of 13th July, and in that bag I found a letter addressed, "Mary Slade, Mrs. Grimway's, the Priory, Leyton, Essex"—Mr. Gardner said something which called my attention to that letter—I handled it, and found it contained coin—about twenty minutes before 7 o'clock I placed that letter on the table amongst the letters which the prisoner had to sort—I saw him sorting the letters amongst which that letter laid—the prisoner was there when I placed that letter there—I saw him sort all the letters—no person was sorting at that table but him—he left the table about ten minutes before 7 o'clock, about ten minutes after I had given him the letter—he then brought the letters for the Loughton-road, where the Leyton letters are taken out, and amongst them this letter ought to have been—he then returned to his seat and remained there till five minutes before 7 o'clock—he then went down, apparently with a view of going to the water-closet—he went in that direction—he was away about ten minutes—when he came back he went to his seat and remained there till twenty-five minutes past 7, when I dispatched the letter carriers, and he went away—after he was gone I looked over the letters in the Leyton box, the one addressed to Mary Slade was not amongst them—I communicated that.

Gross-examined. Q. How many letter carriers were there? A. Forty-two that morning—the prisoner was attached to a walk—it was his duty to sort all the letters put before him—there were others sorting, but not at his table—other sorters sorted for the same district as he did—it is my custom to go to the table, and give the letters to each man to sort—I don't usually

watch all the letters—there were not above half a dozen sorters at work at that time—Kelly was not there—we were one short that morning—I am certain Dean was not sorting letters with the prisoner, but for the same district—I am quite sure that Benham did not sort any of the letters that I placed before Weight—I laid them down before him.

HENRY BINGHAM . I am a police officer attached to the Post-office. On the morning of 13th July, I took the prisoner in custody at the receiving house, in Bethnal-green—I searched him, and found in his right hand trousers pocket a half-sovereign, a crown piece, a halfcrown, 4 sixpences, and sevenpence in copper—I asked him if it was all his, he said "It is; I have been saving it to send my wife in the country"—Mr. Gardner was in the office at the time—I placed the money I took from the prisoner on the table before Mr. Gardner—he looked at the half-sovereign—I heard what passed between him and the prisoner—I took the prisoner to the Post-office in a cab—I had some conversation with him—I said "You changed a half sovereign on your walk this morning"—he said "No; I have not"—I said "Are you quite sure"—he said "Yes; I will take my oath I have not"—when at the Post-office, I left him in charge of Thomas Parkinson, another officer—I went with Mr. Clare to Mr. Keymer, at the City of Paris tavern—he had three half sovereigns, and one of them was this one, which Mr. Gardner saw and identified as one that he had enclosed in the letter.

EDWARD KEYMER . I keep the City of Paris tavern. I took a half sovereign of the prisoner, on 13th July, about a quarter past 8 o'clock in the morning—I gave him in change a crown piece, a half crown, and some small silver and half-pence.

THOMAS PARKINSON . I am a messenger at the General Post-office. On the morning of 13th July, Bingham placed the prisoner in my custody, and while he was in my charge, he said he did not intend to mince the matter; that he came down stairs that morning, at the North Eastern-office, and, passing behind O'Brien and another person, whom he did not name, he picked up a piece of paper, placing it in his waistcoat pocket, and when he proceeded out to deliver his letters, he opened the piece of paper, and found it contained two half sovereigns—that he placed them in his pocket, and threw the paper away, about half way between the North Eastern-office and the Church—that he proceeded to the house of Mr. Keymer, in Old Ford-road, and changed a half sovereign for gin—he was mistaken in naming the house; he called it the City of London, but it was the City of Paris.

STEPHEN HANNAN . I am employed in the North Eastern-office—I was not there on the morning of 13th July—I don't know O'Brien—I know Benham; I think he is a letter carrier.

MR. BEST called

WILLIAM HENRY BENHAM . I am in the employ of the General Post-office; and am engaged at the North Eastern District-office. On the morning of 13th July I remember the letters being sorted, about 7 o'clock—the prisoner was there at that time—I sat next him about a quarter of an hour—I saw him sort letters that morning, about half-past 6 or a quarter before 7 o'clock—Mr. Bennett was there—I sorted some letters—I did not sort any that the prisoner ought to have sorted—I did not see that the prisoner was walking about—I am quite sure that I did not sort his letters—I was examined at Bow-street—my evidence was taken down in writing—I did not sign anything there—I was called for the prisoner—I did not state that I had sorted his letters that morning—I sorted letters for the London District—I cannot tell how many—I saw the prisoner sort letters.

Cross-examined by MR. CLERK. Q. Had you anything to do with the letters that the prisoner had to sort? A. If I had had no letters to sort, I might take some of his—I can't swear whether I did then—if any sorter found amongst his letters a letter for the Loughton District, he ought to put it in the Loughton box.

JOHN HENRY BEERMAN . I am in the employ of the Post-office at the North Eastern District-office—I have to sort my own letters in the morning and pick out the country letters—I was not sorting on the morning of 13th July—I saw the prisoner there about half-past 6 o'clock; I think he was sorting, I am not quite sure—I think he was not walking about the office doing nothing—I had nothing to do with the letters he had to sort—I saw Mr. Bennett; I think he was going about delivering the letters.

Mr. Allen, a tailor, gave the prisoner a good character.

GUILTY.—Recommended to mercy by the Jury on account of his character. Five Years' Penal Servitude.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-739
VerdictsNot Guilty > unknown; Not Guilty > no evidence

Related Material

739. WILLIAM SAMUELS (22) , Stealing, whilst employed under the Post-office, 40 post-letters the property of Her Majesty's Post-master General.

MESSRS. CLERK and COOPER conducted the Prosecution.

THOMAS SHELLY . I am in the employ of a confectioner in Windmill-Street, Haymarket—I was rowing in a boat on the Thames on Sunday-morning, 24th July, between 7 and 8 o'clock, I picked up two bundles of letters—one was wrapped in a handkerchief, and the other was tied with a string—I took them to Scotland-yard, and delivered them to the officer on duty.

DAVID BALDWIN . I am a police-inspector—these letters were delivered to me—I sent them to the Post-office to Mr. Lambert.

RICHARD EYRE LAMBERT . I am a clerk in the Post-office—on 24th July I received this handkerchief containing these letters—they were tied up in the order of delivery—they bore the post-mark of Old Cavendish-street on the previous night.

WILLIAM HERSEY . I am a letter carrier of the Western District-office in Old Cavendish-street—the prisoner was employed there occasionally to perform this duty of a letter carrier—on Saturday, 23d July, he was employed to deliver letters in Rathbone-place for a man of the name of Dutton—I saw him at the office about 8 o'clock that evening—I divided the letters, and gave a portion to the prisoner for him and his assistant to deliver—these are the letters I arranged for the prisoner, and I said to him, as his assistant was not in, he would most likely meet him at the receiving house—I left both the packets of letters in the office under the prisoner's care—I made pencil marks on these letters which I can identify.

PLATO BIERTON . I am a letter carrier in the Western office—on Saturday evening, 23d July, I had to assist the prisoner in delivering letters in Rathbone-place walk—I went to the receiving house in Charles-street for that purpose; I expected to meet the prisoner there with my letters—I went at twenty-five minutes past 8—I waited till about a quarter before 10—the prisoner did not come while I was there—at a quarter before 10 I went over some portion of the walk to see if I could see the prisoner—I did not see him—on the Monday morning I went to the office and reported to my inspector.

Cross-examined by MR. ROBINSON. A. How many rooms are there in the receiving house? A. It is a shop, where we go in or wait outside.

JOHN GARDNER . I am a clerk in the General Post Office—on 25th July I received the letters contained in these packets—I took them to the Western office about the middle of the day—the prisoner came about 4 o'clock in the afternoon—I asked him if he was on duty at 8 o'clock on the Saturday evening—he said he was—I said, "What duty did you do?"—he said, "The Rathbone-place walk"—I said, "Did you deliver the letters on that walk?"—he said, "Yes"—I asked him if he met his assistant on that walk—he said he did not—he said he went to the receiving-house in Charles-street about half-past 8 o'clock, and he waited until 9, but he did not see him—I said, "What did you do with your assistant's letters?"—he said, "I delivered them myself"—I then produced these letters, and I said, "These letters all belong to the Rathbone-place walk, and were placed in your hands at 8 o'clock to deliver them; do you know anything about them?"—he said he did not, he had delivered all his letters, and his assistant's—I said, "Well, they were found in the Thames yesterday morning, and they are remembered by Hersey who made them up for you, and some of them have Heresy's figures upon them"—he said, "Indeed I delivered all the letters I received"—I asked him where he delivered letters—he said in Cleveland-street and Norfolk-street—I said, "To whom?"—he said, "I don't know; I am a stranger to the walk"—I asked him if he delivered letters in any other streets than Cleveland-street and Norfolk-Street—he made no answer—I asked him if he knew anything of this handkerchief—he said he did not—here are 41 letters, 3 newspapers, and 1 pamphlet—the letters were afterwards delivered to the persons to whom they were addressed, and the envelopes retained—the prisoner was not a regular carrier; a supernumerary.

JOHN GUTTERIDGE . I am a carrier in the Western District-office—I was there on 23 July—I believe the prisoner was there on duty—I met him on the Monday—he asked me how I was—I told him I was better, but I was very ill, and I asked him how he got on on Saturday night with his partner—he said he did not meet him, and he went up to the Middlesex Hospital, and waited from 25 minutes or half-past 8 till near 9 o'clock, and he did not meet him, and he had to deliver them all himself—that was all that passed—I should have had an assistant had I been on duty—it is rather a heavy walk—we always have an assistant of a night.

Cross-examined. Q. Are those wide streets? A. Yes—Rathbone-place is at one end of Tottenham-court-road and Fitzroy-square at the other, and Goodge-street is between them.

HENRY BINGHAM . I went round with a letter carrier, and saw these letters delivered in Percy-street, Goodge-street, and Rathbone-place—most of them are large streets.

The prisoner's statement before the Magistrate was here read as follows:—"I told Mr. Gardner that I had done Norfolk-street and Cleveland street, and waited for my assistant at the office, thinking that he was coming—I found he did not—I went down Charles-street, and waited to meet him—I waited there till 9 o'clock—I could not see him—I went and commenced in Norfolk-street, and then went to Cleveland-street—I could not find the other places, as I was never on the walk before—I never saw the streets before—I could not see the numbers—I thought I would do the rest by daylight—I put the letters in my pocket, and was making my way home—I went in a public-house and had a pint of porter—I staid about 20 minutes—I then put my hand in my pocket, and found the Letters were gone—I went in the street to see if I could see the man that had been

standing beside me, but I could not—I never saw the letters again till yesterday afternoon.

The prisoner received a good character.


There was another indictment against the prisoner for unlawfully omitting to deliver the letters, upon which no evidence was offered.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-740
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

740. JAMES HUNT (23) , Feloniously uttering a forged cheque for 45l. 9s., with intent to defraud the Directors of the London and Westminster Bank; to which he

PLEADED GUILTY .— Four Years Penal Servitude.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-741
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty

Related Material

741. THOMAS APTHORPE (24) , Stealing 24 brushes, 2 flasks, 6 looking-glasses, and other goods, of William Black, his master; to which he

PLEADED GUILTY .— Confined Nine Months.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-742
VerdictGuilty > unknown

Related Material

742. WILLIAM DAVIES (16) , Stealing a handkerchief, value 2s. of James Swift from his person.

GEORGE GRAY . I am a hop porter—on 27th July I was in Cannon-street, about half-past 11 o'clock—I saw a gentleman standing at the corner of Martin's-lane, and the prisoner and another man were behind him—I saw the prisoner attempt to take something from him—I saw an officer, and I then saw the prisoner take a handkerchief from the gentleman's pocket—I seized his hand, and told the gentleman—the prisoner turned and apologised, and said he had picked it up, but he had not.

JAMES SWIFT . I am butler to the Archbishop of Canterbury—I lost my handkerchief—this is it.

GUILTY .— Confined Three Months.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-743
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

743. THOMAS SMITH ( ), Feloniously receiving a gold chain and key, value 6l. the property of Edward Coulthard.

JOHN TUNSTALL . I am a pawnbroker in Farringdon-street—on 2d August the prisoner pawned this gold chain and key with me for 2l.—he gave the name of John Smith—on Saturday, 6th August, another man came and redeemed the chain and key—these are them.

Prisoner. Q. You had known me? A. I have known you about the neighbourhood as a working tailor.

ALFRED DICKINSON . I keep the Rose public-house in Farringdon-street—on Friday, 5th August, the prisoner came to my house and asked if I would buy a duplicate of a chain, and he asked me 10s. for it—I told him I did not want such a thing as I had one by me—on Saturday morning he came again and wished me to buy it—he went and got the duplicate and brought it to me—I went to the pawnbroker's and they refused to show it to me—I went back to the prisoner and told him—he said, "Come with me and you shall see it"—I paid the 2l. and gave him the 10s.—the policeman afterwards came and asked me if that was the man that sold it to me—I said, yes—he asked me to let him have the chain to take it to the gentleman it belonged to—I had asked the prisoner if it belonged to him—he said "Yes; he had not always been in the position he now was; he had been in better circumstances, but now he was forced to pawn it."

EDWARD COULTHARD . I am an attorney, of No. 4, Gray's Inn Square—this gold chain and key are mine—they are worth 6l. or 7l.—on 2nd

August, a woman came to my chambers and asked for relief—she stayed there and would not leave—I tried to get her out several times—she got my watch chain—I missed it soon after she had gone—I gave information to the police.

SAMUEL GREENFIELD (City policeman, 367). In consequence of information I went to the prisoner's house and apprehended him—I said, I want you to go along with me for receiving a gold chain and pawning it"—he said, "I have pawned a gold chain"—in coming towards the station I went in the public house and said to the publican, "Is this the man"—he said, "Yes," and I took him to the station—he said he found it in Lamb's Conduit-street, and when he picked it up he was in company with a woman named Glynn.

Prisoner's Defence. I admit having found the chain in Red Lion-street, Holborn, on Tuesday evening, I pawned it the same evening at a shop where I was well-known; I considered that as I had found it I had a right to do what I liked with it, if I have done wrong, I have done so in ignorance. I have a wife and two children depending on me: I never was charged before.


15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-744
VerdictGuilty > unknown

Related Material

744. MORRIS MURPHY (39) , Stealing a pocket-book, value 4s., of James Brown, from his person.

JAMES BROWN . I am a town traveller—on 23rd July, I was in Farringdon-street—a person spoke to me, and I heard a cry of stop thief, and saw the prisoner running—I pursued him, and I did not see him drop it, but I saw my pocket-book on the ground—in Bride-lane I saw the prisoner stopped—I had seen the pocket-book-safe about two minutes before the lady spoke to me.

ANN MARIA STUART . I was in Farringdon-street—I saw the prisoner put his hand in the prosecutor's coat pocket—he took out something and put it in his own coat pocket—he went towards a shop and pretended to ring a bell—he then ran off—I told the policeman a boy had run down Black Horse-court, and he followed him—I can take my oath the prisoner is the person.

JOHN MERRITT (City Policeman, 87). I took the prisoner.

Prisoner's Defence. I was passing down Bride-lane—I had not seen the book; but the officer came and took me.

GUILTY .— Confined Nine Months.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-745
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty

Related Material

745. MORRIS REECE (22) , Feloniously wounding John Bone, with intent to do him some grievous bodily harm, having been before convicted; to which he


15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-746
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

746. MORRIS REECE was again indicted for stealing a handkerchief of a man unknown, from his person.

MR. COOPER conducted the Prosecution.

JOHN BONE (Policeman, 181 T). On Saturday afternoon, 23rd July, I was in White chapel—I saw the prisoner and another at the corner of George-yard—I watched there and saw the prisoner put his right hand in a gentleman's pocket and take out a handkerchief—I called out—the prisoner ran, and I ran and caught him—he asked what I wanted with him—I said, "You know what I want you for; for what you have just done"—he said, "I have not got it, the other one has got it"—I said, "I shall take you

into custody"—he said, "I will have your b—y guts out"—I took hold of him, and he put his right hand into his pocket and took out this double hook used by porters for lifting bales of wool, and stabbed at my throat—a short man came up—I threw the prisoner down, and he said, "I will tear out your entrails"—he thrust the hook at my bowels—I put my hand to save myself, and he thrust the hook in the ball of my thumb and tore it out—he ran, and I ran after him—I remember hitting him and knocking him down—since that I have been 4 weeks under the doctor's hands, and I shall not have the use of my hand again—when the prisoner got to the station he said, he wished he had had a knife and he would have taken my life away, and when he got over this he would have my life.

GUILTY .— Penal Servitude for Life.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-747
VerdictGuilty > lesser offence

Related Material

747. JOHN BRECKETT (18) , Feloniously and maliciously wounding John Burton. MR. MCDONALD conducted the Prosecution.

JOHN BURTON . I am a silk dyer, and live in Hackney-road—on the night of 25th July I was at the Black Swan public-house, Spitalfields, between eleven and twelve o'clock—I heard a noise and came out of the house and crossed the road to see what was the matter—the prisoner made a rush at me, and I did the best I could to defend myself—he hit me a blow and knocked me on the ground, and when on the ground he stabbed me; I got seven cuts—after he stabbed me he ran away—I had not given him any provocation whatever—I was taken to a surgeon—I was two weeks suffering from my wounds.

Cross-examined by MR. BARRY. Q. How long had you been in the public-house? A. I was in about half-past nine and stayed till between eleven and twelve—I knew what I was doing; there were six of us; I don't suppose we had more than four pots of ale—I had seen the prisoner once before, that was all—I was doing nothing in the public-house but talking and drinking—there was a raffle; a man was making a raffle for the relief of his mother—I was asked to go by a young man who was chairman of the raffle—it was more like a collection, what they call a league—I had never known the prisoner before—I had only seen him once—the prisoner was present at the time—he was there all the night—I never said a word to him nor he to me till the row took place, between eleven and twelve o'clock, when we were all coming out—I don't know whether the prisoner knew that I had subscribed—you merely chuck your money in and walk away—when I came out I saw a disturbance on the other side, right opposite the Black Swan—I went over to see what it was, and I saw the prisoner kicking up a disturbance, and he picked me out among the rest—I did not say a word to him—I will not say he was quite sober, he might have been a little in liquor; he knew what he was doing—he came up to me and attacked me at once—I had a cap on, and he said, "I will fight any man round; I will fight you with your big peak," and he rushed at me—I did not feel that I was stabbed the first time; I did when the last stab was—I know a young woman a friend of the prisoner by seeing her; she spoke to me at Worship-street.

THOMAS BURTON . I am an engineer in Hackney-road—on 25th July I was with the last witness at the Black Swan—I came out with him and saw a row going on—when we got across, the prisoner was there kicking up a row with a young woman, and challenging everybody to fight—he challenged my brother who was wearing a cap with a peak—he knocked him down, and

while he was on the ground I saw him stab him with a penknife; he then ran—my brother was then taken to a surgeon.

Cross-examined. Q. Were you in the public-house when they were raffling? A. Yes; I did not speak to the prisoner, I only came there to subscribe for his mother—I and my brother and some others were drinking—the prisoner was a little drunk—we had five or six pots between five or six of us; my brother was not to say drunk; he was not quite sober—I was sober—we went out of the public-house because we wanted to go home—I saw the prisoner picking up stones with a young woman—I had never seen her before—I don't know that my brother kept company with her—I never heard that there had been some row between my brother and the prisoner about her—I saw a knife in the prisoner's hand; I have not seen it since—it was a smallish knife with a white handle—I did not see the blood; it was light enough to see this—the prisoner struck the first blow and my brother returned it—my brother was underneath when he was stabbed—he cried out.

GEORGE BAKER . I am a dyer, residing in Hunt-street, Spitalfields—on the night of 25th July I was at the Black Swan public-house—when I came out I heard a noise—I saw the prisoner there; he was rushing about, threatening to fight any body—he picked out the prosecutor, and said, "Come on, you with your long-peaked cap;" and with that they began fighting—the prisoner knocked Burton down and stabbed him—I saw him stab him with a white-handled knife—I assisted in taking Burton to a surgeon—he did not say anything, to the prisoner when we came out.

Cross-examined. Q. Were you in the public-house? A. Yes; we heard there was a woman in distress, and we went to make up some money—I did not notice the prisoner in the public-house—I knew that his mother was the object of this collection—we went out of the public-house because it was getting late; it was time to go home—I went out with Burton and was going his way home—we went over the road to see what was the matter—we got right close to the prisoner, and he said, "Come on, you with the long-peaked cap"—I did not hear anything about a young woman—I don't know a young woman with whom the prisoner was intimate—I will swear I saw a knife in his hand—when the prisoner got up he ran away—I can't say whether he was drunk.

WILLIAM KING (Police-sergeant, H 9). From information on 26th July, I arrested the prisoner in Grey Eagle-street, Spitalfields—I searched him but found no knife—I took him about twelve o'clock; he was pointed out to me by three persons—I told him he must go along with me on a charge of stabbing a man—he told me not to handle him—he was drunk.

COURT. to JOHN BURTON. Q. What sort of cuts did you receive? A. They were in my shoulders and back—there were seven cuts in my shirt.

JAMES EDMONDS . I am a surgeon, of 2, Spital-square—on the morning of 26th July the prosecutor was brought to me—he had two punctured wounds, on the back and on the side of the chest—they might have been very serious, but, as it turned out, they were very slight—one was half an inch deep, the other not so deep—I saw him several times afterwards.

GUILTY of Unlawfully Wounding. Confined Twelve Months.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-748
VerdictGuilty > unknown

Related Material

748. JOHN PRICE (25) , Burglariously breaking and entering the dwelling-house of Ellen Donovan, and stealing therein 2 shawls and other articles, the property of Hannah Lynch.

ELLEN DONOVAN . I live at 11, Collett's-place, St. George's-in-the-East—on the night of 15th July, I went to bed after 11 o'clock—my house was then quite safe—the kitchen window was down—about 2 or 3 in the morning I heard a noise, got up, opened the door, and found the window open—I waited, and heard a noise again—I dressed myself, and went down—I missed these two dresses and shoes, and other articles—they belong to Hannah Lynch, my servant.

ISAAC FORTY (Policeman, 485 R). About 3 or 4 o'clock that morning I heard a cry of thieves—I ran to the spot, and saw the prisoner running with a bundle—I came in at one end of the street, and he came in at the other—he threw the bundle over into a garden before I got to him—I pursued him, and brought him back—I handed him to my brother constable, and went over the rails and got the bundle—I went to 11, Collett's-place—I found the kitchen window open, and there was room for the prisoner to get over the rails and get in—the bundle contained these articles.

Prisoner's Defence. He did not see me throw the bundle away—he did not see me with it at all.

GUILTY .— Confined Twelve Months.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-749
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty

Related Material

749. WILLIAM LEWIS (43) , Embezzling 14l. 6s. 8d. and 19l. 8s. of Samuel Hanson, his master; to which he


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

THIRD COURT.—Wednesday, August 17th, 1859.


Before Mr. Justice Erle and the Sixth Jury.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-750
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty

Related Material

750. WILLIAM WILLIAMS (21) , Stealing 1 coat, value 10s. 6d. of George Davies; to which he

PLEADED GUILTY .— Confined Six Months.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-751
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty

Related Material

751. ANN JONES (24) , Stealing 1 canvass bag, 6 sovereigns, and 1 shilling, of Lewis Henry Myers from his person; to which she

PLEADED GUILTY .— Confined Twelve Months.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-752
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty

Related Material

752. SAMUEL PYE (24) , Unlawfully obtaining 30s. of James Green by false pretences; to which he

PLEADED GUILTY .— Confined Four Months.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-753
VerdictGuilty > unknown

Related Material

753. PATRICK MARTIN (50) , Feloniously killing and slaying Catherine Russell.

MR. POLAND conducted the Prosecution.

ELLEN DESMOND . I live at 2, Green-yard, Wapping—on Sunday evening, 17th July, about 9 o'clock, I saw the prisoner as I was going down Cooper's-row—I heard him jawing in his own house—I stood and saw him come out and run into Mrs. Russell's, No. 5, into the bottom room on the ground-floor—he went to the fire-place—Mrs. Russell was there—he gave her a smack of the face with his open hand, and knocked her down on the fender which hit the side of her head: saying, "You b—w—, I will let you see

you won't speak to me any more to-night"—she was on the ground then—I was at the street-door, and could see into the room—I heard her moan three times, and froth came out of her mouth—I did not notice whether she was sober—I went away, and sat on a door step on the other side—two men, who I do not know, ran into the house and dragged the prisoner out—he went into his own house.

Cross-examined by MR. ROBINSON. Q. Did you know Mrs. Russell before? A. No—the door opens inwards—I did not go inside—there is a water-butt immediately behind the door; it is between the window and door—it is a tub—you can open the door wide in spite of it—I sell flowers, and live at 2, Green-yard—I was going down to see the fire in the London Docks—I went to the house next day—I live about a minute's walk off—I did not see Mrs. Russell run into the house—I cannot tell whether that man (McCarthy) is the person who dragged the prisoner away—I live with my father, a dock labourer.

ELIZABETH RIDEAR . I live at 8, Green-row, Wapping—my husband is a tailor—I was going down Cooper's-court, about 9 o'clock, and saw the prisoner dragged out of No. 5 by two men—he went into his own house, nearly opposite—I saw Ellen Desmond standing by Mrs. Russell's window—I afterwards went in, and saw her lying on the ground—I was outside the door when the doctor came—the prisoner looked to be in drink—I only knew Mrs. Russell before she was married—I have been away since—she has been married eighteen months or two years—I bathed her hands in cold water—there was a slight wound on her hand—that was the first time I saw her that day—she was suckling her child—I only saw her sitting—she might have been drunk; I do not know—one of the men who dragged the prisoner out was a cooper—he had a shiney cap on—I did not hear him say a word.

MARGARET SLANEY . I am the wife of John Slaney, of 5, Cooper's-court—Mrs. Russell lived there with her husband—on Sunday night, 17th of July, about a quarter to 9 o'clock, the prisoner came up to me, Mrs. Russell followed him, and he struck her with his jacket, which was loose on his arm—they were having words, but I could not hear what—she fell down in the court, and I picked her up—she gave her child to one of her neighbours, went into No. 5, got an empty tumbler, and threw it at the prisoner's wife, but it did not strike her—the prisoner was not there then; he had gone into his house, and his wife was at No. 2, closing the shutters—she went in doors when the glass was thrown at her—I took my children, went to the bottom of the court, and saw no more of it.

Cross-examined. Q. Was she not very violent in her manner? A. Yes; I cannot say whether she was drunk—the tumbler went pretty near the prisoner's wife.

CHARLES RUSSELL . I live at 5, Cooper's court—my wife's name was Catherine—on Sunday morning, 17th July, I was with the prisoner and another man, at a ship called the Araby Maid, at St. Katherine's docks—I was an hour and 20 minutes on board, pumping her—we then went into a public-house, had a pint of beer, and shared the 5s. which we had for our work—I then went home and the prisoner with me—I saw my wife there—she began at the prisoner, and told him that some person had called me out that morning to play at skittles, that some other woman, who had lived in the house before us, was killed, and I should be the same—she went over to her door—No. 2 went to him—just touched him—but did not hurt him in the least; but he said she pushed him—she had the child in her arms—this was

about 12 o'clock—she then went over to her own door—she did not strike him at that time—shortly afterwards, she came back, with a smile on her countenance, and sat opposite the door—she went in, got a jug, and attempted to throw it at him, but I took it from her; by which means she knocked her hand against the wall, and made a slight bruise on the back of her hand—that was between 12 and 1—he then went to his own door, called her a bad name, and said "If you come nigh me, I will push you away," but nothing more took place then—about a quarter to 9 the same evening, I saw my wife at the top of the court, talking to another young woman—she appeared to me to be sober—she had had no drink in my company, except a pint of beer—she walked steady enough about—a little after 9 o'clock I went into my room, found my wife on the floor, and a woman holding her head up—the prisoner did not come in, but he spoke to me outside the window; he said "I have settled the b—b—h; she will not annoy me any more; that is the way to settle the b—cow or sow," I don't know which—he did not address this to any one; I merely heard him say it.

Cross-examined. Q. At that time you did not think your wife in any danger? A. No; I thought she was asleep—I went and got two pillows, and put under her head—I knew nothing about it—the prisoner was apprehended about half-past 9 at night—my wife was very excitable and very quarrelsome; she used to quarrel very much with me—I do not know that she was drunk on this Sunday evening—she had been very drunk and very abusive all day—the prisoner had got a job which he was obliged to do that morning, and came to me to give me part of it—I was on very good terms with him; he had never interfered with me, but I did not frequent that neighbourhood—when we were dividing the 5s. at the public-house, I heard that my wife sent for some gin—she was not subject to fits when she was drunk, and I have never said so—she was always able to walk as if she was sober, however drunk she was—when I put the pillows under her head, I said "Do not wake her; if she is asleep she will be quiet, if she wakes she will commence at me again"—I was just sitting at the door—I know the prisoner went away in the afternoon for some hours, after she abused him, but it was not to get rid of her.

WILLIAM BOXALL . I am a surgeon. On the night of 17th July, I was sent for to 5, Cooper's-court—I found Catherine Russell lying on her back, on the floor, quite dead—I should say, from the coldness of her body, that she had been dead nearly an hour—it was then about 10 o'clock—I examined the body, but only found a bruise on the back of her hand, which might have been made by knocking against a wall—I made a post mortem examination next day; there was no wound visible externally, but on removing the hair, at the back of her head, I discovered a discoloration of the skull, and, on removing the scalp, I found a clot of extravasated blood on the bone corresponding to the discoloration on the outside—the blood vessels were highly filled; some of them were ruptured, and were pouring out liquid blood—the cause of death was the clot of extravasated blood pressing on the brain—that might be caused by a blow or a fall against a resisting body, or by a direct strike.

Cross-examined. Q. Did the brain appear to be that of a person who had been in the habit of drinking a good deal? A. No; but there was a smell of her having been drinking that day.

MR. ROBINSON to CHARLES RUSSELL. Q. Is the room very small? A. Yes; if you are in the street, facing the door, and then open it, it will turn against the water-butt—it was generally placed so that the door would go

as far back as the hinges would allow it—it generally opens completely back against the wall—I will swear that the words I have said, are the very words that the prisoner used.

WILLIAM THOMAS (Policeman, H 15). I took the prisoner on the Monday night—he offered to go with me wherever I wished—I saw him go to his work on Monday morning, and said to him, "It is rumoured that you struck this woman who is now dead"—he said, "I did not; she was annoying me all day, and said that I wanted to take her husband to a skittle-ground, and I went away to keep out of her way.

Witnesses for the Defence.

MICHAEL MCCARTHY . I am a cooper, of 5, Cooper's Row—I have known the prisoner some years; he is a peaceable, quiet, humane man—I never knew anything bad of him—on Sunday, 17th July, I went away with him and his wife—I saw Mrs. Russell at her door—she was very abusive—I have seen her attempting to get things to heave at Martin, but her husband prevented her—I was with him up to 12 o'clock at night—when we came home between 8 and 9 she abused him very much—I did not see anything thrown at her—after that she went over to the door, and I followed him—No. 2 is nearly opposite No. 5—I believe the woman was abusing him so much that he went over merely to frighten her—I went over after him as soon as he went out of his place—I followed him back—he did not go into the house, for I kept him in sight as he crossed—the court is 7 feet wide—he had one leg in the doorway and the other out when I laid hold of him and brought him back—he did not strike the woman; on my oath, I must have seen it if he had—I did not see the woman at all, either standing or lying down—the door was not thrown back, it never is; it always stands perpendicularly half open—I could not see the woman with it in that condition.

Cross-examined by MR. POLAND. Q. Was there any other man with you? A. No; I got the prisoner from the house alone and took him into his own place—Mrs. Russell was at her door when he went across to frighten her—the street door opens into the road; there is no passage—I did not hear him use any expression—I had no difficulty in getting him away—he came away directly when I laid hold of him—after he had gone into his house I went over and stopped with him—when I heard a disturbance I went out to see what was the matter, the same as anybody else would—that was about half an hour afterwards—I then saw the woman on the floor—I had remained with Martin till then at his place—I never heard him use such words as "I have settled the b—bitch;" it is not his languages—he has a wife and family—she is a decent sober woman—I did not hear him say "That is the way to settle it"—I was near enough to hear it—after that a great many people came down the court.

The prisoner received a good character.

GUILTY .— Confined Two Weeks.

Before Mr. Justice Willes.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-754
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

754. WILLIAM WHEBLEY HEBB (34) , Feloniously forging and uttering a transfer of 3,807l. 17s. Public Stock of the Bank of England, with intent to defraud; to which he

PLEADED GUILTY .— Penal Servitude for Life.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-755
VerdictGuilty > unknown

Related Material

755. JAMES ROBINSON (30) , Burglary in the dwelling-house of George Deal, with intent to steal.

MR. MCDONALD conducted the Prosecution.

GEORGE DEAL . I am foreman on board the Tritton, a General Steam Navigation boat—I reside at 4 Lion-square, Mile End Old Town—on the night of 7th July I went to bed about half past 7 or 8—I slept in the back parlour—my wife fastened up the shutters—there were some geraniums in the front room—they were standing perfectly right when I saw them before I went to bed—I was awoke in the morning about 2 or 3 o'clock by my wife calling out there were thieves in the house—I jumped up directly and went into the parlour—I there saw the prisoner getting out of the window—I caught him by the collar—he said, "Release me and go to my employers, and I will put it all right,"—he asked for a glass of water, and I gave it to him—he asked me to let go—I said, "I have got you, my boy, I will hold you,"—a policeman then came in, and I gave him in custody—one of the geraniums was moved about two yards outside the window.

Prisoner. Q. Where the shutters loose. A. They were fastened with a bolt inside—there were two screw-heads broken off by forcing them open—the window was fastened—a pane of glass was taken out, and you came through that—you were not the worse for drink—you pretended to be.

ELIZABETH HERRICK . I am the wife of John Herrick, and reside in the prosecutor's house—I was there on the night of 7th July—I was the last person who retired to bed that night—I went about half-past 11 or 12—before retiring I made fast the doors and windows—I always do—I was awoke by a noise in the morning—I got up, opened my window, and looked out—I saw the prisoner just getting out of the window—I saw him detained by the prosecutor—I went for a policeman and he was given in charge.

ROBERT PAYNE (H 198). I was fetched by the last witness to the prosecutor's house—I there saw the prisoner in the parlour—the prosecutor held him by the collar—he was given into my custody for breaking and entering the dwelling-house—when I got outside, the prisoner said, "Give me a kick and let me go."

Prisoner's Defence. I was the worse for drink—I went in and asked for a glass of water—I took nothing out of the house.

GUILTY .— Confined Six Month.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-756
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

756. CHARLES MURRAY (26) , Robbery on George Stacey, and stealing 1 watch, value 5l., his property.

MR. SHARPE conducted the Prosecution.

GEORGE STACEY . I reside at Richmond, in Surrey—about half past 2 o'clock in the day, on the 19th, I was in the Commercial-road, Shoreditch—I saw the prisoner there, talking to a female—I noticed him casually as I was walking past; he seemed to be in conversation—I was waiting for a train—I turned down a street to pass away the time till the train started—I went down a little way and then turned back—I then noticed the prisoner standing in the gutter—I was just passing him when he sprang forward and laid hold of my watch-guard, and made a snatch at it—I then laid hold of him—he got my watch—he tore the chain from the swivel—he made a hit at my head—he hit me and kicked me—he said he would kick my brains out—I was wrestling with him—I looked up and asked some one who was there to call a policeman—a policeman came up and I gave him in charge—my watch is a silver one, and worth about 5l.—I found afterwards that I had got a wound on my head, where the prisoner struck me with his fist—I had it bandaged by a surgeon.

Cross-examined by MR. MCDONALD. Q. Was this near a public-house? A. I can't say—I was walking when I first saw the prisoner—the policeman and I were strangers to each other up to this time—there were no other persons present that I know of besides the prisoner and the woman to whom he was speaking—I was quite sober—I think the prisoner was not drunk—I don't think he had been drinking—I was in the act of passing him when he got hold of my watch-guard—he pushed the female on one side—I turned round to see what it was, and as soon as I had done that he pulled hold of my chain—I and he scuffled perhaps half a minute—I threw him down—I kept one knee on his chest for about two minutes—it was not when I had my knee on his chest that he snatched at my chain—I have not seen the watch since—there were some persons collected round—I did not beat him when he was down; I struck him before he was down—I recognised the woman down in the court yesterday—the prisoner was not bleeding—the only blood that I saw was from my head—when I had him under me he did not pull me by the whiskers, or by the waistcoat collar—I swear there was no blood on the prisoner, except from my head.

Cross-examined by MR. SHARPE. Q. How did you lose your watch if the chain did not break? A. It broke on the swivel—the swivel was bent—it must have been bent with taking the watch off—he snatched the watch chain before I touched him at all—I did not observe that there was any other person there besides the female.

JAMES LANNING . I am a ticket writer, and live at 68, Great Charles-street, Hoxton—on the afternoon of 19th July, I was in the Commercial-road, Shoreditch—I saw the last witness and the prisoner there, fighting—I walked up to them, and the prisoner had got the watch in his hand—when I saw the prosecutor had been robbed I went towards them, and the prisoner threw the watch over, and it fell on the ground—I ran over to pick it up, and somebody else took it away—I saw the last witness cut the prisoner in the eye twice, and I saw the prisoner hit him on the forehead.

Cross-examined. Q. What time was this? A. About 2 o'clock in the afternoon—I had not been drinking.

SARAH NUNN . I work at a laundry at 18, Felton-terrace, Hoxton—on the afternoon of 19th July, I was in the Commercial-road, Shoreditch—I saw the prisoner and prosecutor there; the prisoner was at the top of a street talking to a female—he was pushing the woman and the woman was pushing him—when the prosecutor had got about a yard past them the prisoner seized his watch chain, and struck him on the side of the head; they then caught hold of each other and fell; the chain was then twisted round both their hands, and the prosecutor had his knee on the prisoner's chest till the policeman came up, and he was given in charge—I saw a boy pick the watch up; it was thrown a little way from them—I did not see any thing in the prisoner's hand.

Cross-examined. Q. You saw a boy pick the watch up. A. Yes, and he ran down to the bottom of the street, and the same woman the prisoner was talking to stopped him.

MR. SHARPE Q. How far was the watch from the prisoner's hand? A. Close to it.

RICHARD FOYLE (425 A). I took the prisoner into custody—I searched him, but only found a broken bradawl—when I first went up I saw them struggling on the ground—the prosecutor was bleeding very much in the head—he was holding the prisoner down—the prisoner's hands were grabbing at the prosecutor—I did not see the watch.

GUILTY .— Four Years' Penal Servitude.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-757
VerdictGuilty > unknown

Related Material

757. ANNE PAYNE (38), was indicted for bigamy.

MR. METCALFE conducted the Prosecution.

ANN SMITH . I live with my brother John Smith—he keeps the Marquis of Anglesea, in Bow-street—in March, 1851 I was present at the church at Charlton, when the prisoner was married to Mr. Kirkaldy; she called herself Daniels—she said she was a widow—I signed the book—she lived with him after her marriage, I don't know how long—I have not seen them for seven years—I saw him yesterday; he is alive.

Cross-examined by MR. COOPER. Q. Have you known her long? A. Some years—I went into that church for the purpose of marrying—I was not present when there was a conversation between Mr. Kirkaldy and the prisoner—I did not know at this time that she had been married before—I did not know that she had been married to a person who had gone abroad.

WILLIAM BARRET PAYNE . I am the brother of Philip Payne—I was present when he was married to the prisoner, on 15th March, 1859, at Trinity-church, Marylebone; she gave the name of Ann Daniels, widow.

Cross-examined. Q. Had you known her long? A. No—I knew nothing of her—I knew nothing of a man who was said to be her husband who was transported,

PHILIP PAYNE . I am the prosecutor in this case—I was married on 15th March, to the prisoner—I first became acquainted with her on board a steam-boat, on an excursion to Sheerness—I saw her again some time after that at Clerkenwell police-court—after I met her there the acquaintance was kept up and we ultimately married—I made a great many enquiries about her, and I found out from a good many people that she was a highly respectable woman—she said her name was Ann Daniels, and that her husband had been dead ten years.

Cross-examined. Q. Have you heard that that man was transported? A. I have heard so—I have not heard that he ran away with another woman—the prisoner had a little household property—and I had some furniture.

MR. METCALFE. Q. All your furniture and hers too was settled upon her. A. Yes.

(81 D). I knew the prisoner when I took her in custody—Kirkaldy went with me to the house—when she got to the station she said to him, "Kirkaldy, when you married me you told me that my husband, who was transported was dead, and you were satisfied that he had died three months after our marriage"—Kirkaldy denied that—I know that the first husband was transported, for burglary—in 1848 he went out of this country—I found a certificate in the drawer relating to John Daniels; this is a copy of it; it is not the original.

MR. COOPER submitted that as he had shown that the first husband was transported, there was no proof that he was alive at the time of the prisoner's marriage with the second husband. The COURT was of opinion that there was evidence to go to the Jury.

GUILTY .— Confined Six Weeks.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-758
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

758. WILLIAM CRESSY (23) , Burglary in the dwelling-house of Hugh Astley, and stealing therein 1 watch and 1 locket of Elizabeth Knapp.

MR. GENT conducted the Prosecution.

CHARISTOPHER MARTIN (B 33). On 15th July, about half-past 10, from information I received, I proceeded to Rutland-gate to an empty house, No. 25—I heard a tremendous smashing of glass as I was going in—I went

to the back window, but did not see any one—I sprang my rattle, and got assistance—I then found the back window on the first floor broken to pieces—103, Shurety, came to my assistance—we searched the house, and found the attic front door broken open, as if it was done with a jemmy—the window of the front attic was open—I and the other policeman got on the roof and searched it—we went along the roofs from one end to the other—there are 21 houses—the other constable apprehended the prisoner 15 houses off from No. 25—I searched him, and found on him pick-locks, a latch-key, a wax taper, some lucifer matches, and a song book—he had his boots in his hand—he had, to stoop down to put his boots on, and I saw the other constable take a watch from him—he seemed to take it from the back of his neck—I produce the watch—the prisoner was taken to the station-house by the other constable—I returned to the empty house—the next morning I went to No. 28, and found a jemmy outside the window—it was in the gutter at the top of the house.

Cross-examined by MR. SHARPE. Q. This was No. 28? A. Yes—there are 23 houses connected with each other—there are 15 houses between the place where the prisoner was taken and the house were the burglary was committed—there were other persons besides me looking for him; the gentleman's servants—there were about 20 of them—no other persons besides the police are here that I am aware of—these keys (produced) are called skeleton keys—I am not aware whether the prisoner spoke to any of the persons who were there—I found the pick-locks in his trousers'-pockets—he did not tell me that he had picked them up on the roof—I did not see any of the police without their shoes—it was rather slippery on the root.

MR. GENT. Q. In going along the parapet, did you pass the window of No. 28? A. Yes.

GEORGE SHURETY (113 B). I went with the last witness to the house No. 28, on to the roof—we went along, and I found the prisoner there—I took him into custody, with his boots off—when we brought him through the attic window, he had to stoop to put his boots on, and I saw the watch in his neck—this is it (produced)—I took him to the station—he said nothing.

Cross-examined. Q. Had you your shoes off as well? A. No—I am not aware that there were other people up there with their shoes off—the roof is rather slippery—I did not hear him say he picked the keys up—he did not speak to anybody else besides myself and the other constable—I am quite sure of that—the house is about three-quarters of an hour's walk from the station.

MR. GENT. Q. What time do you judge it was? A. About half-past 10, and when we got to the station it was half-past 11.

ELIZABETH KNAPP . I am lady's maid to Mr. Astley, 28, Rutland-gate, Hyde-park—on the night in question I left my watch in the attic, on the dressing-table, close to the window—outside that window there is a parapet—the window was open when I was there last—there are iron bars outside it—they lock inside—they were locked, but the key was in the padlock—when I went into the room again I missed my watch—I went in before 12—I did not go on to the roof.

PATRICK RYAN (232 B). I went on the same night of this robbery to the house, No. 25, Rutland-gate—I found there these skeleton keys (produced) contained in this old glove—they were close by where the glass was broken on the floor—close to the window.

Cross-examined. Q. Are these different keys to what were shown just now? A. Some are pick-locks, and some skeleton keys.

JAMES BUTLER . I am the inspector of the B division—I went to the house, No. 25, Rutland-gate, to try the key I have in my hand, to see if it would fit one of the doors—I found that it fitted the back area door.

SOLOMAN MUSSLEBROOK . I am in the service of Mr. Astley, 28, Rutland-gate, Hyde-park—on the night of 15th July, I went up to examine the window of the back attic; the window was open and the bars undone—I found the padlock about three feet from the window.

Cross-examined. Q. What are you? A. A footman—I don't know whether I am the only footman here.

Prisoner to CHARISTOPHER MARTIN. Q. By what means did you get into the house? A. By the side light of the front door, and called out for the police—I did not take you in to assist me; I never saw you—I never saw the front door opened—I got in the side light, and two or three gentlemen followed me in the same way.

COURT. Q. Did you see this man among the people? A. No; I took no one else in custody on the roof—I did not find any body with skeleton keys.

Prisoner to ELIZABETH KNAPP. Q. I believe you said on a former occasion, that you thought the watch might have been taken from the window by putting the hand through? A. I did say that a hand could be put through to take it.

Prisoner. There was a crowd rushed in, and I went in with them—I went on the roof, and I thought I saw some one on the roof climbing over the end—I took my shoes off to go after him; he then disappeared—I went on, and suddenly I felt a hand on my shoulder, and a bundle was put into my hands, and some one said, "Take care of that"—I felt confused, and did not know what I was doing when the policeman came up and took me in custody.


The prisoner was further charged with having been before convicted at this Court, in July, 1857, of burglary, and sentenced to one year's imprisonment. To this part of the charge the prisoner pleaded guilty.

Fifteen Years' Penal Servitude.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-759
VerdictNot Guilty > no evidence

Related Material

759. JOHN WILDE (42) , Feloniously killing and slaying James Groombridge.

MR. METCALFE for the prosecution offered no evidence.


FOURTH COURT.—Wednesday and Thursday, August 17th and 18th, 1859.


Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq. and the Ninth Jury.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-760
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

760. ELLEN MARTIN, Stealing a watch, value 30s. the property of Alfred Charles Gibbons, from his person.

MR. SLEIGH conducted the Prosecution.

ALFRED CHARLES GIBBONS . I live at 4, New Court, Farringdon-street—I am a town-traveller—on the night in question, about 2 o'clock, I was near my home, in Farringdon-street—while I was there the prisoner and another female came up to me; she caught hold of my arm and said, "Where are you going?"—I then took them into a public-house and treated them—we remained there about a quarter of an hour or twenty minutes—we came out together—when I came out, I met one of my friends; he came up and

spoke to me, and we walked down Farringdon-street—I and one female walked together, and my friend and the other female walked together—when we got up to Newcastle-street I stopped and talked to her—all at once I felt a tug at my watch-guard—I called out, "I have lost my watch"—then the prisoner ran away—I put my hand in my pocket and found it was gone—I knew it was safe when she was walking with me, just before—when the prisoner ran away, my friend stopped her—I immediately ran and got hold of the prisoner—I saw one of her hands closed, and I said, "Here is my watch"—at that time a policeman came up, and she dropped the watch into my hand—there was no other woman close when she dropped the watch; the other woman had gone away—upon that I gave her into custody, the policeman kept the watch, and it is here now—this is the watch (produced).

Prisoner. Q. Was the watch out of your possession till you gave it to the policeman? A. Yes; I did not accuse you of taking it at first—I asked the policeman to look on the ground for my key.

WILLIAM LOVELL MOORE . I live at 5, New-court, Farringdon-street, and am a draughtsman—I met the last witness outside a public-house on that night; he was talking with two females; one of them was the prisoner at the bar—one of the females spoke to me—I did not go into the public-house—I was not drinking with them—soon after, the prisoner and the last witness went down Newcastle-street—I spoke to the prosecutor about going home, and he said he would—I soon after heard him call out, "I have lost my watch," and then saw the prisoner running away—I ran and stopped her—I said nothing about the watch—when I spoke to the prosecutor about coming home, I turned back, thinking he was following me, and I then heard him cry out.

COURT. Q. Did the prisoner run past you? A. No; she came running towards me—the prisoner was not two yards from me when I heard the cry—when I stopped her, the prosecutor came up, and then the policeman; and I saw her given in charge.

Prisoner. Q. Where do you say you met with me? A. I saw you in Farringdon-street with the prosecutor—I did not go to the station.

JMAES M'WILLIAM (City policeman, 224). About 2 o'clock on the morning when this occurred, in consequence of hearing a cry, I ran up to Newcastle-street—I was passing on duty near there—I saw the prisoner and the prosecutor—I saw the prisoner running, and the prosecutor after her; and he called out, "I have lost my watch"—he caught hold of her hand, and they wrestled—he handed me the watch, and gave her in custody—she said nothing—he charged her with stealing his watch.

Prisoner. Q. Did you see the prosecutor take the watch out of my hand? A. No.

COURT. Q. Is the watch and ribbon in the same state as it was when the prosecutor gave it to you? A. The piece of ribbon was broken when he gave it to me.

Prisoner's Defence. I was not in the prosecutor's company; I saw him and a female pulling each other about. As I passed him, he took hold of me, and asked me if I would have some gin. I said, "I never take spirits;" he said, "Have some lemonade." I went into the public-house, and remained there about an hour; I then left him; when I got near to the Old Bailey, he ran after me, and said, Young woman, do you know anything about my watch?" he said, "I have lost my key and watch; either you or the other female must know something about it; and if you

do not return it to me, I shall take you up." I said, "There is a policeman you had better speak to him." He then gave me in charge; when we got to the station-house, the prosecutor took the guard from his neck, and gave it to the policeman. I did not take the watch; I am quite innocent of the charge.

JAMES M'WILLIAM (re-examined). The prosecutor was not drunk; he was not under the influence of liquor, to all appearance.

GUILTY .—The prisoner was further charged with having been twice before convicted of felony.

JOHN ROOK (Policeman, 109F). I produce a certificate (Read; "Thursday, 11th Dec. 1856; Ellen Martin, tried and convicted of stealing a purse, the property of Robert White.—Confined Six Months.")—I was present at the trial, and the prisoner at the bar is the person who was then convicted.

SAMUEL CHRISTIE . I was present at the prisoner's trial—Ellen Martin is the person who was so tried—("On 22d May, 1858, Ellen Martin was tried and convicted of stealing a breast-pin and moneys, the goods of Samuel Christie, from his person.—Confined Six Months.)

GUILTY.— Four Years' Penal Servitude.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-754a
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

754. WILLIAM STRICKLAND was indicted for embezzlement.

MESSRS. SLEIGH and LEWIS conducted the Prosecution.

RICHARD FRYER . I am clerk to Messrs. Horne and Co., of Haydon-square—the prisoner was their wool foreman—his duty was to receive orders for wool and to superintend the calculations, and pay such charge as might be asked by the warehousemen—if a bale of wool was ordered in Lancashire an order would be sent to Chaplin and Horne, at Haydon-square, or it might be sent to the prisoner as the superintendent of the wool department, who would enter it in an order-book kept for that purpose—we must have a delivery order addressed to the warehouseman where the wool is kept—if a bale of wool is in the possession of Gooch and Cozens, the first step is for us to receive an order for its delivery, which is given by the owner or the broker—that would be entered in the order-book at Haydon-square—or one of the other depots—orders are frequently put into the prisoner's hands, and his duty then was to make an entry in the order-book—Gooch and Cozens had a separate order-book—after the order is entered in the order-book the next step is to lodge it with the warehouseman of the wool, say Gooch and Cozens, who then make arrangements for the collection; the wool foreman directs a van to call at the different warehouses for the goods, and they are brought to Haydon-square—before they are put in the van, and before the order is lodged, a payment is made, called the paid on, which is a charge of 1d. per bale for marking by the warehouse keeper, or for warehousing, as the case may be—if it has been over the prescribed time another charge is made for warehousing—the charge is made by Gooch and Cozens to Chaplin and Horne—it would be paid by the defendant at the time, or at periodical times by the foreman of the wool, and occasionally by the collector of the bales, and he would receive the money from the foreman; the party that pays it taking a receipt—Chaplin and Home get their money back thus; the bale of wool on its arrival at Haydon-square is accompanied by what is termed the cart note, which is given by the warehouse keeper, and contains the particulars of the wool delivered; so the carman and the cart note being presented to the defendant he registers the number of bales in a book called the number or receipt book, which entry contains the consecutive numbers

of the wool bills—each wool bill contains only the wool that is brought in by the separate loads, and after it is registered in the book the defendant makes out the wool bill, giving the sender, the consignee, and the residence, the number of articles, with their marks, and the amount paid on; he then hands it to the invoicer, who makes out an invoice to the station where the goods are consigned to, and the corresponding particulars, with the amount paid on, are thereupon placed, and with that invoice the goods are forwarded from Haydon-square, which finishes the transaction and finishes the duties of the foreman as far as the transit of that single bale is concerned—he has nothing to do with the carriage to be paid afterwards; but before the invoice leaves Haydon-square it is compared with the wool bill by clerks termed referencers; the invoice and wool bill are brought in together, given to the referencer, and he compares them before the goods are sent away—it is his duty to see that they correspond in every particular—when the wool bills are cleared they are checked by the referencers and given into the hands of a boy, who pastes them into a skeleton book (produced), a reference is made on the wool bill and the invoice—at the termination of each wool sale it is the foreman's duty to make up his account by bringing each bill forward to the last bill of the day, making a daily total—the skeleton book is accessible to the defendant; the place for it is in the down or outward office, and he uses it for reference in case there is any enquiry about wool from the country—he makes demands for payment from that book—he gets back the 1d. a bale by means of it—he makes out an account of his advances on paidons at the end of each sale and gets paid by the cashier, Mr. Castleman—those entries wave made by the defendant in a book called the wool book, which was kepi by him, and was called his book—nobody else made entries in it—I have examined to-see that—this represents money which he has paid out—the wool-book that contains the summary is missing—a search has been made for it—I saw it last in the defendant's possession in the rack in the wool office—there were a dozen or more books there—all the clerks have access to the wool office—it is left open for business—it is not exclusively the defendant's office—I never saw anybody but the defendant in possession of that wool-book; nobody else has a right to make entries in it—it is kept for the summary.

MR. RIBTON. Q. Do you know that other things have been lost from the wool office? A. I know that certain packages and papers have been missing, but they were lost when they were in the hands of the defendant—I never heard of his losing a coat, or of his dinner being taken away—I have been there 9 or 10 months—I do not know that there is at the present moment in the hands of the police property which they have stopped parties stealing out of that office.

MR. RIBTON objected to secondary evidence being given, but the COURT considered it admissable.

MR. LEWIS. Q. Have you got a copy of that wool-book? A. Yes—I made it in June, but it is not-copied from the wool-book—I made it after the wool-book was missed—(THE COURT considered that this was only admissable for the witness to refresh his memory by)—it was after enquiries were instituted that the wool-book was missing—there was a wool sale last December, and here is an entry in the wool-book, "December 8, 1858. No. 501. Thomas Wyeth, from Gooch and Cozens, to Benjamin Crowther, of Kirkstall, 12 bales; amount paid on, 11s.; reference to invoice 583"—this entry, "8th December, 501," in the order-book, which was in the defendant's custody, is in his writing; it has no reference to the entry—this "B. Crowther,

Kirkstall, B. C. P., 12 bales; amount paid on 11s." is his son's—this is the receipt-book; it comes from the wool office, and is the book which is made up from the cart notes—this wool-bill itself is in the defendant's writing—the total amount of bales marked in it now is eighteen, and the total amount 11s. 6d.—this, No. 7, refers to the number of bales re-entered—the bill originally stood "6 bales, 6d., and 1 bale, 1d.; total, 7d."—the alterations are in the defendant's writing—the price charged is uniformly 1d. per bale—no other bales were sent on that day to Crowther from Gooch and Cozens—other bales would be the subject of other entries—this cart note (produced) contains seven bales, six for Paget, and one for Crowther—it is not in the defendant's writing, but the number 501 is—the carter gives it to him—this invoice 583 (produced) is in the invoicer's writing—there is no writing of the prisoner's on it—this entry of 10th December in the order-book is all in the defendant's son's writing, and so is the whole of this entry in the receipt-book—here is no memorandum here by the prisoner—the reference to the wool-bill "516" on the cart note is in the prisoner's writing—it is "10th December, 1858, 22 bales"—there is no charge on the note—the whole of this wool-bill, 516, is made out by the prisoner's son, except the figure "4" placed after the "2" making 24, which I believe to be the prisoner's writing, and this long stroke after the 2d., making it 2s.—this is the wool-bill, "Consignor, Gooch and Cozens; Consignee, J. Hargraves, of Bradford; number of articles, 24 bales of wool," which was originally two bales—the total as altered is fifty-five bales, because there is another alteration in the bill—the third case is Wright Whitnam, of Huddersfield, on the same day—the order-book is in the son's writing, the reference also, and the receipt-book also—the reference, 516, in the cart note is in the prisoner's writing—the wool-bill now stands, "Messrs. Gooch and Cozens, consignors; consignee, W. Whitnam, of Huddersfield, 12 bales marked W. W. H.; amount paid on 11s.; reference to invoice 1068"—the figure 2, making the bales 12, is in the prisoner's writing, and the figure 1 placed before the 1d. on the stroke after it, making it "11s."—the cart note only contains one bale—this entry in the order-book, "11th December, Brown and Eagles to Glover, of Kirk-stall" is by the son, and this entry in the receipt-book also—there is no cart note for this; the cart notes are missing—they were last seen during the prisoner's examination at the Mansion-house—the prisoner was allowed to search for the missing wool-book, and it was immediately after that that I missed them—I left him in the wool office with the notes and books; whether there was any one else there I cannot say—this wool-bill, No. 518, December 11, is in the defendant's son's writing, "Consignor, Brown and Eagles; consignee, G. G. Glover, Kirkstall; 2 bales of wool, marked G. G. P. 2s. 2d."—the first 2 and the stroke are in the prisoner's writing—the bales remain unaltered—the reference to the invoice is 589—this entry in the order-book on 13th December, "3 bales from Gooch and Cozens, London Wall, to Walker, Blomfield and Walker, of Leeds, 3 bales of wool," is in the prisoner's writing, and the reference is his son's—the entry in the receipt-book made by the prisoner is "3 bales;" that is correct—there is no cart note—the wool-bill is in the prisoner's writing, the entry standing precisely as I gave it—the consignment is the same as the order—the number of bales is 13; amount paid on 12s. 3d.; reference to invoice 976—a "I" has been placed before the "3," and 12s. with a stroke before the 3d.—this entry in the order-book on 14th December is all in the prisoner's son's writing, and this in the receipt-book also—we have no cart note—the wool-bill is in the son's writing—the paid on there originally stood 1s. 8d., it is now 11s. 8d.—

there are 10 bales; that stands perfectly correct—the I has been added in the prisoner's writing—the reference to the invoice is 1075—here is an entry in the order-book of the consignment of 18 bales, on 23d November, from Gooch and Cozens, to Hurst and Son—we have separate books for each firm—here is an entry in the receipt-book in the prisoner's writing, "Wool bill, November 23d, carman Wyeth; 4 bales, "but it is not to Hurst and Son, or to anybody—here is an entry in the wool bill for D. J. Cooper, of Leeds, 4 bales; 4d. paid on; and from the same senders to S. Hurst & Co., Hudders-field, 18 bales; amount paid on 1s. 6d.; total of the wool bales 22; reference to invoice 964—the whole of those entries are in the prisoner's writing—the reference to the invoice should have been in the writing of the referencer—we have not got the London Dock book here; I did not understand that that case would be gone into—the wool-book is here, and this is the receipt-book—this entry in the receipt-book, 529, December 14, from the London Dock Company, to Paget, is the defendant's son's writing, and the receipt taken—this wool-bill, 529, December 14, also stood in the son's writing; but here is an insertion by the prisoner, from the London Docks to Paget—it contains an interlineations—it is "16 bills; amount paid 1s. 4d.;" reference to invoice in the prisoner's writing, "592" it is unusual for him to make any reference.

Cross-examined by MR. RIBTON. Q. How long have you been with Messrs. Chaplin and Home? A. Since November last—I have not been talking about the case to the other clerks; I have with the attorney several times; he directed me to make such answers as were compatible with the case—I have not been making inquiries at all; the theory I know myself; I have been long enough at the business for that, and I had only to refresh my memory as to the practice, but I cannot recollect any person who I made any direct inquiries of—I have made several inquiries; I inquired of the two referencers, A venden and Pay; they are here—that was not in order to enable me to give my evidence, but merely to put the facts into the attorney's hands; it is since I was examined at the Mansion-House—I had no inquiries about my evidence, it was about these entries—I have known the prisoner ever since I entered the service in November last, and have seen him every day—my duty there is checking also—I was in the employment of the Great Western Railway before that—I have been in the office with the prisoner many times—I have a pretty good knowledge of his figures, and swear that I believe these alterations to be his—I hare never received a letter from him—I have seen him write these wool bills in his wool-office—I have seen him actually engaged writing perhaps a dozen times—I went into the wool-office sometimes when I had occasion to see Strickland on different matters of business, and talked to him, but never remained very long at one time—I believe all these alterations to be his writing, and they consist of figures only—I have formed my opinion not merely from seeing him write, but from his figures in the different bills—the cart notes never contain the price, but sometimes there is an additional charge in them for warehousing, when the goods remain longer than the stipulated time, when the amount would be put upon the cart note—the defendant pays the warehouseman, but he might pay the carman sometimes—he makes out the bill from the order in the order book, which contains the consignment, the cart note does not—he would have the cart note on one side of him, and the book on the other—the cart note is the only means he has of knowing how many bills on a a particular load a carman brings—the entry is made in the order-book before the arrival of the goods—Strickland makes it, or his son; he gets the order from the consignors—if you buy bales of wool you can send them

through the broker to Chaplin and Horne, without going there; the broker sends an order to them to fetch certain goods specified—Chaplin and Horne's cart do not fetch the goods unless they wish to patronise Chaplin and Horne; there are other carriers.

COURT. Q. If I want to send 500 bales to Liverpool, is there any law to prevent my putting the goods in carts or wheel-barrows and sending them to Chaplin and Horne's? A. No; they might be sent to the station; we should take them in without a cart note—the carman need not have an order if the consignor was the carter himself, if he carted his own goods.

MR. RIBTON. Q. Do you mean to say that Mr. Strickland would cart a load of anything without a cart note? A. He might, or he might not; if it was brought to him, he might make out a note for himself, or they might make the entry without a cart note—the cart notes are all tied up—the wool-bills are made out between the prisoner and his son; he is responsible for their being made up; when they are made up other directions go into the shipper or invoicer's hands, and are sent—the shipper and invoicer are the same person—Knapman was the shipper in the first of these cases; it is his business to make out the invoices; I have gone through all that myself—the invoice is sent to the station; it does not go into the consigner's hands; it is the property of the Railway Company, and is placed in a skeleton at its destination—the shipper makes out the order—the invoice is a copy of the wool-bill, and is made out for the facility of parties at the station in checking them—the shipper delivers the wool-bill and the goods to the referencer after they are put on board; he examines the whole of the entries in every particular—the referencers examine the entries, put the references in, and then give them to the paste boy, who pastes them in, and the book is then placed in the invoicing office—anybody can go there—tarpaulins have occasionally been put in the wool-office of a night to keep them safe till next morning—the office is locked up at night, but during the day any clerk has access to it.

MR. LEWIS. Q. Have you checked accounts which you know to be in his writing? A. Yes; two or three months accounts in detail—if there had been any extra charge in the cart note for warehousing, that would also have appeared in the wool-bills—I have checked one of the prisoner's wool books, from this skeleton of wool-bills—it is the wool book which is missing; what I call the summary—to prove that it was made from this there were two errors in the summary, and two in the wool-bills: that was in the sale from January to March—I do not remember the amounts; it was some trifling error in the addition, which I desired the prisoner to correct, and to alter the total also—I do not remember whether they were in his favour or against him.

JOHN KNAPMAN . I am an invoice clerk in the prosecutor's employ—on 8th December I received wool-bill 501 from the prisoner and entered the particulars of it in this book, (Produced) "501 Gooch B. Crowther, of Kirkstall, 1 bale of wool 1d. paid on; 6 bales of wool for Paget of Kirk-stall, 6d. paid on;"—I then made out this invoice (produced)—it is in the same terms—this wool-bill, 501, December 8th, is not in the same condition as when I entered it in my book—the 1 bale is altered to 12 bales, and 1d. to 11s. in Strickland's writing—I have an entry here of 518; it is "G. Glover of Kirkstall, 2 bales of wool"—I have not got the amount paid on—I did not copy it into this book—the original invoice is at Kirkstall with the Railway Company—I have a tissue paper copy in my own writing.

Cross-examined. Q. How long have you been with Chaplin and Horne?

A. Fourteen years next September—the defendant has been there about five years; he has been very active, and I know that he is ruptured—there is a great deal of business—he may be kept at work the whole day, from morning till night, at a different part—6 or 7 hundred bales is about the largest number he would receive in a day, distributed over a great many different consignments—when I have done with the wool-bill I take it to the referencer's office and leave it there with the invoiced that I have made out, which is forwarded under cover to the Kirkstall-station; a little boy pastes these bills in, named Dobson—those collected to-night would be pasted in tomorrow—I have heard of a book being lost from the wool office, but cannot say what it was; also some cart notes—I never heard of coats and hats being stolen—I never heard the prisoner complain of his dinner being stolen.

WILLIAM HILL . This wool-bill, 516, in my book on December 10th, would in the course of business generally come to me from the prisoner or his son, but I cannot speak to this particular bill—I am an invoice clerk; there are several invoice clerks, two for the wool department, Knapman and myself—I first of all receive a cart note down a shute, and hand it over to the prisoner in the office—he would make out a note for Gooch and Cozens there, and hand it over to me—I copied the contents of that note, but not as it is now stuck in—here are 12 bales, R. P. of H.—one for W. W. of Huddersfield, two for R. Groves, and one for W. Bidfen, of Huddersfield—this is the original invoice (produced)—I made it out myself, and Mr. Fryer gave it me to-day; it is in my writing—this is the first time I have seen it since I wrote it; it is "J. Hargraves, 2 bales, 2d. paid on Gooch's bill 516"—this other was given to me by Mr. Fryer in the same way; it is in the same state as it was when I made it out, except these red marks and figures which were made at Huddersfield, I suppose—it is "W. Whitnam, Huddersfield, 1 bale, 1d. Gooch's bill 516"—the wool-bill, 516, is not in the same state as when I copied it into my book—it stands 21 bales instead of 1, and 11s. instead of 1d., and Hargraves is 24 bales instead of 2, and 2s. instead of 2d.—this 4 in the 24 bales, to the best of my belief, is the prisoner's writing; also the 11s., and the 2 in the 12 bales—I have been there so long, and have seen his writing many times—I have had hundreds of bills in his writing—there is a blot on this 2d. altered to 2s., and I cannot swear to it.

Cross-examined. Q. Have not you looked at this book before to-day to see whose writing it is? A. Yes, once; that was some time ago—Mr. Fryer and our principal manager asked me to do so—Mr. Fryer asked me how many bales I received on 517, Huddersfield, and if it was in the same state as when I passed it to the reference clerk—he did not ask me in whose writing the alterations were made; this is the first time I have been asked that.

COURT. Q. Did Mr. Fryer ask you about it before or after the charge was made against the prisoner? A. I believe it was before.

WILLIAM FOWLER . I am an invoice clerk in the prosecutor's service—I made a copy of wool-bill 528 on the invoice which is at Leeds—here is a copy of it made by Knapman before the invoice was made out.

JOHN KNAPMAN (re-examined). This book is my writing—I made this copy from the cart note, not from the wool bill—Wyeth gave it to me—the cart note is not here—this entry was not made in the prisoner's presence.

FRANCIS WEBB OVENDER . I am one of Messrs. Chaplin and Home's referencers at Haydon-square—it was part of my duty to receive the wool-bills and invoices from the invoicers—it is my duty to compare the one with the other—this wool-bill, No. 501, is not my checking, it is done by Mr. Pay—I compared this one, No. 518, Kirkstall, Dec. 11, from Brown to Glover, with

the invoice, and they tallied—the wool-bill is before me now, and is not in the state that it was then—this is the tissue copy of the invoice—I did not check No. 525 with the invoice, and have never had it under my official notice—this wool-bill, which I am looking at, appears in an altered state—I did not compare 531, Crossland; 529 Paget of Kirkstall is my checking, but not my figures—in this, 529 Paget, 16 bales, the referencing is not in my writing, though I know the clearing has been passed as cleared by me—these figures have been filled in since—it is not my duty to make any entries except the number—it is in young Strickland's writing in the first instance, but the defendant has filled in, "Paget of Kirkstall, 16 bales"—it passed through my hands, and I have a mark to show that—that was not written on it at the time I checked it—I have known the defendant two-and-a-half or three years—I have had frequent opportunities of seeing him write, and have constantly acted on his writing—I consider myself capable to judge his writing from anybody else's—I did not check wool-bill 501, but this 12 bales and 11s. are in the defendant's writing—there are other figures here—this six bales is in the prisoner's writing also; all the figures are his except the references—in the next 516 the name and the consignee are in the son's writing, but the alterations of the figures are the prisoner's—it was, "2 bales, Hargraves of Bradford," and there is a 4 put after the 2, making 24; and 11s. is put as paid on—I did not compare the invoice in Whitnam's case, but this "12" is in the son's writing, and the 11s. is the defendant's—this bill, 518, Brown to Glover of Kirkstall, is in the son's writing; but "2 bales of wool, 2d." has been altered by the defendant into 2s. 2d.—bill 225, from Gooch and Cozens to Walker of Leeds, 13 bales, 12s. 3d. is all in the defendant's writing; it should have been, "3 bales, 3d."—bill 531, from Gooch and Cozens to Crossland of Huddersfield, appears to be made out by the son, except this 11s. 8d. which is the prisoner's—it appears in its original state—I referenced this November wool bill, 529; it is not now in the state it was then—"Gooch and Co. to S. Hans, 1s. 6d. paid on, "has been inserted in the defendant's writing after the bill was cleared by us—there was plenty of room on the bill, and that has been put in—I know when a thing has passed my hands by my writing being on it.

Cross-examined. Q. How do you know it has been added since? A. Because there is no such practice by the shipper, and the line is all in the the prisoner's writing except these figures, the number of the Leeds invoice—I know that this was not all written at the same time, because we should never have passed it, and it would not have been pasted in this book—the original invoice is at Leeds, I suppose; they have two originals here, but I do not know which they are—I check one, and Mr. Pay the other.

MR. LEWIS. Just explain to the Jury what there is on the face of this document by which you can tell that any entry has been made since. A. These figures, 964, have been put in by the prisoner since, and this entry is here which the shipper ought to have marked.

COURT. Q. How do you know that he would have put in these identical figures? how do you know that any of the other clerks did not put them in? A. If you refer to the Huddersfield book, you will find that the numbers do not run so high; he has not taken that number from his book at all—I have examined a great many of these wool-bills with Mr. Fryer, and find a great many alterations made by the prisoner, which do not correspond with entries in my books—I have examined a great number of those to which I have spoken to-day—I have particularly examined 525 and 529—I can judge the defendant's writing from his son's—I am aware that I said in

my evidence in chief that the 2s. in bill 516 was in the writing of the son; it was 2d., and a stroke is put after it in the prisoner's writing, making it 2s.—the 2 after the 1 in "12" is the prisoner's writing; and he has also put "1" before the 1 made by his son, making 11s. of it—I meant to say, that the 11s. is in his writing; but that he converted 1d. into 11s.—in 531 the bill is made out by the son, and I should judge the 11s. 8d. to be the prisoner's writing, the whole of the figures, but it so happens that I did not check this case—if Fryer had told me that the original amount was 1s. 8d. and that only the other "I" was in the prisoner's writing, I should still remain of the opinion that the whole 11s. 8d. is in his writing; it is strange for 11s. 8d. to appear for 10 bales—I should be able to speak better if I had checked the invoice, but the whole figures appear very much like the defendant's.

MR. RIBTON. Q. Turn to 569. Do you see that the shillings and pence are different? A. Yes one is 8s. 7d. and the other 1s. 8d.; but that is something of his own, in the shape of totals; not something brought down to us.

WILLIAM PAY . I am in the prosecutors' service at Haydon-square. I am one of the referencers—there is only Mr. Ovenden and myself—we receive the wool-bills and invoices; he compares some and I some—the shipper makes the invoice, and brings it into our office—they are left there for us to compare them, and we make a check on the invoice—this (produced) is the original invoice of wool-bill 501—Mr. Knapman made it out—I have no mark on it—it is Mr. Ovenden's tick—I call it over to him; he stands by the invoice, and I stand by the bill; I call out the names and amounts from the bill, and he says "Right," if it is in the invoice (THE COURT considered that this was no comparison at all, as one person might be careless)—have woolbill 516 here, that is my own ticking; I looked at both without anybody's assistance; the one strictly tallies with the other—the second one is Hargrave's; I compared that with' Ovenden—the other is Whitwen, of Huddersfield, and Pollett, of Huddersfield; I compared those without assistance—this is the original invoice; I expect they have written to the country for it; it is in three different hands—I know it is the original, because I compared it with the wool-bill, and they strictly tally with one another—Ovenden called the items, and I marked the invoice, as containing the same items called—I saw the wool-bills on each occasion when I compared them—they are not now in the same state—in No, 501, what was 1 bale has been altered to 2, and a 1 put before it on the left side, to make it 12; and the amount paid on which was only 1d. is now 11s.; the total bales at the bottom, which would have been 7 in its original state, is now 18 bales, but the total was not there; it is not always put—I believe those alterations to be in Strickland's writing—No. 516 is not in the same state as it was originally, "Hargraves, of Bradford, 2 bales, 2d." is altered into "24 bales, 2s." by a 4 being put at the right side of the 2, and the 2d. having a long stroke brought down, making it into 2s.—I believe the 4 to be the prisoner's; I cannot speak to the stroke—the next item is "Whitwen, 1 bale of wool, 1d." which is altered to "12 bales, 11s." by adding a 1 on the right side, and a long Broke afterwards, such as is commercially understood to mean 1s.—the 2 is Mr. Strickland's figure, but the 1 I cannot swear to—there was no total bales at the time I first saw it; the total is now 55 bales, and the money 14s. 7d., in Strickland's writing—this wool-bill, 518, is not in its original state—here are Mr. Ovenden's figures on it, therefore, of course, I did not see it—Strickland's son has made out the bill for 2d., and this 2

with a "s " over it, and a long stroke, is Strickland's; the other figures are his son's—the figures on this wool-bill, 521, are in the defendant's writing; I had this bill; they are my figures in referencing—I cannot be certain whose figures these are in 531—I have known the defendant the whole time he has been in Chaplin and Home's employ; about four and a half years—I have seen him write a great number of times, and acted on his writing.

Cross-examined. Q. Where have you seen him write? A. In our office, and also in the wool-office—I have stood by his side, and looked over him while he has been writing—my attention has been called to one or two bills—I am not aware that these are the particular ones; I am not certain that they are not—Mr. Fryer was with me; he pointed out some figures to me, and asked me if I could say whose they were—we were alone—he asked me with regard to some particular figures, whether I could say that they were Strickland's—that was not done more than once; it was on Friday last—I did not go to the Mansion-house—Mr. Fryer came to me, and was with me about five minutes—that was all that he did, to look over this book—the bills are left in the office by the shipper, before they are compared, in order for us to compare them—I may not be in at the time they are brought in; they may sometimes be possibly two days in the office before they are checked, but we are supposed to do them at the same time—there is sometimes possibly an accumulation of two or three days, and there they are lying in the office—there are three clerks in the office and a lad—I have nothing to do with the cart notes of these bills—Mr. Strickland has them, I believe—I do not know what he does with them; you have had some here—I never compared them with the cart notes—Mr. Fryer is the only one who has been speaking to me about this.

COURT. to R. FRYER. Q. Turn to wool-bill 501. You say that the alterations are in the writing of the defendant; I want to know what you call alterations? A. The number of bales has been affected by the insertion of figure 2 after the 1, and the money has been affected by the insertion of a 1 before the 1, or making it 11s. with a stroke added. I am aware that I differ in opinion from the last witness as regards the alteration of the number of bales—it is evident that the figure which is now "2" was "1"—I have no doubt at all that it originally stood 1 bale, which has misled the other witness.

THOMAS FOUKES . I was in Chaplin and Horne's employment, and had to paste the wool-bills into this book before me—the referencers put them on a corner of the desk for me in the down referencer's office; and when they are pasted in the book it is put in a rack in the office—I have fetched it down from the wool-office several times, and taken it into my own office to put the bills in—Strickland uses that office, and I have seen him use that book at various times, but not very often—he has had it to put a bill in sometimes—the office in which the book is kept is not the office in which the prisoner generally is—he is generally in the wool office—I have fetched it from the down office to put bills in.

Cross-examined. Q. Were you examined at the Mansion-house? A. No—Mr. Fryer has not been talking to me about this matter—he told me to be here to-day on this case—he asked me questions, and I answered them, but not as many as you have put to me to-day—he only told me I was to come here about putting the wool-bills in the book—that was on Monday, which was the only occasion he spoke to me—I pasted them in all at once, all that are there—they very seldom remain more than a day, but I never put them in more than once a day—there is not another boy to assist me.

JOHN EDWARD HUDDLESTON . I am a clerk in the employment of Gooch

and Cozens, wool warehousemen, of Aldgate—I produce an order from Chaplin and Horne for a bale of wool, on December 8, for Benjamin Crowther—it is written by a clerk of Messrs. Alley and Sons—(THE COURT did not think this was evidence)—this cart note produced was made out by one of our foremen—the charge is 1d. per bale—I made out the order for the delivery of certain goods to the carman.

SAMUEL WYAT . I took this cart note (produced) to Chaplin and Horne's wool-office—I cannot say whether Strickland was there—I delivered 7 bales of wool to Mr. Knapman, which I had received from Gooch and Cozens that day—there were 6 for Paget and 1 for Benjamin Crowther, of Kirkstall—it is customary to take the cart note up into Strickland's office, and I write my name and the number of the van on it—I see my name and the number of the van on this note—I delivered it up in the wool-office.

GEORGE POTTS . I am in the employment of Chaplin and Horne, in the inquiry office—on 10th February the prisoner came to me with a message from the manager that I was to check his wool-book—I have never done that duty before or since—the checking was performed by the prisoner calling over the amount from this book of wool-bills, and I ticked the corresponding amount off in his wool-book (produced)—it is in his writing, and is a summary in respect to these wool-bills for November and December—I got the total amount from adding up the wool-bills—I remember it—it was 89l. 10s. 11d.—I compared this wool-book, the amount of the summary, with Castleman's cash-book on the same day, which was on or about 10th February, a minute or two afterwards; it was the same transaction—I saw the entry of 89l. 10s. 11d. in Castleman's cash-book—at that time I did not see it made—it had been made previously, and the summary tallied with the cash-book—the entry in the cash-book is, "February 10. Wool paid ons in November and December sales, 89l. 10s. 11d."—it is impossible for me to recollect entries in the wool-book for 2 months—I recollect one because my attention was drawn to it, and because I have looked at other documents—the entries were about paid ons, and they were principally small amounts of money, line after line—I do not recollect, without referring, any particular item existing in that wool-book at the time I was comparing it with the wool bills with the prisoner—I have memorandums to refer to—I did not make them at the time, but when I was investigating this matter.

Cross-examined. Q. How long have you been there? A. 12 months—I believe a clerk named Whitmore, who has since left the establishment, was in the habit of checking his accounts—Castleman is the cashier—he was not present when the prisoner and I checked the wool-book, but I afterwards carried it to his office to compare it with his—I did not remain in his office 5 minutes—I saw the amount in a moment.

J. E. HUDLESTON (re-examined). It was part of my duty to receive the paid ons for Gooch and Cozens—this amount on the 10th of December is in my writing—I received 2s. 1d. for Benjamin Crowther for 31 bales, which is at the rate of 1d. a bale—that appears from the account—I did not receive any money that day in respect of wool for them—I received from Whitwen 1d. but received no other money that day in respect of wool for Gooch and Cozens—here is another entry on the same date of money received by me for Gooch and Cozens, in respect of wool for Hargraves; it is "2 bales 2d. 10th December"—I received no other amount that day in respect of wool for them—I cannot speak positively as to who the payer of

those sums was—I sent the account in to Mr. Strickland, and he generally paid them, but sometimes Mr. Castleman; the rule was that Mr. Strickland paid—whoever paid these sums to me paid them on account of Chaplin and Horne.

MR. RIBTON. Q. Let me look at that paper, when did you make it? A. I can tell you by the date if you will let me look at it; it is a running account between December 1st and 15th—it has been paid to me—I debited the 2s. 1d. for Crowther on 8th December—we have a cash-book—I cannot say whether this is entered in the cash-book first—this is made every day, day by day, from the orders.

CHARLES MONCEY . I am clerk to Messrs. Brown and Eagle—this receipt (produced) is my writing, but the endorsement is not—I had not that receipt in my possession at the time I had wool for Glover—the paid on, is paid after the wool is delivered—I received the money in this instance—I received no money for Glover on 16th December from Chaplin and Horne—on the 28th I received 6s. 3d. for the paid ons, for 75 bales of wool, I cannot say from whom, but from some one I know to be in Chaplin and Horne's employment at the time—I cannot say whether it was the prisoner—I was in the habit of seeing the prisoner—he has paid me money on account of Chaplin and Horne—I cannot say that he is the person, and I should not like to say he is not—by reference to the order, which is in my possession, I see that 2 bales out of the 75 went to Glover—it is not in my writing, but I acted on it, issuing the order from the counting-house—I made up the 75 bales, with other orders, on the same day—I had the order before me when I made out the account, one of them is to "Glover, 2 bales, 2d."—no other wool went to Glover from Brown and Eagle's that day—all the wool sent does not pass through my hands, but all the orders do.

Cross-examined. Q. Did you see this order yourself on that particular day? A. Yes; the endorsement is in the broker's writing—it comes to me through Chaplin and Horne—this duplicate order is in my writing, and will show the date of delivery—I know that the bales were delivered on the date in this order—the order was delivered on 10th, and the goods on 11th December—I do not know the carman's writing—I did not see him sign it, but this is the signature obtained on the goods being delivered; we believe it is given by the carman.

ROBERT JAMES PARKER . I am in the employ of Gooch and Cozens—the receit for 3d. for marking three bales of wool for Walker, Bloomfield and walker, is mine—I do not know who paid me the money, somebody in Chaplin and Horne's firm.

B. FRYER (re-examined) These words, "Walker, Blomfield and Walker, Leeds," are in the prisoners writing.

JOHN WILLIAM HARKER . I am clerk to Gooch and Cozens—this receipt for 10d. is in my writing; I had the amount paid to me by, I should suppose, the carman—it is a charge against Chaplain and Horne on the 14th December, 1858. for marking 10 bales for Benjamin Crossland—I paid no other amount that day that I can remember.

Cross-examined. Q. Is that receipt all in your writing? A. All but that which is put across it—I should say I made this at the time I received the money, because it was after the sales were over, and therefore, instead of being paid weekly it was paid at the time—I am not sure when the goods were delivered, because I was not in the warehouse to see them delivered, but I am sure I received this 10d. on 14th December.

B. FRYER (re-examined). This crossing is in the prisoner's son's writing—

this is Gooch and Cozens" order-book; it was kept principally by the prisoner, and occasionally by his son.

EDWARD FRANCIS CASTLEMAN . I am in the prosecutor's employ as cashier—there are periodical wool sales every year—the last sale before 10th February closed in December—it is the prisoner's duty during the sales to pay certain charges for paid ons, and at the conclusion of the sales it is my practice to settle with him for what he has paid for the paid ons—I advance him on behalf of my employers, pending the sales, certain sums of money, and take his 10 U's; and when I settle with him he produces to me a wool-bill, containing a summary of the amounts said by him to be paid on—I gave no directions to Fox to check his wool-book with his wool-bill—he brought in his wool-book on 10th February, and there was a general settlement between us—I looked at his wool-book, which showed an amount of 891. 10s. 11d. which he represented that he had paid on during the previous two months—I recollect the amount by taking credit for it, and making a note of it in my own book at the time—on settling the account I debited myself with the amount, tore up his I O U's, and paid him the balance, about 4l. or 5l.—I have seen that wool-book since in the prisoner's possession—it was a wool-book that I settled with him in March—it contains the summary for March—I do not know where the wool-book that was paid in February is now—when I last saw it I believe it was in the prisoner's possession—I have no items in my cash-book, only the 89l. 10s. 11d.

Cross-examined. Q. Do you know that clothes have been stolen from the office in which the books were kept? A. Yes; the very office which these books have been lost from—I have been in the habit of paying the prisoner for it may be two years—he came to me with his account checked by a third party; I do not know in what mode—it was Mr. Whitworth, the party who formal filled Mr. Fox's place, who was in the habit of ✗necking it—it was Mr. Fox's duty to check it at this time—if it had been checked by some person who had no authority to check it I should not have paid it.

This being the case for the Prosecution, MR. RIBTON contended that there was no evidence that the sums charged by the prisoner, had not formed part of the 89l. 10s. 11d. and been paid to Chaplin and Horne. MR. SLEIGH submitted that there was abundant evidence to go to the Jury. THE COURT considered that there was evidence on the first Six Counts, but not on the Seventh and Eighth.

The prisoner received a good character.


NEW COURT.—Thursday, August 18th, 1859.


Mr. Ald. ALLEN; and Mr. Ald. PHILLIPS.

Before Mr. Baron Martin and the Fourth Jury.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-762
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceNo Punishment > sentence respited

Related Material

762. ROBERT WILLIAM PATTERSON (14) , Burglary in the dwelling-house of George Brooke, with intent to steal; to which he

PLEADED GUILTY.— Judgment Respited.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-763
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty

Related Material

763. GEORGE WILSON (31), was indicted for Bigamy; to which he

PLEADED GUILTY .— Confined Six Months.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-764
VerdictGuilty > lesser offence

Related Material

764. ROBERT WILLIAM WOODROW (26) , Feloniously stabbing and wounding Harriet Emily Barker, with intent to do her some grievous bodily harm. Mr. THOMPSON conducted the Prosecution.

HARRIET EMILY BARKER . I am the wife of William Barker, a timber porter—previous to my marriage I had known the prisoner—I met him on 11th July, in Tavistock-place, about half-past 10 o'clock in the morning—I saw him again about half-past 8 o'clock in the evening, and two young girls came up and spoke to me—we all remained in company about five minutes—before we came to the public-house the prisoner asked me for 2d. to have a pint of beer—I offered him a penny—he declined to take that—we bad words, as we had in the day previously—he took my head under his left arm, and I felt myself stabbed, three times in the breast, once in the elbow, and once in my ribs—a great deal of blood came from the wounds—I felt myself wounded, and put my hand to my breast—I fell, and was insensible—I was taken to University College Hospital, and remained there a fortnight—I am quite well now—I have seen a knife like this (produced) before—I should not like to swear it was this—some angry words had passed between me and the prisoner before—I wanted to go to a place, and he said I should not go—I said I would, and he pushed me, and I struck him—that was about 2 o'clock in the day—he went away, and I went to my place, and in the evening I met him again—I was with two friends when I saw him.

Cross-examined by MR. BEST. A. Did you know the prisoner before you were married? A. Yes; but I never had anything to do with him—I became acquainted with him 18 months ago in Agar Town—he was lodging in the same house—there was no intimacy between him and me—I removed to Coram-street—the prisoner lodged with me there—he and I did not take two rooms three doors off—I will swear we did not—I never lived with him there—I have been in the habit of going along with him—on the day I met him at half-past 10 o'clock I went to the police-court, and to a public-house opposite—we did not have two pints of gin; we had two quarterns—we went to another public-house first, and refreshed ourselves there; we then went to Guildford-street and had some more—we then quarrelled—we went to a gin-shop afterwards and had more liquor there—I and he were pretty fresh.

GUILTY of Unlawfully Wounding. Confined Nine Months.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-765
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

765. MICHAEL HERRING (28), and HENRY WILLIAMS (30) , Feloniously breaking and entering the dwelling-house of William Fredericks, and stealing his goods.

Mr. COOPER conducted the Prosecution.

WILLIAM FREDERICKS . I live in Winslow-road, Holloway—I am a trimming manufacturer—I left my house from Saturday, 9th July, till the Monday—I locked up the house; no one was left in it—I secured it throughout, windows and all—I came home, and I observed my bedroom blind drawn aside—I came to the house, I found it had been entered, and I missed the property now produced, and other property also, value about 80l.

ALFRED GREEN (City policeman). From information I received, I went to Mr. Frederick's—the prisoner Herring was then at Guildhall, on a remand—while he was on the remand, I took from him the trowsers, and waistcoat, and boots that he was wearing—this was on Monday, 1st August—he had been wearing them from the time he was taken—I asked him to account for

the clothes he was wearing—he said he bought them—I told him that what he said would be stated against him, and he refused to answer any more questions—from information I went after Williams, and took him—I took from him a pair of boots and a pair of trousers—these are them.

ALFRED HALEY (Police-Sergeant, 15 S). I was called to Mr. Frederick's on 11th July—I examined the house, and from what I saw in the bedroom, I think there had been three persons there—in a room on the ground-floor, I found this pair of shoes (produced)—all the windows and doors were fastened, but the lock of the street-door had been forced—it appeared that the key which had been put in was not long enough to take the lock back—I fitted these boots which I found on Herring at Guildhall, and they fitted him.

WILLIAM FREDERICKS (re-examined). This pair of boots I found in my bedroom, where my boots had stood—my boots were taken away and these were left—I took them down stairs.


15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-766
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

766. MICHAEL HERRING was again indicted for feloniously, with others, assaulting Harriet Edwards, with intent to rob her.

Mr. COOPER conducted the Prosecution.

HARRIET EDWARDS . I am servant to Mr. Dale, of Shoe-lane, a founder and lead merchant—about half-past 8 o'clock in the evening of 16th July, I heard a ring at the bell, in consequence of which I went and opened the street door—there were two gentlemen at the door, one of them said, "Is Mr. Dale in"—I went to answer him that Mr. Dale was absent, and they both rushed in—one of them closed the door, and the other seized and held me by the throat—there were only two men then, but one more came in directly afterwards—I got from the man that held me, and screamed, and then the other man got hold of me by the throat, and pressed me very hard with his two thumbs—that was the prisoner; I am sure he is the man—two of Mr. Dale's men then came up, but the prisoner did not let go of me for a minute or two, till the other man ran out, and then he ran out too—the usual time for Mr. Dale's men to leave is 8 o'clock, but they were there later that evening—when the prisoner rushed out, both Mr. Dale's men pursued him, and I was left alone in the house—I saw the prisoner again at the station, the same evening—I had never seen him before.

JOHN MASON . I live in King-street, Lambeth, and am a brass-fitter, in the employ of Mr. Dale—I remember the night of the 16th July—while in the back premises, I heard a scream from the last witness.—I and my fellow workman rushed to the passage, and I saw the prisoner had got hold of the servant by the throat—I am quite certain he is the man—he rushed out at the door, and I rushed after him, and followed him till he was captured—I did not lose sight of him at all—he was at last secured by a policeman—in going along, he made a stop; I came up to him, and he went on again.

HENRY PARK . I am a workman at Mr. Dale's—on that Saturday evening I heard a shriek—I went to the passage near the shop door—I saw the servant, and the prisoner had hold of her—he ran out and I followed him—when he got to Bride-lane I saw him put his hand in his side pocket and throw something over into the burial-ground.

ROBERT TAPPIN (City policeman, 223). On Saturday night, 16th July, I was in Fleet-street in plain clothes—I heard a cry of "Stop thief," and saw the prisoner running and two men running after him—I followed him

down Bride-passage, and as he turned to get into Bride-lane he threw this life preserver over the fence—I asked a man to get over and pick it up—I took the prisoner to the Station, and found on him a handle of a knife, and 1 1/4 d.


He was further charged with having been before convicted.

JOHN NOBLE . I am the governor of York Castle—I produce a certificate—(Read: " Dennis Elson convicted Dec. 1851, of wounding, having been previously convicted.—Transported for Fifteen years).—The prisoner is the person.

GUILTY.— Twenty Years' Penal Servitude.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-767
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

767. HENRY WILLIAMS , was again indicted for feloniously breaking and entering the dwelling-house of William Newland Wellsby and stealing 1 silver bread-basket, and other articles, his property.

MR. COOPER conducted the Prosecution.

ALFRED GREEN (City policeman). On the morning of 8th August, I went to a house in the Borough-road and saw the prisoner standing in the passage—he went into the front parlour, and I left him in charge of Harris—I went and searched the back room on the same floor—I found this silver sugar basket—the landlady was in the house at the time—and the prisoner came into the room—I asked the landlady how she accounted for the possession of this basket, and she said, "Harry gave it me—did not you Harry;" speaking to the prisoner, who said, "Yes I did"—I then went to the front parlour, the room which the prisoner first entered—I there found, wrapped in some rags, by the prisoner's bed, this bread basket and this egg stand, and 3 cups in it; one is deficient—the prisoner saw me find them—I asked him how he accounted for the possession of these—he said, "A man left them here last night for me to buy"—he then said, "You may as well have all," and put his hand in his coat pocket and handed me this sugar ladle—I took him to the station in Fleet-street, and while there I took from him a pair of boots.

JAMES HARDWAY . I am coachman to Mr. William Newland Wellsby, of Porchester-terrace, Bays water—he is on the circuit—I reside in the house, and on the night of 6th July, I fastened all the doors and windows at a little after 9 o'clock, before I went to bed—at about half-past 4 o'clock on the Sunday morning a policeman rang at the bell and awoke me—I found the doors open which I had left shut, and the front door had been broken open—I missed a number of articles—I can swear to these articles (produced) as belonging to Mr. Wellsby; they were in a glass case in the breakfast-room—the case was broken open.

WILLIAM MBUNNS (Policeman, 321 D). I was on duty in Porchester-terrace, about half-past 4 o'clock in the morning of 7th August; I saw the door of No. 38 open—I rang the bell and went into the house—the last witness came down, and this property was missed.

EDWIN BYRNE . I am a milliner, and live in Newman-street, Oxford-street—I went to Mr. Wellsby's house on 4th August, and about 2 o'clock in the afternoon I was in the breakfast-room on the ground-floor—I heard a ring at the bell of the garden-gate, and I saw the prisoner walk in the gravel-walk up towards the breakfast-room—the female servant came to him, and he asked if she wanted a sweep—she said, "We have our own sweep," and he went away—on 6th August I was at the house between 11 and 12 o'clock, standing at the foot of the stairs—I heard a ring at the bell, and again saw the prisoner—he walked right along the gravel walk down

the area steps, and close to the breakfast-room window—the housemaid went to him, and he said, "I want to know when you will want the sweep"—the reply was, "We have our own sweeps, and they have been here"—I noticed that he looked right into the breakfast room.

Prisoners Defence. I have been getting an honest living, and kept that house 10 months. These things were brought to me to be left till Monday morning; a man told me they were purchased at Debenham and Storr's. The policeman came to my place and found the things. That spoon I had in my hand, and hearing a double knock, I put it in my pocket; I did not hide it. I said, "This came with them." I know nothing about stealing them.

GUILTY .—He was further charged with having been before convicted.

CHARLES KEMP (Police-sergeant, S 22). I produce certificates of the prisoner's conviction (Read: "Central Criminal Court, August, 1850; Henry Williams, convicted of breaking into a dwelling-house, with intent to steal, having been before convicted—Confined one year." "Clerkenwell Session, July, 1853; Robert East, convicted of stealing a pencil-case and other goods. Transported for Ten Years ")—the prisoner is, the person.

GUILTY.— Twenty Years' Penal Servitude.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-768
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty

Related Material

768. CHARLES MANNERS (30) , Feloniously wounding James Creed, with intent to do him some grievous bodily harm; to which he

PLEADED GUILTY .— Confined Six Months.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-769
VerdictsNot Guilty > unknown; Guilty > pleaded guilty

Related Material

769. JOHN KING (23) , Feloniously stabbing George Pawley, with intent to do him some grievous bodily harm.

MR. BARRY conducted the Prosecution.

GERGE PAWLEY (Policeman, 225 B). I heard a noise in York-street, Westminster, at a quarter past 11 o'clock at night on 27th July—I ran to the spot, and saw a soldier lying on the pavement bleeding very much from the head—some of the mob cried out, "That is him that did it," pointing to a man who was making away from the crowd in company with the prisoner and another person—he was attempting to go under the arch leading to Blue Anchor-yard—I followed, and took that man, Mike, into custody—I saw a soldier's belt under his coat—I tried to get it from him—he dropped it, and it was taken up and given to me—I took Mike along to where the soldier was lying—Hemmings was with me, and he assisted in taking the man into custody—having taken him, I went back to where the soldier was—he was in the act of getting up—I asked him if that was the man—he said, "Yes," and I took him in custody—I then heard some words about a knife, but I could not say that it was the prisoner that said them—the prisoner came round directly after the words were used, and I received two or three very hard blows on the chest from the prisoner, which hurt me very much, and caused me to let go the other man, and I took the prisoner—a woman clawed at me in front at the same time, and some other man caught hold of me behind, and threw me on the ground with the prisoner on the top of me—I was kicked several times by others who were round—the prisoner was in the act of getting from me, and I struck him on the head with the truncheon—he then got away, and I believe he ran through Blue Anchor-yard, but I am not certain—I saw him afterwards in the Broadway—I followed him to the door of the Emigration Office—he ran and hid himself behind the door—I went in and took him—when I was at the station I found that I was wounded.

Cross-examined by MR. DOYLE. Q. Was there a great crowd? A. Yes; I saw no fighting—the soldier came to the ground before I got there—his belt was not off; it was another soldier's belt that Mike had got—soldiers when they get quarrelling very often use their belts—there were a great many persons quarrelling—I only struck once with my truncheon—I said at the station that I could not say the prisoner did it; but he was the only person who was close to me—I saw no knife.

CHARLES HEMMINGS (Policeman, B 79). On the night of 27th July, about a quarter past eleven o'clock, I heard a cry of "Murder!" and "Police!"—I went to where I found the last witness with a man in custody—the man had a soldier's belt under his coat, and they were endeavouring to get it away from him—it dropped down, and some persons picked it up and gave it to my brother constable—the soldiers said, "That was the man that struck him;" and my brother officer said we would take him to the station—we were then surrounded; and the prisoner, who stood close by my left side, said, "Out with your knives and down with the b——rs," and directly I received a blow on the lower part of my hand and went to Pawley—I had four or five on me, and we all went down together—I had four or five kicking and punching me—the prisoner went down Blue Anchor-yard, and we followed him.

Cross-examined. Q. Did the prisoner strike you also? A. Yes; but I was not wounded—I saw no knife—the prisoner's head was cut—when we took him he was going towards the Westminster Hospital; but he had turned up Parkhurst-street, which was out of the way.

WILLIAM HILTON . I live at No. 10, York-street, and am a light porter—I found this knife lying on the ground in York-street, Westminster, near the Blue Anchor, on 28th July, about a quarter before one o'clock in the morning—it was ten or twenty yards from the public-house—I afterwards found some blood on my clothes.

GEORGE PEARCE . I am a surgeon, and live in Eaton-street, Westminster—on 28th July the policeman was brought to my house—he had a wound on the chest three-quarters of an inch in length; it penetrated to the bone—his clothes were cut—the knife had passed through the double fold of his coat, and his under clothing was saturated with blood—the wound was a serious one; such an instrument as this knife might have done it—it must have been with great force to have gone through the clothes—if it had passed half-an-inch on one side it must have penetrated the heart—there was only one wound.


The prisoner was again indicted for assaulting Charles Hemmings; to which he

PLEADED GUILTY Confined Twelve Months.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-770
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

770. HUGH KELLY (40) , Feloniously administering to Mary Kennedy a certain poison, to wit, sugar of lead, with intent to murder her.

MR. GENT conducted the Prosecution.

MARY KENNEDY . I am the wife of Thomas Kennedy, a painter, of 6, Pye-street, Westminster—it is a lodging-house—the prisoner lived there with a woman—on Sunday evening, 24th July, a quarrel took place between the prisoner and my husband—I took it up, and he said he would do my husband a private injury; he would make him stiff—next morning, about eleven or half-past, I was frying some beef, bacon, and onions—the salt, which was proper salt for every one's use, which was usually laid on the table, was put away—the prisoner took something out of his pocket about the size of a walnut, and put it on the table—I took it for salt, and used it;

the prisoner and his wife had had breakfast in the same room—I broke some off the lump and put it on the meat and in the gravy—I used very nearly a quarter of it—I and my husband and children all partook of this meat, but the two youngest children did not get so much of it—I then felt very ill, and a burning pain at my chest, and was sick—my eldest child, who is near twelve years old, was very sick; he went to the hospital; and my husband was sick also—I took the remainder of the stuff to Mr. Hatton, and he said it was rank poison—I gave information.

COURT. Q. Does your husband use sugar of lead in his trade? A. I do not know—he had not been able, to work for some time—I go out charing to support him—I am sure the prisoner did this—I have been in trouble—I was fined 10s.—I had an imprisonment of seven days for a row—when I came out my husband and I had a drop to drink in the evening—we did not get drunk.

Prisoner. I laid it on the table, and I said I was either drunk or silly for laying it there. I said I beg your pardon; and did you not call me a b—y old b—r, and get a saucer and hit me with it?

Witness. No, I did not—I did not threaten to knock you down with a broom—I did not come home drunk on Sunday morning—I did not charge you when you came in at 3 o'clock, because I knew my husband was gone for a policeman; and directly you heard the policeman was looking for you you ran away and hid yourself in the next house.

Mr. GENT. Q. What time did you go to the chemist's with this stuff? A. About half-past 12 o'clock—I had two children very ill the same day; one is seven years old, the other about twelve—the landlord finds the salt for the lodging-house—I don't know who put it away that day—the place where I was cooking is not confined to ourselves; it is for every body's use.

THOMAS KENNEDY . I live at 6, Pye-street, Westminster—on Sunday, 24th July, a quarrel arose between the prisoner and my wife and me—a great deal of bad language was used, and the prisoner threatened very much—I heard him say that he would try and do us a private injury; meaning my family—he said he would not spare man, woman, or child—I was at home when my wife was getting dinner on Monday—she was cooking some beef, bacon, and onions in the pan—she wanted some salt—the salt that we generally use in a plate or dish on the table was put away—I saw the prisoner take something and put it on the table—my wife took it, and used it as salt—as soon as the meat was cooked it was put on the table, and the gravy in a saucer—I was the first that tasted it—I took some bacon, and put it in ray mouth—I threw it out, and said, "What have you been buying; you have bought bad meat"—my wife said, "The man that I bought it of said it was good"—it had an acid taste—we all partook of it—they all felt very ill and sick—I did not know what it was; but my eldest boy said, "It is the salt"—as soon as this salt was given to me by my boy, I said, "This cannot be salt; it must be sugar of lead"—my wife took it, and ran to a chemist—it was then between 1 and 2 o'clock—I was very sick, and all of us were more or less affected—I took my boy to the hospital.

Prisoner. Q. Did you not tell me if I would give you a bit of sugar of lead you would give it to some of the blacks? A. No—I did not show a pair of spectacles to a gentleman, and tell him they were real pebbles, and ask him 10s. for them; he did not say he would give me in charge—you did not ask me the price of a hat—I did not say I did not care about selling it—I did not say that my wife would be drunk when she came home, and

she would not know where she had put the sugar of lead—I believe my wife has been in prison, but that has nothing to do with this case.

Mr. GENT. Q. Is sugar of lead used to polish spectacles? A. I don't know; I never use it—I have not had such a thing in the house for a long period—I never bought any, only to make white paint.

GEORGE HELPS . I am a chemist, and live in Margaret-street—on 25th July Mrs. Kennedy brought me a small lump of white stuff—I said it tasted like sugar of lead—I used the ordinary test to try what it was, and have not the least doubt it was sugar of lead—if taken in large quantities it might cause illness—I can't say that it would cause death—I have heard of large quantities causing death, and I have heard that some persons have taken large quantities, and it has not caused death—the symptoms produced by a small quantity would be sickness and costiveness.

THEOPHILUS WILLIAM TREAD . I am a chemist—Kennedy brought his boy to the hospital on Wednesday, 27th July; he was complaining of pain in the abdomen—I asked if he had taken anything that had disagreed with him—he said that he was not aware that he had, and his father said the same—there was nausea and pain in the abdomen—there was no looseness of the bowels—sugar of lead when taken in small doses would produce constipation, but in large quantities it would produce diarrhoea.

JOHN WILLIAMS (Policeman, A 278). I took the prisoner on 25th July—I told him the charge, and he said, "Good God, I had a quarrel with him."

Prisoner. Q. Did I not say I never had it in my possession? A. Yes.


15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-771
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

771. THOMAS BEAN (17) , Stealing 1 shawl, 1 gown, 1 petticoat, and other articles, 2l. 6s., of Mary Ann Disborough.

MR. McDONALD conducted the prosecution.

MARY ANN DISBOROUGH . I reside at Cumberland-street, Hackney-road—on 5th August, between 10 and 11 o'clock in the evening, I was crossing Hackney-road, near Union-street—some persons came, one pushed the other against me, and pushed me down into the road—one man came on the right side of me and said, "What did you knock the old lady down for?"—he picked me up, snatched my parcel, and ran down Crabb-tree-road—another ran after him, who I believe was the person who knocked me down—that was the prisoner—my parcel contained a silk parasol, a new muslin dress, a family gold brooch set in pearls, some stockings and other things—I got up as quickly as I could, and gave information of the robbery—there were other persons behind me—my opinion was that they all belonged to one another.

Prisoner. I am entirely innocent. A person came to the Police-court and said I was not the person. What do you know me by, by my clothes?

Witness. By your voice; I should not like to swear to your face—I know you by the corduroy trousers you had on.

JOSEPH SODO . I am an engineer's clerk, and live in Crabb-tree-row—on 6th July I was standing at my door between 9 and 10 o'clock in the evening, and I saw the prisoner walk by with two other men—I saw him again from 10 to half-past 10; he came by from Hackney-road running very fast; he had a parcel under his arm, in a lightish paper, about sixteen or eighteen inches long—I am quite positive it was the prisoner I saw.

Prisoner. Q. Why did not you stop me? A. I did not hear the cry of stop thief—you had a fustian jacket on, and the same corduroy trousers that you had on at the Police-court.

JOHN REED (Policeman, N 202). On 6th August I received information which led me to apprehend the prisoner, from the description the prosecutrix gave of him—on the way to the station he said, "I was at home and in bed at 10 o'clock"—I had seen the prisoner on the evening of 5th August, close to the spot where the old lady was knocked down—I saw him at half-past 8, and again at a quarter before 10; I ordered him away—he had a fustian jacket on—when I took him he gave me an address which I ascertained to be false—he said he slept at his mother's, No. 8, Haberdasher-place, on the night of the robbery, and at the Police office he said he slept at 27, Old-street-road.


He was also charged with having been before convicted.

NATHANIEL LEVERIDGE (Policeman, N 84). I produce a certificate (Read: "Worship-street Police Court, 23d Dec, 1858; Thomas Jones, convicted on his own confession of stealing a half-cask of butter.—Confined Six Months, the prisoner is the man. He had been convicted before that, and had six months.

GUILTY.— Six Years' Penal Servitude.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-772
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

772. HENRY NEWTON (31) , Stealing one coat, value 5s., of Charles Edward Plowman.

Mr. COOPER conducted the Prosecution.

CHARLES BAKER (City policeman, 635). On 3rd August I saw the prisoner and another man in Petticoat-lane—I went after them, stopped the prisoner—I asked him what he had got about him?—he said, "Nothing"—I felt him down with my hand—I then asked him where he got the coat that he was wearing—he asked me why—I said, "Because it is too big for you a great deal"—he said he bought it of a man at the top of the lane for 8s.—I said, "You must go back with me to that man"—he went to a man, and he said to him, "Did not I buy this coat of you last Sunday week for 8s."—the man said, "No; you came here to me just now to sell it"—I took the prisoner into a shop, and searched him—I found this time-piece in the lining of his waistcoat, between his waistcoat and coat, and in the pocket of the coat I found this handkerchief.

Prisoner. He saw me with the coat on my back, and he said, "Where did you get it?" I told him, and I went with him to the old Jew. He said I never bought it of him, but I had bought it for 8s. I gave 3s. 6d. for the time-piece, and I went to get it mended.

CHARLES EDWARD PLOWMAN . I reside at Stratford-le-Bow—this coat is my property—the last time I saw it was on the morning of 3d August, when it was hanging up in the Hall, at my house—there was another coat hanging there, and some sticks and umbrellas—this handkerchief and time-piece are not mine.

GUILTY .—He was also charged with having been before convicted.

ROBERT WAIT (Policeman, K 160). I produce a certificate—(Read: "Thames Police Court, 21st August, 1858; Henry Newton convicted of stealing ten live fowls—Confined Six Months")—on the same day he was convicted of stealing seven chickens, and ordered to be confined four months at the expiration of his former sentence—the prisoner is the man.

GUILTY*.— Three Years' Penal Servitude.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-773
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

773. WILLIAM BROWN (17) , Robbery (with a man unknown) on Christian Peter Smith, and stealing from his person three pieces of foreign coin, value 12s., and 17s. in money, his property.

Mr. COOPER conducted the Prosecution.

CHRISTIAN PETER SMITH (through an interpreter). I belong to the ship Johann Christian, in the St. Catherine's Docks—on 14th August, I was walking in Ratcliff-high way; the prisoner and two other men came up to me—they folded me round, and took my money from me—they ran; I ran after them, and the prisoner turned and hit me in the mouth—they took from me three Prussian dollars and 17s.—I saw the prisoner stopped.

Cross-examined by Mr. BARRY. Q. Where there any persons about? A. A great many—it was between 5 and 6 o'clock—I had been in a shop before and bought three belts for 2s.; that was immediately before I met with this accident—I was quite sober—I had never seen the prisoner before—the man who first came up to me was the man who took the money—it was the prisoner who struck me—the men were close together—I did not see them speak to each other—there were two shipmates walking in front of the prisoner—they could not see what happened—they were not running after the prisoner—those men had been with me in the shop—they were standing at the door; and I had change for a sovereign—I put the money in my trousers-pocket—I felt a hand in that pocket taking it out—he that ran away with the money, put his hand in my pocket—there were two or three of my shipmates standing about; they told me so when I came on board—they said they did not think to tell me before—I am sure the prisoner is the person who struck me—I did not lose sight of him.

GEORGE TOON . I keep a bacon and cheese shop—on 14th August, about half-past 5 o'clock, I was coming out at my door—I saw the prisoner and another man go to the prosecutor—I saw the prisoner strike him twice as I was crossing the road—he struck him in the face—I said, "What game do you call this"—I saw another man, who put his hand into the prosecutor's pocket—I did not see him take the money—they ran away—I pursued the prisoner, and knocked him down—I laid hold of him, and tried to get him to the station, and some of my neighbours helped me—he got his arms round my arm, and I said "He is breaking my arm"—all the girls and bad women came with sticks and stones and beset us—we had to send for a policeman.

Cross-examined. Q. Had you seen the prisoner before? A. Yes; many times—I had seen him pick pockets before—I did not tell that before, because I have not had a chance—I first saw the prisoner when I came out of my own door—I live at 68, High-street—I was going up to Cannon-street—I had seen the other man before who was with the prisoner—I had seen them together many times.

GUILTY .— Four Years' Penal Servitude.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-774
VerdictGuilty > unknown

Related Material

774. PETER MITCHELL (29) , Feloniously receiving one 5l. and two 10l. bank notes, knowing them to have been stolen.

MR. COOPER conducted the Prosecution.

JAMES STRIDE . I live at 15, Cambridge-terrace, Hyde-park—on 26th December I was robbed, by a woman named Susan Smith, of my purse, which contained one 5l. bank note, and two 10l. notes, and 1 sovereign—the numbers of the 10l. notes were 90281 and 90282—the woman was tried—she confessed to the robbery, and received sentence of six months—at the time of the robbery a man came up to me—I believe it was the prisoner.

Cross-examined by MR. TAYLOR. Q. You do not pretend to speak to him? A. As far as I can I have done so—this (produced) is one of the notes—I know it by its date and number—I have the notice paper which I received

from the bank, telling me that they stopped certain notes on my information—these notes were a portion of a cheque which I received—they gave me 10l. notes at Coutts' bank.

MR. COOPER Q. How many notes did you receive? A. Only two 10l.—it was part of a larger amount—there were 10l. notes, and some were paid away by another party, and these 2 came into my possession—immediately I lost them, I went to the party from whom I received them, and they were stopped—I know this note by its not having any indorsement on it, except this, which has been put on it since it was stolen from me.

HENRY JOY (Policeman, A 338). I received information on 23d June, and a memorandum of a note was given to me—in consequence of that, I went to a small chandler's shop, kept by the prisoner, in Flower and Dean-street, Spitalfields—I saw the prisoner—I asked for Mr. Mitchell—he said "My name is Mitchell"—I asked him whether he had received a 10l. note of late; he said "No"—I told him I wanted to speak to him—he came out of the shop, and when we were outside, I asked him again whether he had not received a 10l. note—he said "No"—I asked him again, and he said No"—I said "Are you quite certain?"—he said "Yes; in fact, I never remember having one in my possession"—I then told him who I was, and I asked him whether there was any other man living in Flower and Dean-street, named Mitchell—he said not to his knowledge—I then told him there was a note which had been stolen, paid into the Bank of England with his name on it—he said that was impossible, for he could neither read nor write—I told him to be particular—and asked him on several occasions, if he had not passed one—he said no; he had never had one for the last seven months—I then left him—I went to him again on 7th July, took him in custody, and charged him with receiving the note, well knowing it to be stolen—he said he knew nothing about any note, and he knew nothing about me—I told him that was ridiculous, for he must remember the time I was there speaking about a 10l. note.

Cross-examined. Q. Did you know him at all? A. No; I never had the note in my possession—I knew that it was indorsed with the name of Mitchell, Flower and Dean-street—I did not ask him if he had any more notes—I knew that two had been lost, and one 5l. note—I did not ask him if he had any more 10l. notes—I am quite confident of that—I never mentioned to him about there being another note lost—I said most likely he would hear from me again—I went to ascertain who he received the note from.

THOMAS BROWN (Policeman, C 177). I was on duty in Park-lane, on 26th December, about 11 o'clock at night, and Mr. Stride gave a woman in custody, on a charge of robbery—the prisoner came up and made inquiries—I am sure he is the man—he came up just after Mr. Stride had spoken to me—I don't recollect what he said.

Cross-examined. Q. Was that woman put upon her trial? A. No; she was not; she was convicted at Marlborough-street—I did not say that any man came up; because there were more there besides him—Mr. Stride gave charge of the woman, and we began to look about for the notes—he did not ask me if there was any accomplice to whom she passed the notes—I don't recollect being asked whether there was a pal there—I tried to keep the woman away from the other people as much as I could—I did not notice my thing particular about this prisoner, only that he had more to say than there persons had—I did not see the woman pass anything—I am not aware hat I have said that she did not—I don't know that I have said that she did not pass anything, and sworn it—I noticed the prisoner by his features,

and by his nose in particular—I pointed out the prisoner at the House of Detention—I was sent there—Sergeant Silverton asked me if I could recognize any man that was there on the night of the robbery—I said "Yes; one man that had so much to say"—I went down to the House of Detention, and saw 20 persons; I pointed to the prisoner, and recognised him directly; he has got a sharp nose.

GEORGE SILVERTON (Policeman, A 239). I accompanied Joy to the prisoner's house—I searched his house and found seventeen duplicates in one place relating to gold rings and watches, and eighty-five duplicates in the shop on a shelf behind the counter—from these duplicates I was directed to a pawnbroker's in Whitechapel-road.

Cross-examined. Q. Is there any other charge against the prisoner of any sort? A. Not that I am aware of—I have had something to do with getting up this case—I sent the last witness to the House of Detention—I did not arrest the prisoner; Joy did—when he went in with me the prisoner denied all knowledge of him and the note.

WILLIAM McLACKLIN . I am assistant to Mr. Fryett, a pawnbroker in Whitechapel-road—I know the prisoner; he pawned things at our shop—on 18th June he brought this note (looking at it); it is a very old note; I put his name and address on it, and the date—it was on Saturday, 18th June, he came to redeem some pledges which came to between 8 and 9l., and knowing him I put his name on the note—I knew his wife; I had seen her.

Cross-examined. Q. Are you able to remember it was on 18th June when he came to you? A. Yes—I think he took out about twelve or thirteen pledges; they were mostly clothes; they had been with us not more than two months—they had all been pawned by his wife—I indorsed the note at at the time after he left.

RICHARD ADYE BAILEY . I am a clerk in the Bank of England—this note is produced from the bank—I stopped it with four others in December.

JOSEPH DEEBLE (Policeman, H 196). The prisoner keeps a chandler's shop in Flower and Dean-street—I was on duty there about 7 o'clock on 1st July—the prisoner was outside the door—there was some quarrelling and a crowd—a woman was there whose right name is Susan Smith—I said, "What is the matter"—and she said, "I sold him two notes—I suffered six months, and all he has given me is 2l."—I said "Where are the notes"—the prisoner said to the woman, "You had better go inside"—she said, "He has taken one of the notes to the corner of Union-street, to the bacon shop; the b—r, I will transport him; he was there at the time the notes were stolen"—from what she told me I made inquiries.

Cross-examined. Q. Are these friends of yours? A. No—the prisoner keeps a chandler's shop and a lodging-house—I have known him five years—I don't know any charge against him—this is a low neighbourhood—I am not in the same division of the police as Joy—I had known Smith before—I inquired about this about an hour afterwards—I have not been able to find Smith since—I have heard that the prisoner and his friends have kept her out of the way—whether that is right I don't know—I know she said she had served six months for it—I went immediately and made inquiries—I reported the case to my inspector—Flower and Dean-street is five or six miles from Park-lane.

SAMUEL PIERCE . I am clerk to a cheesemonger in Sun-street—on Wednesday, 15th June, the prisoner bought a side of bacon, he tendered in payment a 10l. note; I know the date by the entry in the day-book—I did not change the note—I could not do it conveniently—I don't think it

looked quite so yellow as this note does—he took it away with him—I knew him very well.

Cross-examined. Q. Had he not dealt with you? A. Yes; occasionally—very seldom—he paid for this bacon partly in cash at the time, and part he sent afterwards—it came to 2l. 1s. 5d.; all that he had got was 1l. 1s. 5d. and he sent 1l. afterwards.

JAMES STRIDE (re-examined). My purse was in the side pocket of my coat—I was going home, and the woman who received the six months accosted me, saying she and her children were in distress, and had not had food for several days—she followed me for some time, and I stopped and gave her a shilling—I said, "If you and your children are suffering, I will take your address and see if it be so"—I put my hand in my pocket, and missed my pocket book—I seized her, and she dropped it out of her hand—I called the police and picked the book up directly, but it had been torn open, and the notes had been abstracted; a sovereign was left in.

JURY. Q. Did you see any one with her? A. No—I was in the act of relieving her—my purse was in my waistcoat pocket.

Prisoner. The 10l. note I took in the shop; I changed it at the pawn-brokers—I only had one.

GUILTY .— Confined Fifteen Months.

THIRD COURT.—Thursday, August 18th, 1859.

PRESENT—Mr. Justice WILLES; and Mr. Ald. GABRIEL.

Before Mr. Justice Willes, and Eighth Jury.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-775
VerdictGuilty > unknown

Related Material

775. LYON GOLDSMITH (38) , Unlawfully obtaining credit for 6,300 yards of chintz, and other articles, value 1,240l., within three months of his being adjudged a bankrupt.

MESSRS. ROBINSON and POLAND conducted the Prosecution.

THOMAS COLLINS . I am clerk to Thomas Hamber, one of the messengers of the Court of Bankruptcy—I produce the proceedings in the bankruptcy of Lyon Goldsmith—the petition for adjudication is dated 30th June, and the adjudication itself the same day; and the same day the prisoner surrendered and signed it—I have not the declaration of insolvency.

THOMAS MORTLOCK . I produce the original declaration of insolvency; it is filed 30th June—I have the Gazette as well.

PETER BROWN . I am a carpet warehouseman at 11, Basinghall-street—I first became acquainted with the prisoner in January last—he was brought to me by a customer of mine—he referred me to Messrs. Skiff, Brothers, of Great Alie-street, which reference was highly satisfactory—I knew At that time that he was carrying on business in St. Swithin's-lane—I did not know from him how long he had been there—he first purchased goods to the amount of 139l.—he said when he bought these goods, that he had become buyer for some houses in Holland for Fortuyn, Keiser, and Hartolf; upon which goods he was to receive a commission of 5 per cent., for purchasing on their account—the goods were sold at 21/2 per cent. in a month from that time, up to the beginning of April—I should say the amount was nearly 30,000l.—I supplied him with goods in April; on the 4th, 83l. 3s. 11d.; on 7th, 120l. 5s. 3d.; on 8th, 164l. 7s. 5d.; on 11th, 101l. 9s. 6d. on 13th, 224l. 2s.; on 16th, 129l. 8s. 3d.; on 19th, 38l. 19s. 4d.; on 21st, 3l. 19s. 5d.; on 25th, 79l. 18s. 8d.; on 27th, 83l. 15s. 2d.; on 29th, 786l. 14s.—these were for donnetts and serges—I can separate them; the donnetts are 760l. 6s.,

and the serges, are the difference, namely, 26l. 8s.—on May 10th there were some table covers, which came to 169l. 4s., and 15l. 13s.—there were 144 table covers; they were sold in one lot—the 15l. 13s. were what we call Victoria covers, a different kind altogether—on 11th May there are carpets and table covers, 308l. 15s. 4d.; June 8th, carpets and donnetts, 167l. 0s. 1d.—I don't know whether the whole amount of these goods is 2,000l. 8s. 4d.; I could tell if I added them up—that 21/2 discount was altered—after he was doing a good trade he wanted to have a little more time, and I promised then to give him an account up to 1,000l.; a running account—that was six weeks afterwards; by that time he had paid me about 10,000l.—there was no further alteration of credit—I did eventually give him credit—he asked me if I could, and the feeling was so straightforward and satisfactory, that I had no hesitation at all in trusting him—when he got the donnetts and serges on 29th April, he said that they were for Holland; nothing else—I was not aware that they had not been shipped to Holland until after I received information from Grundy's, of Manchester, in the middle of May—Messrs. Grundy were the manufacturers of whom I had bought the goods—in consequence of the information I went to the prisoner immediately, and told him I had heard that the goods had been offered to Messrs. Grundy for 760l.; that being 50l. below what they had been invoiced to me at—that was the donnetts only—he seemed very much surprised, and turned to his day-book (produced), and showed me this entry, (R ad: "R. Berhens, goods bought, 30th April; donnetts, 368 pieces, 754l. 17s. 6d.")—the date in the prisoner's book is 9th May—he said he could not account at all for how the goods could have been sold in Manchester—he said he had sold them to Mr. Berhens, a friend of his from Holland—I asked him if that was the party for whom the goods were originally intended—he said, "No; the goods were originally intended for Hartolf"—I then asked him the reason Hartolf had not received the goods—he said Hartolf already owed him a considerable amount of money, and he did not wish to send any more goods to him until the account was reduced; and this friend coming over from Holland, he sold him the goods and got cost price for them—I asked him how the goods had been taken away—he said he had taken them to a packer's when they were brought by Berhens—I think he said the packer lived in Newgate-street—I don't think anything was said about a cart—they could not go without a cart—I knew nothing about Mr. Berhens, and had no further means of ascertaining—I asked the prisoner where Berhens lived—he said he did not know—I said it was a very extraordinary thing; I should like to have such a customer, to know where to go back to him again—nothing else passed—when I sold the 144 table covers to him, he said they were to send to Mr. Fortuyn, of Holland—there was another parcel supplied after the table cloths on 19th June—I had no suspicion at that time—he told me he had received the money—the first time I had any suspicion about the prisoner was when I got the information from Manchester—I attended the meeting of his creditors on 22d June—a person named Eames was present—I believe he is a watchmaker—he was very vehement indeed against the bankrupt—he said in the bankrupt's presence and hearing that ho had sold him goods, and asked what had become of them, and Goldsmith stated that he had pawned them with Attenborough, in the Strand, and that he had afterwards given him (Mr. Eames) the pawn-ticket—when the prisoner ordered the carpets and donnetts on the 18th June, he made no representation specially about the goods.

Cross-examined by MR. CHAMBERS. Q. When was the order given for this

lot of donnetts and surges; was it about the 29th February? A. On 1st March, 1859—this is my order-book; I will read them; "100 pieces of No. 4, 38s.; 100 pieces No. 15, 42s. 6d.; 100 pieces No. 16, 40s.; 100 pieces No. 17, 49s. 6d."—we had not got those goods in hand when they were ordered—the first delivery was made on 3rd April—I am perfectly certain—there were some goods delivered on 24th March, but not of that order—I delivered many goods in March—on 24th March I delivered 92 pieces of donnetts, not of the order that has been given, of a previous order—my clerk is here; he can tell you when the earliest order for donnetts was given; it was some time before 1st March—the 92 pieces were never opened out of the bale—I sent them to him packed in the bale to send to Holland—the distinction between the bales is this: that the 132 pieces, the order on 1st March, were sent in on 13th April—the other pieces were sent on 29th April, those were donnetts—they were sent in at two different times—the representations made to me about the prisoner carrying on business for parties abroad was made in January—he mentioned the name of some—Fortuyn, Keiser, Hartolf—I have seen a man he called Keiser, at my own warehouse—I have only seen him once—I don't recollect when it was; I should say it was in March—he selected goods—they were to be sent to Holland—a portion of them were sent by me to the packers, and a portion to St. Swithin's Lane—I have no doubt that Southgate's, the packers, sent them off to Holland—we have enquired since at Southgate's—I did not enquire personally—I supplied goods, and received very large sums of money during my dealings with the bankrupt—the sum altogether is 2,531l.—it was somewhere about 12th May when I had the conversation with him about what I had heard at Manchester—I showed him the letter I had received from Grundy's—I did not say to him that unless he assisted me with some money I could not get the goods from the manufacturer—I told him that the manufacturer wanted money for the goods previous to sending them, but I got no money from the bankrupt before I got the goods—this was previous to sending in the whole of the donnetts—he did not complain at that time, of the delay that there had been—when he talked about Hartolf running into debt, he did not say that he had run into debt after the order had been given—I did not ask him; I was satisfied with the statement that Hartolf had run into debt—he did not pay me any money then—on 4th May he gave me 100l.—I will swear the conversation was in the middle of May—I will not swear it was not on the 12th—on that day he gave me a check for 197l. 3s.—the bill was due in a few days—he gave me a check and I gave him the bill—I have no entry that he gave me on the same day a check for 150l., post dated—on 16th May he gave me 150l.—I went to the bankers on the 16th—he might have given it me on the 12th, I am not quite sure—on June 8th I trusted him again 167l., he then promised to pay me more money—he promised to pay 400l. that week—that was when I delivered the table-covers—I received 150l. on account of those table-covers—he came in for the goods, and promised to pay me 400l.—I sent, but did not get the money—I did not let him have the goods for the purpose of making him cash up—I trusted him in the ordinary way, believing he would keep his word, as he had hitherto done—he was exceedingly straightforward; he always kept his word and paid when he said he would, and it was after the conversation about Manchester goods that I let him have 167l. worth of goods—I could not give him a bad character—I can't tell when the latest time was that I gave him a good character; I think about the beginning of June—I did not tell any persons anything about the Manchester affair, or the post dated check, or the over-drawn

account of 2,000l., but I afterwards supplied goods—I ship nothing myself—the bankrupt saw me and my clerk repeatedly when he came to order goods—we were not always together—the donnetts and serges were ordered of me—the order of the table-covers, on the 10th May, was given to me; the velvet table-covers were given to me—the 308l. 15s. 4d. order, on 11th, was also given to me—my clerk was not present at the giving of either of these orders—if goods are forced into the market they must be sold at a sacrifice—there were two lots of table-covers; 144 went to Southgate's, the packers, and 144 to St. Swithin's-lane—I have seen a person whom Gold-smith called Mr. Fortuyn—I was told to enquire about him, and I found that he was a very respectable person, and that he was a Holland merchant—for the 368 pieces of goods the prisoner paid 764l. 2s. 6d.—the serges are not charged there; they were at the manufacturers—I believe Mr. Eames lives at Hoxton—I know nothing about him—I believe he is a watchmaker—whenever I asked the bankrupt any question he showed his books, and answered in a very straightforward manner indeed—I believe the stoppage arose soon after the money paid on his bankers—when he attended the meeting of creditors, when he was asked questions he answered; them without difficulty or hesitation—before the bankruptcy all his bills had been honoured.

MR. ROBINSON. Q. I believe you heard that Messrs. Fortuyn's were respectable merchants? A. Yes; when the prisoner brought Mr. Fortuyn to me, he said he was a party for whom he had bought goods on commission—I have never seen him since—after the prisoner gave his references, I trusted him with goods—when the donnetts were sold there was no fall in the market—with regard to those sold to Simons, if they were sold for 13s. 6d., any wholesale house would give a sovereign for them—they were invoiced to Goldsmith at 23s. 6d.—between the date of supplying these and the date when Simons appears to have bought them, they had not fallen—he paid me on a general account—I would not let him have the 300l. order without him paying me some money—at that time he was indebted to me about 2,000l. odd—with regard to the donnetts, I have seen those which have been shown to me by Mr. Grundy—I have them in Court now—I saw the bale—I have not seen the covers since.

MR. CHAMBERS. Q. You say when you trusted him with the goods on 8th June, you did it on his promise to pay you something? A. Yes; before that, he had promised to pay me 400l. on the Friday—I did not say to him, that before I trusted him he must first pay me the 243l. draft bill—he did pay it; it was coming due, and it was paid.

WILLIAM THOMAS BELTON . I am clerk to Mr. Brown—I have the delivery-book here; here is "24th March: 92 pieces of donnetts"—I don't think the date on which they were ordered is here—it may have been put on a loose piece of paper—I think it is very likely it is not here.

WILLIAM BUTLEY . I am carman to Mr. Brown. I have my delivery-book here. I remember some goods coming from Messrs. Grundy's previous to 30th April—they went to Basinghall-street.

Cross-examined. Q. I believe you took some goods to the packers? A. Yes; some others—I have taken goods several times to Southgate's, the packers—I can't say exactly how many—the greater part were taken to St. Swithin's-lane.

ALLAN LOWRY . I carry on business under the name of Guiness, Lowry, and Co.—I know the prisoner—I first became acquainted with him about 2nd April—he came to our place—he introduced a gentleman named

Fortuyn, of Holland, as a merchant—we required references—he said he wanted to purchase some of our goods, and that he could give satisfactory references—that was with respect to both—I made inquiries—I did not take Mr. Fortuyn with me when I went—I found that Mr. Fortuyn was a merchant in Holland, and a very respectable man—I had no means of knowing whether the Mr. Fortuyn of Holland was the one introduced by Goldsmith—he gave me an order to the amount of 75l. 16s. 9d. for donnetts—the prisoner said they were to go to Mr. Fortuyn's at Holland—the next lot was sold on 25th May—that was a completion on an original order—the amount was 73l. 9s. 6d.—I have never been paid a penny—I applied for my money at the end of the month, perhaps twice.

Cross-examined. Q. Did you understand that Mr. Fortuyn was the purchaser of those goods? A. I understood that they were for him—I went to Chadwick and Co. to inquire about Mr. Fortuyn—they are ware-housemen; it is a highly respectable firm—I also went to Mr. Mulligan—I went also to Mr. Peter Brown about the prisoner—I did not go to anybody else—they said he was highly respectable—Mr. Fortuyn was not long in selecting the goods—he ordered that they should be sent into his office—those that he ordered that day were to be sent to St. Swithin's-lane—I think those goods that were ordered on 2d April were shipped—I made no inquiries—the second lot were not delivered immediately; I think it was about five weeks before they were delivered—I can't be sure whether it was seven weeks—the credit of the month would run from the time of delivery, and before that time he was a bankrupt, but we had not got the goods in hand—we had to write for them.

MR. ROBINSON. Q. Would the 79l. 16s. 9d. be due before he was a bankrupt? A. Yes—I applied for that sum—I did not get it—Mr. Peter Brown, the gentleman whom I referred to, is the one who is here—Mr. Fortuyn took no part in the conversation—he did not appear to understand English—the fact that the goods could not be delivered at once was communicated to Goldsmith—I told him that perhaps they would be delivered in three or four weeks, and after I had told him that the order was given.

JAMES MULLIGAN . I am a general merchant, in Gutter-lane—I know the prisoner; he came to my house in February last, and stated that he was a purchaser of goods for various parties on the Continent, in Holland, and many of them his own relations; that he got 5 per cent, for acting as agent, and gave references as to his respectability; he referred to Skiff, Brothers, to and H. Isaacs, and to Mr. Peter Brown—he had no one with him at this time—he said he never purchased goods for himself, only as agent for others—to certain inquiries he gave the name of one party in Holland, A. J. Fortuyn—he gave me an order for some samples, and I was to inquire of the reference—I executed that order on 24th February; the first order came to 64l.; the goods were principally black lustres and black awnings, as far as I can remember—I saw the prisoner again after that, on 10th March, I think; he then ordered 700 pieces of black lustres, and a large quantity of donnetts of different sorts; the order for the lustres came to about 800l.,—we refused to execute the order for donnetts, we thought the order too large to trust to one man—I don't think any more goods were ordered till 1st May—I have not an account here; the goods ordered then were about 72l. value, in black lustres; the prisoner said that they were for a party in Holland; this delivery was on 5th May; we had no further order after that—the orders were delivered, on an average, about a week or a fortnight after the goods were ordered; altogether we have been paid about 650l.; 447l. 1s., is now due.

Cross-examined. Q. Were you the gentleman who put in the attachment? A. Yes; for the 447l. 1s.; it was that that led to the bankruptcy; he had nearly 500l. in the bank open, it was between 300l. and 400l.—I have inquired; we have had answers to our inquiries—we received on 11th March, 69l. 4s.; I should say we received 158l. 9s. 9d., on 31st—on April 5th, 29l., and May 16th, 298l. 15s.; and then two days after the credit had expired, I paid in the residue—all the subsequent orders but one were the completion of the order of 10th March—I did not appear at the Police-court—I was first requested to attend this morning—I live at Gutter-lane—my attachment is at the bankers—I have had no money under it—I did not know that I was coming as a witness till this morning.

WILLIAM MARS . I am traveller to Messrs. A. Morell and Co.—I know the prisoner; on June 1st he gave me an order for 30l. worth of needles, he made a statement that they were to go abroad; they were supplied on 1st June—the order was given a day or two before it was executed—that is the only transaction I had with him—I also travel for Messrs. Torer and Forticue—I got an order for them from the prisoner in May; the goods were delivered on 17th May, they were ordered about a week before that—the sum was 237l.; I believe that is correct—they were handkerchiefs and linen.

Cross-examined. Q. You went there in the ordinary course of business to solicit orders? A. Yes; hearing he was a large buyer—I called many times before I could persuade him to give me an order—I did not show him samples, or leave samples; the needle order was a Sample order as he had not shipped them before—I did not call more than two or three times to solicit an order for the needles—I always recommend my goods.

SOLOMAN ABRAHAM HART . I am a merchant and warehouseman, carrying on business at 22 and 28, Bury-street, St. Mary-Axe—I know a person named Vanralte—I saw him three or four days prior to the date of this invoice—he spoke to me respecting a lot of flannels and donnetts—I eventually purchased some of them, 368 pieces—I purchased them a day prior to the date of this invoice—I paid 5l. 16s. 8d. for them, net—I gave Vanralte this check (produced), and he gave me this invoice—before I purchased these goods, I had samples; they were sent to my house—I did not go to Hoxton to see these goods—I never saw them till they were delivered at my warehouse on the Saturday—I did not pay the check on the same day—I had to examine the bulk to see if they were as good as the samples—I was not at Vanralte's house at all—I did not give the check on the Sunday—I received the goods on Saturday, 7th May—I wrote the check on that day—to the best of my belief, I did not part with the check till the Monday—I have sold a portion of the goods since to Messrs. Moses, Levi, and Co. in London—Mr. Merton is one of the firm—I sold them on June 17th—the first parcel was on June 14th—I did not send samples down to Manchester—I sent samples to Messrs. Moses a few days afterwards.

Cross-examined. Q. What do you call yourself? A. A general merchant and warehouseman—our business is a very extensive one; 60,000l. or 70,000l. a year—that is our own trade—we have a shipping trade besides—sometimes when we have ordered goods for shipping it happens that we have to retail them—it is not at all an unusual thing—a mail may alter a market—if a large lot has been ordered, and they come back to the person, they are sold for the best price they can realize; sometimes publicly, sometimes privately—that is what we call a job lot—I have had transactions with Vanralte prior to this case for the last four or five years—they are buyers as well as sellers—I have got some of the goods on my hands now; they left them on my hands.

MR. ROBINSON. Q. You buy a great many goods, I believe; I mean goods that have been countermanded? A. Not countermanded—I don't know where Vanralte is—I saw him last about a week after this transaction.

THOMAS HAYWOOD . I am manager to Messrs. Grundy and Co., of Manchester—in April last, I sold Mr. Brown some donnetts, and in June I bought a portion of them of Messrs. Moses, Levi, and Co.—there were 142 pieces, I think—I believe them to be a part of the same that I sold to Mr. Brown—they were offered to me in May—I think then there were 368 pieces—a servant of Messrs. Moses, Levi, and Co. offered them to me.

Cross-examined. Q. Have you got books here to show the quantity you sold to Brown? A. No—I sold him some in February; not of that class of goods—I will not venture to say that I did not supply him with donnetts at the beginning of the year—we have our mark impressed on our flannels outside—we supply a great many other warehouses with flannels and donnetts—we mark them in the same way—these flannels are a large part of our business.

Mr. POLAND. Q. Did you pay less to Messrs. Moses than you had sold them for? A. Yes; the average is 141/2 per cent. less—I communicated with Mr. Brown at once—that was in May.

MERTON. I am a member of the firm of Moses, Levi and Co.—we have places of business in Liverpool and Manchester—in June last we purchased some donnetts from Mr. Brown, and sent them to Manchester.

BENJAMIN SIMONS . I carry on business in Glasgow as a wholesale fruiterer; I used to deal in other goods—on May 17th I received a telegraphic message, in consequence of which Mr. Davis called on me next morning—we went to Goldsmith's—that was on 19th May—I went first of all to the packers—I then went to Goldsmith's—when we got there he was not at home—we counted the goods, and soon after he came in—I gave him a cheque for 420l.—he asked me if I had any cash—I said "No"—with that he went out with the cheque under the pretence of getting some, and I never saw him again—part of this was velvet covers—I took the books myself, and kept possession of them as goods I had advanced money on—I gave them to Mr. Solomon to dispose of, and they were disposed of—Mr. Davis was the purchaser—I was not going to part with my money without the goods—I know Davis; he is not a relation of the prisoner, but Thomas is a brother-in-law—Davis is no relation of the prisoner's wife; he is a relation of Themans—on 6th June I purchased some goods of Goldsmith—Mr. Davis bought them—I was in Glasgow, and did not see Goldsmith about them—this (produced) is the account I got of the goods—I paid 475l. for them, less 2l. 10s.—they were forwarded to me, and I handed them over to Mr. Solomons to dispose of as he had done the rest—I received the money for the sale in both instances—all that took place with Davis on 6th June was that he telegraphed down to me for 475l.—this is the telegram I received from him—"Remit to myself by telegraph 475l. as G. wants it to-day, 6th June. From M. Davis, 8, Finsbury-pavement, to S. Themans, 4, Argyle-street, Glasgow"—Themans brought that to me, and I remitted the money through the telegraph.

Cross-examined. Q. Did Davis represent to you that he had purchased these goods? A. Yes; and he required the sum of money to complete his purchase—I went to Goldsmith with him on the first occasion, and paid that sum of money to him to complete Davis's purchase—I was to make him an advance on the goods, and the amount I advanced was what I paid to Goldsmith.

Q. Did you refuse to advance it unless the entry was made in your name in Goldsmith's book? A. I did not know the entry was made, but I refused to lend the money unless the whole transaction was in my own name—I mentioned to Davis that he was to instruct Solomons to sell, and as to the price he would ask—I did not succeed in selling them all; some remained on my hands—I sold to the amount of 420l.—the two lots were put up together—I also made an advance to Davis on the second lot in the same way, on the condition that the whole transaction should be carried out in my name—Davis is living at present with Mr. Thomas, of Bath-street, Glasgow, who has been in business there some seven or eight years as a cigar merchant, wholesale and retail; he is brother-in-law of the defendants—I have seen Goldsmith in Glasgow—he was a cigar merchant at one time.

Mr. ROBINSON. Q. When did you see Davis last? A. On Monday morning, he was at my place of business in Glasgow—it is false that those who appear for the prosecution have been trying very hard to find him—I have seen him every day calling at my place of business—he is walking about like any other person—his wife is dangerously ill, and he is at home every evening—there would be no difficulty in producing him here.

ISAAC ABRAHAM SOLOMONS . I am a general commission agent, of 20, Howard-street, Glasgow—I know Mr. Simons—I received 72 table-covers from him at the latter end of May or the beginning of June, and sold them—I sold none of them to James Neale—I sold him some chintz on 4th July; this is the invoice (produced)—I sold the whole 72 table-covers to Messrs. Simpson and Myers on 10th June—I also received goods on 9th June from Mr. Simons, but have sold hardly any of them; the portion I have not sold were taken out of my possession by Mr. Simons.

Cross-examined. Q. Could you not succeed in disposing of them? A. No; I made an effort—I was obliged to sell the others at considerably less than I first asked—I tried to dispose of them at a lower price, but could not get a purchaser—I never had such a difficulty—everybody said they were too dear, and I was obliged to abate considerably—I know Davis—I saw him last Friday—he lives in Glasgow with his wife and family—if anybody had asked me where he was I could have told them—I have known him at least six years.

JAMES NEALE . I am traveller to Peter Brown—about 4th July I purchased three table-covers of Mann, Simpson and Vyers, of Argyle-street, Glasgow, for 17s. or 17s. 6d. each, which was below the wholesale price; also some chintz mentioned in this invoice.

Cross-examined. Q. You do not mean to say that you paid for them? A. I do.

PETER BROWN (re-examined). I recognise these table-covers.

Mr. CHAMBERS. Q. How many hundreds have you bought during the year? A. Some hundreds; they are not all similar patterns—there is no private mark, but I know the pattern—I do not know how many I have sold over London of this pattern.

JAMES THORN . I am in the service of Mann and Co., of Glasgow—I purchased 72 table-covers on 10th June—this produced is one of the same pattern—three of them have, I believe, been sold to Neale—I gave 13s. 6d. for them.

Cross-examined. Q. I suppose you would hardly buy things which you thought were ill come by? A. No.

EDWARD HART . I am a member of the firm of Hart, Brothers, of Basing-hall-street, accountants—I was called on by the creditors to examine

into these accounts—saw the prisoner, and entered into an examination of his books—I got such an explanation from him as I thought necessary—I saw that he first began to trade as a shipping-merchant in December, 1858, in St. Swithin's-lane, and in the Pavement as well, where he has a retail cigar shop, which he has carried on since February, 1858—having examined his books, he was, in January, 1859, insolvent to the amount of about 800l.; and in March he was about 1,500l. behind—at the end, his deficiency, according to his own account, was 4,519l.—that has since been checked by me, and I find it right—the whole amount of purchases which appeared by the books from January to June is 10,285l.; the purchases for the three months preceding the bankruptcy, taken from 1st April, were 6,700l. or 6,800l.—he mentioned Mr. Hartolf as a debtor for 954l.—I inquired who he was, and he said he was a merchant living at Amsterdam—I asked how he came to include him as a doubtful debtor—he said that he had sold him a large quantity of goods, and that was the balance of the account; and he heard from friends that he had left Amsterdam, and therefore he considered it was doubtful—he recognised Mr. Fortuyn, of Zutfen, as a good debtor of 695l., and said that be thought the debt would be paid—he said that Mr. Reyser, who was down for 832l., was a bad debtor; that he knew him some time in Amsterdam, and he used to call on him, but had returned him as a bad debtor, as he did not know where he was, as he had ran away from Amsterdam, and he did not know his present whereabouts—I find entries in the books of goods sold to Behrens amounting to 754l. 17s. 6d.; on 19th May here is one sum due, 176l. 13s.—at the meeting of his creditors on 30th June he said he knew Mr. Behrens in Holland, and that Mr. Behrens called on him in Finsbury Pavement, and wished to know whether he had any goods to sell, and lodged with him sums of money; on 2d May 40l.; on 3rd May 108l. 14s.; on 4th May 200l.; on 6th May 190l.; and on 9th May 216l. 3s. 6d.; the 9th May being the day he sold him that large parcel of goods—those sums come to 754l. 17s. 6d.—I inquired further about Behrens—he said that he did not know his address, and could not tell where he could find him, but that he was in the habit of calling on him almost daily at his office, but did not know where the direction was—I have seen this entry about Behrens—cloaks and mantles, 30l., and clocks, 12l., appear by the balance-sheet to be all the stock given up off the premises in the last three months; the difference is made up by debts, and by a stock of cigars which had not been referred to in the furniture; the stock was valued at 200l.—that is his valuation, contained in the account laid before the creditors—the accountant does not value; he puts down what the debtor gives—his private expenditure for the last 18 months before his bankruptcy is down in the book as 1,401l.; it is 280l. for the three months before his bankruptcy—in this book, under date of 19th May, here is what purports to be a sale to Simons and a payment by Simons to the amount of 590l., and in the cash-book I find, "19th May. Simons, 590l. 6th June. Simons, 624l. 14s."—I find Themans put down on the other side as a creditor, but there are three or four Themans—there are several entries—the first is, "29th June, 1858. J. C. Themans, 430l."—that is, 430l. received of Themans—here is a repayment to Themans on the credit side: "Acceptance, 100l.," but there is no name to it—that is the last.

COURT. Q. He comes out clear at the end? A. Yes; the account is paid—the last date is 10th June; he having been a creditor for 800l.—he remained so till April, 1859—the whole 830l. was advanced before, but 400l. of it is not entered in any book.

MR. ROBINSON. Q. Turn to June 8th; how is the 167l. accounted for? A. The entry in the bankrupt's day-book is, "13 June. J. Van Rountie, goods P. P. 8 June, 167l.," and in the next line, "Discount 5 per cent., 8l. 7s.; carried out, 157l. 13s."—I do not recollect asking him anything about the next entry, "J. Van Rountie, return cheque, 65l.; cash, 94l. 13s."—here is a receipt entered in the cash-book, under date 11th June, for 159l. 13s., and immediately under that, "6th June. Check, 65l."—Van Rountie's loan of 65l. comes out of order (there are several entries under date of 11th June)—I don't know whose writing it is—it came to me from the bankrupt's place; it is in ink—here is on the other side a sum of 65l. balancing the other—I had a conversation with him about watches—I find an entry amounting to 846l. 12s. under several dates—they begin on 31st January, 1859—this watch account is in my clerk's writing, made up from the bankrupt's dictation—I did not hear him dictate it, but I asked him afterwards if it was correct, and he said that it was—there are 271 watches, I think, altogether—218 silver and 51 gold—on the other side there is an account of the same number of watches, except one, pawned with Mr. Attenborough, for 548l. 10s.—856l. 12s. appears on the left-hand side as paid for them—they are in three batches: 29th April, 195l.; 30th April, 120l.; 16th May, 243l. 10s.—the amount obtained within the last three months on estimates is, two parcels of 160l. each—those are the two sixteens; the 32 watches.

Cross-examined. Q. Do you know when the watches were ordered? A. Nothing, except the entries made in Mr. Goldsmith's books—Eames, I believe, lives at Dalston—I know that he is an existing person; he attended the meeting of creditors—I asked the bankrupt questions at the meeting of creditors—I attended on behalf of the creditors, Peter Brown, Mr. Laurie, and Mr. Eames; I forget the other names—I look to those three to pay me—I have seen Mr. Eames two or three times since he attended the meeting of creditors—I saw him last a day or two before the examination—the bankrupt was taken in custody on 30th June—I find that these watches are Mr. Attenborough's—there was an advance of money, and a regular deposit-note—the last delivery of silver watches, as appears from his books, was on 18th March—fourteen silver watches were pawned on 10th May, within the three months—those were delivered in March—in January he had six gold watches, in February three, and on 29th March, one day before the three months, he had twelve—he pawned thirty-six gold watches within the three months—I had a good deal of conversation with the bankrupt on the subject of his affairs—this balance-sheet, rendered to the creditors begins in 1858—he was not in the wholesale cigar trade to my knowledge—I never asked the question whether, though he had a shop in Finsbury-pavement, he did not deal wholesale in cigars—every question I put to him he answered me readily; I had no difficulty with him at all—I made no difficulty with him at all—I made no enquiries to find the persons he named—I had nothing to do with that—there have not been many bad debts, but there are one or two large amounts—I did not look into the cigar ledger, and did not see how many customers he had in the cigar trade, but it must have been a number, because the debts are numerous—I do not know who made up his cash-book; I first saw it on 23d June, the day after the meeting of the creditors—I have not kept it ever since—the official assignee has had all the books and papers—I attended when the prisoner was before the Commissioner—that was not, I believe, the very day after he was taken in custody—if I recollect rightly, he went before the Magistrate next day—the

Commissioner would not allow him to be examined—he said that it was unfair—according to his cash-book, he had paid away in trade 10,897l. between January and June—I find in that payments entered to his creditors—that is the total of the payments in the cash-book in every account—I find he owed Themans a debt as early as 1848, 430l.—I required him to account for why he had incurred it—he said that he had expended about 200l. on matters for himself, and another 100l. for furniture, of which he could not give me any items—that was before he commenced to make his cash-book—he has paid away 6,400 between 31st March and 30th June; that would make 8,200l. from March 1st.

MR. ROBINSON. Q. Then that purports to contain everything? A. Yes—if he lent 500l. it would appear here, and if be received it back at the end of a week, it would appear on the other side—there is nothing to tell how much he expended in trade, but you can get at it by the names.

JOSEPH ATTENBOROUGH . I am a pawnbroker, of 32, Strand—on 16th May, thirty-four gold watches and three silver watches were left on deposit with me, for two months, by a person named J. Van Rountie, who I know in the name of Goldsmith and Co.—I gave him a deposit note.

Cross-examined. Is it uncommon for tradesmen to deposit goods with you and get advances? A. No; there is nothing commoner when a bill is coming due, and they afterwards redeem them.

JOHN LEONARD (City policeman, 119). I received this deposit note (produced) from Mr. Eames—I have been looking after Van Rountie, but have not found him—I believe, from information I have received, that he is on the Continent—I have been endeavouring to subpoena Mr. Eames to come here, and failed.

Cross-examined. Q. Did you attend at the Police-court? A. Yes; the only two cases heard there were Mr. Lowri's and Mr. Brown's—Mr. Eames' case was mentioned but not heard—I am a detective.

JOHN ATKINS . I am clerk to the official assignee—the property realized, which has come to the assignees, is 596l. 0s. 6d., and there is a further sum of 57l. to be received from the auctioneer—that includes the money attached at the bankers, 304l. 9s. 10d.—a letter was written, addressed to Hartolf, but nothing has been received from him or from Keiser.

MR. CHAMBERS to E. HART. Q. Was it not mentioned that Behren's had paid him by cheque? A. I never heard anything about a cheque—the entry is, "I O U, cheques 538l. 14s., cash 248l. 16s. 3d."—I did not inquire on whom those cheques were drawn, nor did be tell me Behren's banker—I have no recollection of it being mentioned at the Police-court—I took it for granted that he had received the money on the cheques—I was not told that Behrens had an account at the Bank of London—there are twenty-four out-standing creditors now—there were twenty-six, of whom he has purchased goods within the six months.

MR. CHAMBERS to J. LEONARD. Q. Did not you hear it mentioned that Behrens had an account at the Bank of London? A. No.

MR. CHAMBERS submitted that a great quantity of the goods supplied by Mr. Brown were ordered long before they were delivered, and that the date to be looked at, in calculating the three month before the fiat, must be the date of the order, and not that of the delivery; that with regard to the watches, the party who supplied them ought to have been produced; and that the silver watches were all delivered within one day before the three months would begin to run.

THE COURT considered that there was no case as to the watches, but that as to the rest of the goods, there was a case for the Jury.

GUILTY .— Confined Twelve Months.

NEW COURT.—Friday, August 19th, 1859.



Before Mr. Common Serjeant and the Third Jury.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-776
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

776. WILLIAM WELLINGTON TURNER (44) , Embezzling the sums of 1l. 6s., 1l. 12s., and 1l. 12s. received by him on account of the Parish of St. Mary, Islington, his master.

MR. SLEIGH conducted the Prosecution.

RAYMOND SMITH . I am clerk to the Deputy officer of the Parish of St. Mary, Islington—this is the prisoner's writing—I am the attesting witness to this bond—(By this bond the prisoner was bound to account, from time to time, for all monies received, paid, or disbursed by him, and to state for what purpose those payments were made).

Cross-examined by MR. GIFFARD. Q. Do you know that there is a written appointment specifying what his duties are? A. I believe there is, but I have not seen it.

MR. SLEIGH. Q. Can you say that there is one? A. No; I don't know for a certainty.

SUSANNAH BABER . I live at Holloway, and am a rate-payer of Islington—I remember paying the prisoner the amount of money for rates—I have always paid Mr. Turner—I received this paper (produced) when I made the last payment, and he wrote his initials on it—I paid him 1l. 6s.; he gave me no other paper or receipt but this—he promised me a receipt—I think I paid this on 11th May, 1859 (Read: "Mrs. Baber. Application is made for 1l. 6s. William Wellington Turner, Collector.") and here are the prisoner's initials—on other occasions, when I have paid him money, he has not given me the receipt on these application papers, but this time he said he had no receipt there, but he would leave me one.

Cross-examined. Q. He left the application with you, and you went to the office? A. Yes; I can't recollect when I received the application—it was some months before—this is the paper he left, and I took it when I called to pay.

HANNAH HARVEY . I am the wife of James Harvey—I know the defendant as a collector—I have paid him rates on several occasions—this paper (produced) was left at my house—I remember paying the prisoner the amount 1l. 12s.—to the best of my knowledge, it was about the last week in April this year—I paid him at the office, in the Holloway-road—I took this paper with me, and the money, and he wrote his initials on it—on one other occasion he did the same, and sent me a receipt afterwards—he did not give me any reason for writing his name on this paper, but said he would send me the receipt.

Cross-examined. Q. On one occasion he did the same thing before? A. Yes; I am not certain that this was not paid in May, but I believe it was the last week in April.

ELIZA TAMER . I live in Edmund-terrace, Ball's Bond—the prisoner was in the habit of calling to receive my rates—I have known him as collector about two years; during that period I have always paid him the parochial rates—I remember paying him the amount stated on this paper, at his office, Hope-cottage, Holloway-road—I paid him 1l. 12s. on 27th April—this paper had been left with me previously—I took it with me, and

on paying the prisoner, he put his initials on it—he said he had not the receipts then, but he would send the next day, or the day after—this was about the last week in April.

GEORGE TUCKER . I am accountant to the Vestry of Islington and have been so for six years—the prisoner has been collector of the rates.

Cross-examined. Q. Don't you know that he has an appointment in writing? A. No; I have never seen it—he was collector before I was in the employ of the parish—I don't know that there is a written appointment specifying what his duties are—I have never seen nor heard of one.

MR. SLEIGH. Q. Since you became connected with the parish, is the constitution of it entirely changed by Act of Parliament? A. Yes; during the time I have been there, I have known the defendant to act as collector—I know the mode which is pursued by the collectors—it was for myself to hand to him official receipts in print—they were bound in books—and the notice or application papers with them, applying for the rates; and, having these materials, it was his duty to go and collect the money—the receipts are all written and filled in, in my writing for him, before they are given to him—this is one of the application papers—this is filled up by the collector himself—on collecting the money, it was his duty to give one of the official receipts, signed for the amount he received, and pay the money into the Union Bank of London, every Saturday; the whole amount received up to Friday night—an account of what he receives is rendered to me every Saturday morning—he is to give me the weekly return of all money received—he does not give any paper from the bank—here is a book furnished him by the parish—the amounts on these papers ought to tally with the weekly returns—giving a receipt on the application paper is not in the regular course of business; it is a very great departure from it—the collectors are directed, when they receive money to give an official receipt; and on the receipt itself the vestry request that only a printed receipt stamped with their common seal be taken—at the end of about three months it is customary for the collectors to make out their balance sheet; the quarterly account—I have the quarterly balance sheet for the Christmas quarter; it is in the defendant's writing—I have the three receipts of Baber and Harvey and Tamer—I have an account of the defaulters, which was rendered to me on 16th May, this year—I produce the book of receipts which was handed to the prisoner by me as to the Christmas collection—these are the identical receipts which were handed to the prisoner in the book for the purpose of being given to the rate payers, on payment of the money—the defendant brought them back to me on 16th May with this account of the payments and defaulters—it is the practice that he hands me a book of the names of persons who have not paid, and returns the receipts—those three persons are returned by the prisoner in his writing as defaulters—No. 203 is Susannah: Baber's; that refers to the number in the rate-book, and that shows that that person is a defaulter—the document of the money he pays into the bank is kept by the bankers—it was discovered that these sums were not paid in by the collecting being put into the hands of a subsequent collector.

Cross-examined. Q. Do the collectors receive receipt-books to collect all their rates by? A. Yes—these are given quarterly, and having collected or made efforts to collect them at the quarter, they make up their quarterly account—in the first instance the defendant is debited with all the receipts, and he must give an account that the houses are empty, and that the person has left without paying; or that the person is excused; and in this

other column that they have not paid—he had to go through the accounts—there are, probably, two or three thousand receipts in all, at the beginning of the quarter, and he has to make a recapitulation, and abstract of all the receipts in books; Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, and so on—he copies the receipts on separate documents—when he has a receipt in the book, that will be an uncancelled receipt—when he has not the receipt he has the counterpart, but that does not show what has become of it—it shows that that person has paid the money—when he goes through the book he has to go through the receipts—I think he has not to go through the counterparts because he has paid those receipts in—the collector should make a copy of this book in figures; but supposing he does not do it, it would be necessary for him to refer to the counterparts—he must go through all the receipts and counterparts in making up his quarterly returns—I think it would take him from Friday night to Monday morning to do it—after the account is closed it would be improper for him to give any formal receipts out of the book—I believe there are no positive directions; it would be improper.

Q. Suppose a rate-payer comes to him with the money, when the account is closed; is he to refuse the money? A. I do not know—I never knew a rate-collector refuse the money—he cannot give an official receipt, because he hands them to me—I do not think I was present in May, when the defendant was asked about the Judge's order—the vestry clerk would know: he is here—I know that besides this account there is a separate list of defaulters—he has not made such a list here—that is a list of defaulters for the Magistrate—I do not know whether these would be returned as defaulters till the prisoner returned these names in his lists as defaulters—this is returned, and in about three weeks afterwards the list is made out for the Magistrate.

MR. SLEIGH. Q. Would the list of defaulters be made up about three weeks after this list is sent in? A. Yes, about three weeks or a month—before he made out that list, he was suspended on 23d May—so long as he had not made out the list for the Magistrate, the persons would not be summoned—the time he closed his account would be Friday night—he would not return the book of receipts on Friday, he would keep them, and only return the account—he would not dispossess himself of the receipts—all the time from Christmas till 16th May he had the receipts in his possession to give to the rate payers—he has never accounted for these three amounts.


15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-777
VerdictNot Guilty > no evidence

Related Material

777. WILLIAM WELLINGTON TURNER was again indicted for embezzleing 18s., 1l. 4s., and 10s. on which no evidence was offered.


15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-778
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

778. ROBERT MARKS (50) , unlawfully obtaining money of Richard Cort and others by false pretences.

MR. SLEIGH conducted the Prosecution.

RICHARD CORT . I live at 9, Hemingford-terrace, Barnsbury-park—I am not in any business—my father has been dead some years; he did not leave me in very opulent circumstances—he was the discoverer of many improvements in the manufacture of iron—in 1856 it was proposed to raise a testimonial to my father—the first time I knew the prisoner was in 1856—I appointed him to collect subscriptions by a note which I wrote and handed to him—there was no other paper—this is the note, in my writing,

I hereby undertake to pay to Mr. Robert Marks one half of any subscriptions received by me at the banking-house of Messrs. Lubbock and Co."—in the course of the same year I cancelled his authority—on 22d October I sent him a letter, which I sent by post—I saw him repeatedly afterwards in reference to it—I cannot recollect what passed, only that he thoroughly understood what I said—I saw him a very few days afterwards; I cannot say where—a proposal was made for a fresh agreement—I do not recollect that he said anything about having received a letter—he complained of the abrupt manner in which he was dismissed by the letter—I said the commission was much too liberal; and besides that I had discovered many acts that I disapproved of—I told him I very much disapproved of the circulars which he had dispersed, for it was without the banker's name, and seemed to imply that it was to be paid to him, and he altered that, and said he would have a fresh circular—the conversation which I had with him certainly contained the opinion that I had of his conduct—he complained to me of the abrupt way in which I had dismissed him—I never reappointed him—I did not on that occasion, or any subsequent occasion appoint or authorise him to receive any money for the testimonial—never—I saw him several times in November and December, because I was endeavouring to get an account from him—I don't recollect whether I saw him in 1857—I did not on any occasion that I saw him between October and January authorise him to receive any money for me—he has never accounted to me for a farthing—he has not accounted to me for the receipt of 30l. 4s. received from Mr. Boyd, nor for any money received from Mr. Boyd—he never accounted to me for two guineas received from Mr. Hooper, or for 5l. received from Mr. Randall.

Cross-examined by MR. RIBTON. Q. You do not clearly recollect what took place between you and him in October, 1856? A. No; I think it very likely that I should make use of the word dismissed; I won't swear I did—I certainly will swear that he made use of the word, because he referred to it—I think it was more likely to be in November—I should not like to swear that word was used; I think it very probable—I do really think that he did—it is three years and a half ago since the transaction, and my memory is not so good as it was—I complained to him of the circulars—I think it very probable that I complained of them in November, and before he was dismissed also—he said he would have a fresh circular—he produced one before November—that was not the first time I saw them—I saw them before he was dismissed, because he called on the parties—I have got copies of them in his own writing—I saw him in November and December—I had interviews with him several times—I don't recollect that I saw him in January—he had been collector from 28th August—he did not travel to all parts of the country; he had but a few persons to call on, who paid into the bankers crossed cheques—I don't know that he went into any districts—he was in London mostly; but the whole he collected he had a commission on long before—he received 39l. 10s. from me—he told me there was a large sum due to him; but I reminded him that I had reduced the commission to 25 per cent. in September—I did not find that he was a very successful collector—there were a few subscriptions paid into the bankers; 80l. or 90l.—I received 25l. 10s. from him—he received 50l. and he gave me this 25l. 10s.—about 100l. was paid into the bankers by the prisoner and by the parties—that was the amount of the prisoner's solicitation—other names were put down and paid afterwards—to the best of my knowledge, 20l. or 30l. was paid afterwards—the prisoner was never paid the 50 per

cent. on those that were paid in after October, certainly not; because I gave him notice that I would not—he frequently requested an account—I had commenced to act for myself long before—perhaps I had received 150l.—the bankers had received about 100l. as the result of his applications—in addition to what was paid into the bank, I received 20l. 10s. from the prisoner, and of course I received some from the contributors; perhaps 150l. was paid to me when I was travelling about the county—in 1857 I went to Glasgow—in 1856 I received money paid by contributors and sent by post; perhaps 60l.—that was before August.

COURT. Q. Besides the money paid into the bankers, did you receive any money from persons whom you did not solicit up to the end of the year 1856? A. No, none.

MR. RIBTON. Q. Do you mean to say that from August 1856 to the end of the same year you received no money; I don't say from the hand of the prisoner, because you say he deducted his own commission, but did you yourself receive no money?—A. I received about 150l. from August 1856 to the end of the same year—perhaps I had received half of it before October—I did not pay the prisoner his 50 per cent, on what I myself received; certainly not, because he was not entitled to it—I did not pay him any per centage at all on that sum of 150l.—I am not going to pay him per centage on what I received myself—the whole of the 150l. was the result of my own solicitation: I think I will swear that—I will swear that the money that I received individually that he was not entitled to, was the result of my own solicitation; Baron and Hall, for instance; I received from that house myself 10l. in 1856 or 1857—the prisoner had not given me their names that I recollect; certainly not; or I should not have called on them—it was not in consequence of information given me by the prisoner that I called on them—I don't know that he had sent them a circular—he has said that I am largely indebted to him for per centage on money received, the result of his solicitation, and he has made a claim on me, but it was false—I think altogether about 120l. was paid in the bank in 1856 and '57, the result of his solicitation—he has not been paid his 50 per cent. on that: certainly not; I disputed it—he has been paid some per centage—he has received 39l. 10s., that was not to cover the per centage on all—Milner and Sons were solicited by the prisoner, and the sum paid to the bankers—there was an agreement between us of his own proposal, but I have not executed it—I think that was on 4th November—he gave me a list of a thousand names that he had solicited or meant to solicit and hold me responsible for—that was in Nov. 1856—I swear that he never intimated to me that he would retain in his own hands the money that he received to liquidate what I was indebted to him—I promised to give him every facility to make out his own account—that was in December—I refused to give him an account of what had been paid into the bank certainly, because he had not furnished his own account—he called at the bankers to get it, but I desired them not to give it him—I have the original circulars here—one is printed and one is in writing—here is the bankers name on it—I don't know where these circulars have been circulated—I know he went to persons whom I desired him not to go to—39l. odd was the only sum I paid him; he claimed more—he may claim 50l. more—I did not threaten to file a bill in Chancery, or instruct my solicitor to do it—I was in connexion with a solicitor—I cannot tell when that was; it might be in 1856—I was then pressing the prisoner to render his account—that was subsequent to his furnishing the account which I say was erroneous, and my refusing to give

my account—I do not recollect that I threatened the prisoner with filing a bill in Chancery, but the letters speak for themselves—Mr. Williams paid me 10l. at a meeting at Dudley; I cannot say that the prisoner had not seen him before, because he went all over the country after my giving him instructions not to go to any of the iron districts in the country—I sent him instructions in writing not to canvass in the iron districts—I think that was in October, before I dismissed him—he had not authority to do so in August and September, certainly not, because I had verbally given him instructions not—but in October I gave it him in writing—I furnished him with the book containing the iron districts—I will swear positively that when I gave him the book I gave him those instructions that he was not to canvass in the country—that was sometime early in 1856, before I dismissed him—it was perhaps in September—I have received sums from the country but not through his solicitation—he had not sent them circulars to my knowledge—he furnished me with an account which I have here, and it is a disgrace to any man.

MR. SLEIGH. Q. From October, 1856, did you ever authorise the prisoner to collect any money? A. No—he never told me that he had solicited any person, or obtained any money whatever, or handed any money over to me—from January, 1857, I never saw him till I saw him apprehended—I saw him at Guildhall.


Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-779
VerdictGuilty > unknown

Related Material

779. ROBERT MARKS was again indicted for obtaining the sums of 1l. 1s., 1l. 1s., and 1l. 1s., by false pretences.

MESSRS. SLEIGH & GIFFARD conducted the Prosecution.

JOSEPH THORLEY . I carry on business in Newgate-street, as a manufacturer of food for cattle—the prisoner called on me on 3d January; he was a stranger to me—he stated that he came from the Royal Agricultural Society; that they were going to present Mr. Alderman Mechi with a testimonial in the shape of a piece of plate, and he asked for my subscription—believing that statement to be correct I ordered my clerk, Mr. Higgate, to pay him a guinea—he produced to me a bundle of parchment, and asked me to sign my name there, and I did so—he told me it would be advertised in the course of a few days—I see every newspaper in England, but I never saw it advertised.

Cross-examined by MR. RIBTON. Q. Is this the parchment you signed? A. Yes—I believe it was about 3 or 4 o'clock in the afternoon—my cashier was in the office—he heard the conversation—I read all the newspapers—I was not aware that at a dinner at the Albion Hotel a piece of plate was to be presented to Mr. Alderman Mechi—after paying the prisoner this guinea I expected I should see it printed shortly, and I never did—I did not get a portrait—none was ever received by any of my establishment—I never saw this portrait (looking at it) before—the prisoner called on me twice—I was not in the first time—my clerk told me he called—the prisoner said, "a piece of plate;" he did not say, "a portrait"—I gave evidence of this shortly afterwards—I applied for a warrant when I found him to be a swindler—I believe it was a few days after I gave the subscription—I did not communicate with an attorney—I believe the prisoner's exact words were, that I should see my name in print—I concluded he meant advertised—he handed me a parchment to sign my name—I might have read the whole if I liked, but I had not time—it was some months after I had the interview with the prisoner and gave him the guinea, that I gave my evidence at Guildhall—I

went shortly after the transaction and got my warrant, and then I gave some evidence—there was nothing of a plate or print mentioned.

JAMES GALE . I am a clerk in the office of the Royal Agricultural Society—I do not know the defendant—to my knowledge he was never employed by me or by the society to collect any subscriptions—the employment of any person employed for that purpose would come to my knowledge.

Cross-examined. Q. How many clerks are there? A. One besides myself, Mr. Huxley—there is no secretary; he is dead—Mr. Huxley was the secretary—we have a board-room, a council-room, a library, and two offices—the secretary's room is one of the offices—any person coming there might see the secretary if it is anything particular—I heard of this presentation to Alderman Mechi by the paper—I never saw the portrait of Alderman Mechi on the council table, or a list of subscribers to it—I was there in December last—I think it could not have been there without my seeing it—I will swear I did not see it—I never saw one at any time there—I never saw the defendant there—I will not go so far as to say he might not have been there—there is a printed list of the council, not of the governors—I never recollect any circulars being addressed to the council—the other clerk, Mr. Huxley, is an elderly man—he and I are not always together; I go out and leave him, and he goes and leaves me—he and I manage the business—I represent the whole of the great Agricultural Society here.

MR. SLEIGH. Q. When did the secretary die? A. I think on 28th of last month—it is my duty to be there, and the general business of the society comes under my knowledge as one of the clerks there—the senior clerk keeps the books—he is now at the office.

COURT. Q. Do the council know that you are here to-day? Yes—the secretary keeps the minutes of the society—I don't know of their having authorised a testimonial to anybody; if they had I should have had to copy it—there has been no such minute copied by me—anybody coming in to see the secretary would have to come through our office.

JOHN HIGGATE . I am in the employ of Mr. Thorley; I remember the defendant calling in the early part of this year—he asked if Mr. Thorley was at home; I said he was not yet come to business; I asked him if he would call again, and I asked the nature of his business; he said "I am come from the Royal Agricultural Society of England with a view to obtain a subscription for a piece of plate, which the members of the Royal Agricultural Society are about to present to Mr. Alderman Mechi for the very valuable services which that gentleman has rendered to the agricultural community at large"—I asked him if he would call again; he said he would, and he did the same day—he saw Mr. Thorley—I saw the parties in the office, but I was attending to my own business—I could not hear what they said—Mr. Thorley desired mo to hand him a guinea, which I did—I put a sovereign and a shilling on the counter—I could not swear that the defendant took it up—I never saw it again—I did not take it up—Mr. Thorley did not—it disappeared, and to the best of my belief the prisoner took it.

Cross-examined. Q. When they had the conversation you did not hear what passed? A. Not so that I could tell the subject of their conversation; I was attending to my own business—there was nothing said in the conversation with myself about a portrait—the defendant did not say anything about it—he did not say that he asked the favour of Mr. Thorley's name for a complimentary portrait to Mr. Alderman Mechi—he had something under his arm.

ROBERT JAMES SNAPE . I am a member of the bar—the defendant called

on me at my chambers in Stone's-buildings—he said he was engaged in collecting subscriptions for a testimonial to be presented to Mr. Alderman Mechi—I objected to give anything, and he spoke of Mr. Mechi's great service to the cause of scientific farming, and told me that all subscribers to the testimonial, would be presented with a portrait, or print, or plate, I don't recollect the word—I told him not to send me a picture, that I had no use for it, and I should decline to receive it if it were sent; but I said, having some personal acquaintance with Mr. Alderman Mechi I should wish to give a guinea; I thereupon drew this check (produced) for that amount on the Unity Joint Stock Bank—it was returned as paid—I gave this check because I wished to join in a testimonial to Alderman Mechi—I of course believed that the defendant was engaged in what he said he was, or I would not have given him the guinea.

Cross-examined. Q. Do you recognise your old friend in this picture? A. I do, indeed—it is one of the best likenesses I have seen—the defendant handed me a list, and I signed it—I had an opportunity of reading it—I was in Chambers at the time—I was not engaged in any important business.

GEORGE GOODS ELKINGTON . I keep the Freemasons Tavern, Great Queen-street—on 29th December, the defendant called—he introduced himself to me, and asked if I knew Alderman Mechi—I said I did, perfectly well, and asked him what he wished to know—he said, "The feet is, I am collecting subscriptions for a testimonial that has been presented to Alderman Mechi, and I have published a private print of him, and every guinea subscriber will be entitled to it"—he introduced a book containing a great many subscribers' names—I added mine to it, and a guinea at the end of my name—I said if he would call any time when he was passing in a few days, I would direct Mr. Banks to pay him the money, which he did on the 29th—he gave the name of Marks, and gave a receipt for the money—I said to the defendant that I thought it was a curious way, to present a testimonial first, and to call for a subscription afterwards; and I further told him that if I were Mr. Alderman Mechi, I would pay the balance out of my own pocket—I don't think he said anything to that—I directed Banks to give him the money, in case I should not be at home—I believed what the defendant told me to be true.

Cross-examined. Q. That was after he had handed the list? A. I saw the list before I put my name down—when I made that observation about Alderman Mechi, he put the list before me—I thought it was all straight-forward and correct, and that he was collecting a subscription—it was my impression that there was a balance unpaid.

MR. GIFFARD. Q. Was the word "balance" used by him? A. No; by me—he might have heard me use it.

BENJAMIN BANKS . I am in the service of Mr. Elkington—in consequence of directions he gave me, I gave the defendant a guinea on 29th December.

Cross-examined. Q. I believe you are the person to whom he gave the portraits. A. He gave me something wrapped up—there were two portraits—he gave me a receipt.

MR. RIBTON to MR. ELKINGTON. Q. Did he say when he came first, that it was for a testimonial that had been presented? A. Yes; he said he believed I knew Mr. Alderman Mechi, and a great many names that I should find in the list—I did not read the list from the beginning to the end—I don't remember saying, "Oh, I see there is a print of Mr. Mechi"—I did not say I knew a great many of them—the print was shown to me—I may have said, "It is not bad; but if you will step this way I will show you

a superior thing:" probably I did—I do not remember showing him a portrait—I did not show him a portrait of the Grand Master of the Freemasons—there was one hanging on the wall—I do not remember saying I would show him a much superior thing that I had for a guinea—I do not remember my attendant saying, "That is a very fine engraving; I dare say it has a large sale"—I do not remember that I said, "Yes, it was about 2,000"—I do not remember when the defendant called again that I said, "I hardly know what to say to you; I do cot think it is worth a guinea, and, besides, there are two of them"—I dot not remember that he said, "Well, Sir, as that is the case, I will let you have two copies"—I believe he left the two copies when the guinea was paid—I do not remember that I said, "If I am not mistaken, I have seen a similar print in a shop window, marked 7s.;" or that he said, "If you have seen any of these, I will make you a present of it; no person has had a single copy, but by subscription, of me." I think he did say, "Not one copy has ever been in a shop window"—I do not remember that the words I used to my clerk were, "Pay a guinea to this person for two prints, when he brings them to-morrow"—I told him to pay him when he called.

MR. GIFFARD. Q. Did you pay this guinea, or direct Mr. Banks to pay it, in purchase of two pictures, or to make up the balance of a testimonial? A. To make up the balance—I have not the slightest doubt about it—the direction I gave to Mr. Banks was, when Mr. Marks called, to give him a guinea as my subscription to the testimonial to Mr. Alderman Mechi, and that Mr. Marks would leave him a print; and he left two—I did not tell Mr. Banks anything about his leaving two pictures instead of one—I paid my guinea to the testimonial.

BENJAMIN BANKS (re-examined). Q. Is this the receipt the prisoner gave you? A. Yes; it was drawn by the prisoner himself—I don't think I read it—(Read: "Dec. 29, 1858. Received of Messrs. Elkington and Co. 1l. 1s. subscription for Mr. Alderman Mechi's testimonial portrait."

THOMAS BATSON . I live near Bath, and am a friend of Mr. Alderman Mechi—I am Honorary Secretary to his Committee—the testimonial was presented to him in August, 1857—I cannot say that I know the prisoner—I never gave him authority to collect subscriptions; certainly not—the subscriptions were closed previous to the time of the plate being given—I have never received 1l. 1s. from the prisoner from Mr. Thorley, Mr. Snape, or Mr. Elkington.

Cross-examined. Q. Were you Chairman of the Committee when the piece of plate was presented? A. Yes; a testimonial was about to be presented, and a committee was formed to consider what it should be—I do not know that the prisoner saw me at Bath—a person called on me, but I will not swear that it was the prisoner—he took out an engraving, and asked me if I would recommend him to some influential gentlemen in the neighbourhood who would be likely to take one—I said I could not pay any attention to him, I had a meeting going on at the time, and that I thought printsellers were the more likely persons to take them—I never saw a list of subscribers to the print of Alderman Mechi.

JOHN MARK BULL (City-policeman). I took the prisoner on 18th June—I was looking after him from February—I found him between 3 and 4 o'clock—I said "Good morning, Mr. Marks, senior"—he said "How do you know that I am Mr. Marks, senior?"—I told him I was an officer, and I had a warrant for his apprehension; and I should take him in custody for obtaining from Mr. Thorley, in Newgate-street, the cattle-food manufacturer

on 3d January, the sum of one guinea, stating that he came from the Royal Agricultural Society of England, for a subscription for a service of plate to Mr. Alderman Mechi—he said "They have made a great mistake; I used no false pretences"—I then took him to the premises of Mr. Alderman Mechi; I saw the Alderman's partner, and he said "That is the man'—I took the prisoner to the station—he was searched, but nothing relative to this case was found on him—he gave his address, 33, Sussex-gardens, Brighton—I said "You do not reside at Sussex-gardens; you have a wife and family there, but you have not been there these two years"—he said "How do you know?"—I said "I have been down there"—I said "Have you any objection to tell me where you slept last night, or where you have been residing since you have been in London?"—he declined to answer that, and said "If I had known there had been a warrant out against me, I should have gone and made the matter all correct."

GUILTY .— Confined Eighteen Months.

THIRD COURT.—Friday, August 19th, 1859.


Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq. and the Seventh Jury.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-780
VerdictNot Guilty > directed

Related Material

780. WILLIAM STRICKLAND (54), Was again indicted (see page 455) for stealing the sums of 22l. 8s. 4d., 39l. 17s. 10d., and 40l., of Benjamin Worthy Horne, and another; his masters.

MR. LEWIS conducted the Prosecution.

RICHARD FRYER . I am a clerk in the service of the prosecutors, at Hay don-square,—the prisoner was foreman of the wool department—I recollect his bringing in his wool-book in the early part of May for me to check the wool sales from January to March; he said "Here is my account for you to check, Mr. Fryer, will you check it"—I have looked at the book since because I had to go through the account, but I recollect the amount independently of that—it was 109l. 9s. 3d.—I recollect that one item was 22l. 8s. 4d.—I know the other items to be in the account, but cannot tax my memory that I have recollected it from that period.

Cross-examined by MR. RIBTON. Q. Do you recollect saying yesterday that you did not recollect any item at all in an account? A. Yes; because I did not check that account.

ALFRED STRICKLAND . I am in the prosecutors' employ—I remember paying 21l. 6s. 9d. on 22nd September, to Griffiths, Slate, and Foster, ship brokers; I took a receipt which I believe I gave to Carson, but am not certain now—I got the money from my father, not from Mr. Castleman—I believe I gave the receipt to Castleman and not to my father, but I cannot say.

Cross-examined. Q. Did not you tell me at the Mansion-house that you received it from your father? A. Yes.

EDWARD FRANCIS CASTLEMAN . I am cashier at Haydon-square—I was in the habit of advancing to the prisoner sums of money from time to time on behalf of my employers, for which I took his I O U's at the time—it was his duty to expend that money on behalf of the firm, and a balance was struck afterwards—at the end of March, this year, he brought me this book

(produced), and made a claim on me for payment, and I made a payment to him on that claim—this entry was made at the time—I paid him on March 9th, 109l. 9s. 3d., which formed a balance and gave him back some I O U's the amount of which I deducted from the 109l.—to the best of my recollection the prisoner stood at the desk receiving the money at the time I made the entry—the entry is "March 9th, wool paid-ons February and March sales, see wool-book, 109l. 9s. 3d—this is to certify the correctness of this amount—I cannot tax my memory with any of the items in that account—I might if I was to refer to my vouchers given by the separate carmen—I recollect advancing him after those wool sales another sum of 40l. for which he gave me this I OU: "I O U on account of Chaplin and Home, 40l., W. Strickland, 19th May, 1859."

Cross-examined. Q. Were you in the habit of advancing him various sums from time to time as he required them? A. Yes; and at the end of two or three months there was a settling of accounts; sometimes I had to pay him money, and once I believe it was the other way, I had not advanced him enough.

COURT. Q. At the time you advanced him that 40l. had you and he arranged the mode in which it was to be spent? A. No.

MR. RIBTON. Q. Is the account for which the 40l. was advanced still unsettled? A. It has not been settled yet.

BENJAMIN WORTHY HORNE . To the best of my belief the prisoner was with me at the time the accounts were being examined, under suspicion of being wrong, in Cattleman's office, and I saw this I O U in Castleman's hands who said that he had advanced the money for paid-ons on account of the then running wool sales—the wool sales generally last some weeks—I asked the prisoner how he had disposed of the 40l.—he said that he had paid a portion of the money; and when his accounts were made out, there was no doubt but that the payment would be explained—the accounts were then made up—the invoices were there at the time, and the account was put into the hands of the accountant to make up—I did not stand by the accountant, but he and the prisoner had to make up the account together—I then saw the prisoner, and said, "Strickland, I do not see that you have accounted for this 40l., nor are there any items to your credit that will contribute any portion except 5l.," which was a deposit either at the London or St. Catherine's Docks—I said, "Will you have the goodness to hand over the difference between the 40l. and the 5l.?"—his answer was that he had spent the money, and had not got it—this money was advanced by the cashier, by our full authority, each sale: according to the wants of the prisoner, as has been the custom for some years, to pay paid-ons for wool alone; and during the recess between one wool sale and another, it became his duty to make out the items—for fully fourteen days after the wool sales there is full occupation for the prisoner in clearing up disputed matters between the senders of wool and the purchasers as regards the delivery, the result being that he has deposited the orders and lodged them, without being able to obtain the wool.

Cross-examined. Q. Was this conversation in May? A. Either May or the beginning of June; the wool sales were pretty well over—I think they were not finished.

The COURT considered that there was no case for the Jury.


15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-781
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

781. YORK RUSSELL (30) , Stealing a bill of exchange for 100l. and 1 piece of paper, the property of William Poole.

MESSRS. DOYLE and MCDONALD conducted the Prosecution.

WILLILAM POOLE . I am the prosecutor—on 5th August I had in my possession a bill for 100l. drawn by myself and accepted by Reed, Johnson, and Co.—this is it (produced)—it was not torn at all when I last had it—I and the prisoner had been to a Mr. Cameron, of Clifford's-inn-passage, who the prisoner introduced me to in August, to get that bill discounted—it was not discounted, and Mr. Cameron returned it to me—on 7th August the prisoner and I went to the Green Gate Tavern, Hackney-road—it was the evening of the day on which the bill had been returned to me by Mr. Cameron—as we stood at the bar between 9 and 10 o'clock, the prisoner asked me to let him see the signature of the bill—he immediately took it up, and attempted to run away with it—I caught him, and asked him to return it; he refused to do so, and I called the assistance of the landlord, Mr. Burleigh, but he did not interfere—the prisoner and I scuffled together, and my coat was torn by the prisoner in the scuffle—the prisoner got away from me; I pursued him, but did not catch him—I afterwards went to Spital-square police-station, and gave information—they directed me to find a policeman—I got one, and went with him to the prisoner's house—I knocked at the door, and the prisoner's wife opened it—asked her if Mr. Russell was at home—she said, "No," and shut the door—I walked to the parlour window, looked through a blind which did not quite cover the window, and saw the prisoner asleep on a table—I again knocked at the door—Mrs. Russell opened it, and I walked in with the policeman, and gave the prisoner in charge.

Cross-examined by MR. POLAND. Q. Have you known the prisoner some time? A. About 18 years—I have always been on terms of friendship with him—I know that at this time he was in the employ of Mr. Niner, a fringe-maker, as traveller—I know Mr. Rehden, the acceptor of the bill; the prisoner knew him also—I did not call on Messrs. Rehden and Johnson.

COURT. Q. What was the consideration for the 100l. bill? A. No consideration—I do not say that the prisoner was not going to give it back to Rehden—I cannot say whether I was ever going to do so.


The following cases were disposed of by Mr. Common Serjeant in a Fifth court.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-782
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

782. ANN MEED (28) , Unlawfully obtaining 5s. the money of William Alfred Chatwin, by false pretences.


15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-783
VerdictGuilty > unknown

Related Material

783. FRANCISCO FILLIPONI (30), was indicted for wilful and corrupt perjury.

GUILTY Confined One Year.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-784
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

784. WILLIAM CHRISTIE (alias PRICE ) (35) , Unlawfully attempting to commit b—st—y.



Before Lord Chief Baron Pollock and the First Jury.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-785
VerdictGuilty > unknown

Related Material

785. THOMAS SMETHURST (48), was indicted for the wilful murder of Isabella Bankes; he was also charged upon the Coroner's Inquisition with the like offence.


MARY SMITH . I am the wife of Joseph Smith, of Rifle-terrace, Bayswater—I keep a boarding-house there—the deceased lady, Miss Isabella Bankes, became an inmate of that boarding-house on the 20th September last year—the prisoner and his wife were inmates there at that time, and had been so for some time, at different times; the last time for about five months—Mrs. Smethurst was, I should think, twenty years older than the prisoner-after Miss Bankes became an inmate of my house I noticed some familiarities that I thought were improper between the prisoner and her—in consequence of that I desired Miss Bankes to leave my house—I heard her tell the prisoner that I had given her notice—I told him why; he said he was very sorry that I had pained her mind, that if I had named it to him he would have taken care I should not have been annoyed—I still persisted in my desire that she should leave the house; and the prisoner said that he should go away himself—Miss Bankes left my house on 29th November, the prisoner left on 12th December—he said he was going to visit a friend, he did not say where he was going—he left his wife behind him in the house—after he had left he returned to his wife, I am not certain how soon after, but I should think about a fortnight—I don't think he stayed any time; he slept there once, but I was not aware of it until afterwards—he came several times.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY (with MR. GIFFARD.) Q. How long had Miss Bankes lived with you? A. About ten weeks, I think—Mr. and Mrs. Smethurst came the last time in May, and left in December—I thought Miss Bankes very delicate—I did not remark whether she suffered frequently from a complaint of the bowels, she did from bile—she was twice sick in my house—I do not remember more than that—she complained of a nausea whenever she attempted to take food—twice when sitting by my side at dinner she was compelled to get up and leave the table on account of sickness—I considered her very delicate, her appetite being very bad—she appeared unable to eat her substantial meals, she took very little indeed—she complained to me of nausea and sickness; she told me she never could ride in an omnibus or carriage without being sick; she complained of being very bilious—the old lady, Mrs. Smethurst, was unwell at times while Dr. Smethurst was there; he always attended upon her, he took up her luncheon to her almost every day—Miss Bankes was perfectly aware that Dr. Smethurst was married to this old lady, and that they lived as husband and wife.

COURT. Q. I suppose no one could be at the house and at the table without knowing that they passed as man and wife? A. No one doubted it for a moment, I believe.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. In fact, you gave her notice to leave, did not you? A. I did, on account of what I observed—when Mr. Smethurst left he made an arrangement to pay me a sum of money on the 11th and 26th of each month, that was for the board and lodging of Mrs. Smethurst; she is an old lady, quite 70—I believe she is as much as 73 or 74.

MR. BODKIN. Q. When was it that he made the arrangement about paying for his wife? A. I think it was a few days before he left my house, after Miss Bankes had gone—the arrangement was that he should pay so much for his wife—nothing was said about the doctor returning, on either side, in any way whatever—he was to pay 25s. a week for his wife—he had paid more than that before.

MARIAN GRABOUSKA . I am the wife of Morris Grabouska, and reside at 37, Kildare-terrace, Bayswater. On 29th November last Miss Isabella Bankes came to lodge at my house—she came by herself—she remained with me up to 9th December—when she left me she told me where she was going—the prisoner never came to see her while she was with me—no medical man attended her while she was at my house—she used to go out walking every day, sometimes for one hour and sometimes longer—she took her meals at my table—I never saw her after she left on 9th December.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. I do not understand you to say that you went out walking with her? A. No—she went out from my house, and came back again; that is all I know—whether she walked or rode, I do not know; or where she went—when she left me on 9th December she said she was going to Clifton, for the benefit of her health—she did not mention any person whom she was going to see there—she appeared to be very fragile; that was my observation of her—she did not make any complaint to me; her observation when leaving me was that her health was so bad that she required change of air, and she was going to Clifton to see if she could get health.

JAMES SPRICE . I am the parish-clerk of Battersea—I produce the register of marriages at the parish church there—on the 9th of December, 1858, there is an entry of a marriage between Thomas Smethurst and Isabella Bankes—I was a witness to the marriage—the prisoner is the man who was so married.

WILLIAM EASTER . I am clerk of St. Mark's church, Kennington—I have before me the register of marriages celebrated in the year 1828 at that church—a person of the name of Thomas Smethurst is entered here as having been married in that year—a person of the name of Thomas Boardman was, I believe, the parish-clerk at that time; he has been dead some years—the parish-clerk is a witness to the marriage here—I only know his handwriting from seeing it many times in this book—I never saw him write—I have seen it to documents many times—this signature, in my opinion, is in his handwriting—Boo, the clergyman, who appears by this entry to have officiated, is also dead.

COURT. Q. What is the date of that? A. The 10th March.

ALEXANDER MCCROSTY . I am a clerk in the London and Westminster Bank—the prisoner has an account there—I believe the signature in this book of marriages to be in his handwriting—I have not the books of the bank here—(register read "Marriage solemnized in the district parish of St. Mark's, Kennington, in the county of (blank), 1828. Thomas Smethurst, of this parish district, and Mary Durham, of this parish district, were married in this church by license, with consent of (blank), this 10th day of March, 1828; by me, William Otter. This marriage was solemnized between us, Thomas Smethurst, Mary Durham, in the presence of Thomas Boardman").

ANN ROBERTSON . I am a widow, living at 6, Old Palace Terrace, Richmond-green—the prisoner came on the 4th February to lodge at my house—he brought a lady with him, who passed as his wife—he had not been before that time alone to make arrangements about taking the rooms—she

came with him—he had not been with me before that—they came together—the rooms had been taken a few days before they came, on the 4th of February, he and his wife came together to take them—they occupied a parlour on the ground floor and a bedroom adjoining it—they left the house on the 15th of April—the cause of their leaving was because I raised the rent 5s. a-week, and he said he could not afford to pay it—I had a lady occupying my drawing-room apartments—when they came to my house, the lady appeared to be quite well; she was in the habit of going out for two or three hours together; she went with the prisoner on those occasions—after she had been there some time she became poorly—she showed signs of illness about three weeks, or it might be a few days more, before she left; I can't exactly say—the illness that she laboured under was diarrhoea and sickness—the prisoner spoke to me about that, and told me what her ailment was—he said it was a bilious attack—she laboured under that illness from the time she was first taken until she left—the sickness and diarrhoea continued all that time—the prisoner made a suggestion to me about calling in a medical man; that was about a fortnight before she left—he said he was not satisfied with her, and he thought he should call in Mr. Hills, as he was the nearest—Mr. Hills is a medical man living near us; I said, "If you call in any one, call in Dr. Julius," and he was quite agreeable—Dr. Julius was then sent for, and he continued to attend her during the whole time they remained lodging in my house—the sickness and diarrhoea did not abate at all—I have seen her vomiting many times in the day—I spoke to the prisoner about it, seeing that it continued so long, I said I wondered it could not be stopped, and he said she was a very bilious person, and there was some more bile to come—it was after Dr. Julius came that he said that; I can't say exactly how long after, perhaps it might be a few days or a week—I noticed myself what the colour of what she brought up from her stomach was; it was a yellowish green; that was always the colour that I saw—in the way of nourishment she used to take arrow-root and sometimes beef-tea, and sometimes food made with corn flour—Dr. Smethurst gave her these things—I cannot say what was the effect of her taking them, because I was not in the room—I know he gave them to her, because there was no one else to give them—I prepared them—what I made I took into the parlour and gave them to him—the parlour communicates with the bedroom—I can't recollect whether I have given her any of these things at any time; I might have given her something when he was in London; I think I have done so—when he went to London he used to go in the morning, and return in the evening, at 6 or 7 o'clock perhaps; he did that several times—I do not remember whether she was sick when I gave her these things in his absence; I did not remain with her—she always had a basin by her side—I did not remain with her while she took what I carried to her—it was put by her side, and she took it when she liked—perhaps I went into the room afterwards, before he returned from town, to see how she was—there was always vomit in the basin—Dr. Julius sent medicine from time to time—sometimes I took it in, and sometimes my daughter—I and my daughter were the only persons to attend to anything of that kind in the house—the medicine was placed in the parlour and put on the table there.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. What rent did Mr. Smethurst pay? A. 18s. a week—the sole ground for his leaving me was because I asked 5s. a week more; I asked him 25s., that was 7s. extra—I really can't say how often he was up in London while he was with me, but several times; perhaps he went to town once a week, and the last week I think he went

once or twice, that was the last week he was with me, when the lady was very ill; he was absent for a whole day together—while he was away, Dr. Julius saw the lady—Mr. Bird never came to our house, only Dr. Julius—my daughter waited chiefly on Mr. and Mrs. Smethurst; while they were with me they generally dined in the sitting-room—she had not her meals in bed—I believe I have noticed beef-tea and arrow-root, and preparations of that kind partly eaten, which I have removed and taken away.

COURT. Q. You believe she took some of those things occasionally? A. Yes.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. And you removed the remains, you and your daughter? A. Yes—my daughter is here—she was not here before; she was directed to come—I made the bed myself; I always made the bed—I removed and emptied the slops—I did everything myself, my daughter never did the bedrooms—the bedroom was used by Mrs. Smethurst—I removed the evacuations and emptied them, always; during the time I noticed the vomiting I noticed the evacuations; they were completely like coloured water, nothing more—I noticed the vomits; I noticed that they were green and yellow—whatever was left of the beef-tea, arrow-root, or other things, was washed away; it was never used in any way—the deceased did not get up in the morning to breakfast for the last fortnight or more—I used to hear her retching early in the morning; that was before she got up—I have not seen her moving about the room at times when she has been sick; she used to come from her bedroom and lay down on the sofa—I have observed that when she has got up to move about that she has been sick—I used to think as soon as she began to move that brought on the sickness, and the said so herself; I noticed that every day when she got up—I remember Dr. Smethurst suffering from the toothache while he was there—he complained for some days of a very sharp and severe attack of toothache—he went up to town to consult a dentist.

COURT. Q. When was that? how long before they left? A. I should think a month.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. As far back as that? A. I believe so—I do not remember, after he returned, noticing any wine bottle or wine bottles, either on the hob or the shelf—there is a cupboard in the parlour, and everything was put in there—I never fetched any ice while they were with me—I have no recollection about the bottles—I remember your asking me the same question upon the last trial, and I answer now as I did then, I have no recollection—she used to complain to me of a want of appetite; she used to say she could not eat anything; she was very anxious to get well—she first complained to me that she could not eat, during the time of her illness.

MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. Was there a key to this cupboard? A. Yes; Dr. Smethurst kept it—she lived principally on what one would call slops, if she took anything—I believe that was from the time she began to be ill—I was not in the room at dinner-time or breakfast-time, so I could not see what she took; up to the time of her becoming ill she had lived in the ordinary way, on ordinary food, and then after that these slops—I brought them up and put them into the parlour—I never gave them to her myself when he was at home—I did not offer to do so; I left them in the parlour, and he, I suppose, gave it—I believe she got up every day; she went into the parlour—the morning she left, my daughter gave her a poached egg in bed, and she quite enjoyed it—Dr. Julius ordered her a poached egg—I was not present; my daughter took it to her—the prisoner was at home at that time; he was in the parlour, I believe.

ELIZABETH ANN ROBERTSON . I live with my mother at Richmond—in February last Mrs. Smethurst and the prisoner came to my mother's house—I used to wait on them; when anything was brought to the door for Mrs. Smethurst I used always to take it in, if my mother was not there—medicine used to come sometimes from Dr. Julius—if I took it in I placed it on the dining-room table—after Mrs. Smethurst became ill she had her breakfast in the bedroom, I think before she got up—I took her breakfast into the dining-room, and placed it on the table—after she had had her breakfast the things were generally brought into the dining-room; I think by Dr. Smethurst—they were taken from the parlour, where I left them, into the bedroom—I took them down afterwards—after she became ill she generally took tea for breakfast of a morning, when she could take it—the tea was not poured out before it was taken up—I took up the kettle—the bedroom was on the same floor—in the course of the day I used to take the arrow-root into the dining-room—sometimes Mrs. Smethurst was there, and sometime in her bedroom; sometimes she was in bed, sometimes sitting up—I used not to leave the food in the dining-room—I recollect taking an egg to Mrs. Smethurst on the morning on which she left; I gave it to her; she ate it, and said she enjoyed it very much—I saw that she was sick some time after she had eaten the egg—it may have been two hours perhaps—I had not taken anything to her room in the meantime, after the egg and before she was sick.

Cross-examined by MR. SERGEANT PARRY. Q. You say Dr. Smethurst used to take the breakfast in, did they appear to live on kind and affectionate terms? A. Yes; very much so; that was my observation and that of my mother—he appeared to be particularly kind and attentive to her during her illness—I can't say I remember Dr. Smethurst being absent three days running; but I remember his having been to London repeatedly—when he went to London Mrs. Smethurst dined in the dining-room by herself—I have attended on her; I mostly attended upon her—I can't say that I remember, just after she came there, her returning home from a walk very much exhausted—I remember quite well a chair being put outside for her to sit upon one evening, because she was so tired that she was unable to come into the house without rest—I don't remember whether that was shortly after they came, but I recollect the evening quite well.

COURT. Q. Was that before or after she was ill? A. I think it was after she was ill.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. My question was, whether it was not early after she came there; are you quite sure about that? A. I cannot be quite certain on that point; it was after she was taken ill, after the symptoms of diarrhea—she had been out for a walk with Mr. Smethurst; I cannot remember how long she had been out—I remember Dr. Smethurst going up to town about his teeth—I am not quite sure whether that was before or after Mrs. Smethurst was ill—I remember his complaint about his teeth—there was a grate in the bedroom, but it was covered over—I cannot remember after he returned seeing a wine-bottle in any part of the bedroom—they drank wine for a short time after they came; no brandy was fetched at any time, that I know of—I have noticed Mrs. Smethurst vomiting; I can't say that I have noticed it without her having taken food; my mother only attended to the bedroom—I have heard her vomiting early in the morning—I have repeatedly seen her vomiting during Mr. Smethurst's absence from Richmond—I think the vomiting appeared to continue whether he was absent or present; it was continuous.

SUSANNAH ANGELINA WHEATLEY . I am the wife of Thomas Wheatley, and live at 10, Alma-villas, Richmond; I was living there in the month of April last—I let lodgings—I recollect the prisoner, Dr. Smethurst, engaging lodgings at my house on the 15th April; he came on that day with a lady he called Mrs. Smethurst—they came in a cab; they engaged two rooms, a sitting-room on the ground floor, and a bedroom over that; those were the only lodgings I had to let in the house—Mrs. Smethurst appeared to be in a very delicate state of health at that time; she was hardly able to walk; she went to bed very soon after she got up stairs—from the time she remained in our house till her death, she came down into the sitting-room about four times, in the way of having her bed made, and to purify the room—as soon as she came to me, Dr. Julius or Mr. Bird attended her every day—after she had been with me a day or two, Dr. Bird came in place of Dr. Julius—I used not to wait on her; Dr. Smethurst waited on her—I prepared her food down stairs; then I either took it to the dining-room, to Dr. Smethurst, or sometimes I have taken it to the bedroom-door; once or twice—when the food had been taken, Dr. Smethurst generally put the things outside the door, on a box in the passage—medicine was brought from the surgery of Dr. Julius for Mrs. Smethurst to take; when I took it in, I either took it into the dining-room to Dr. Smethurst, or to the bed-room-door, and he took it from me there—when there were any evacuations to throw away I took them from the landing—Dr. Smethurst placed them outside on the landing himself.

COURT. Q. You never took anything of that sort out of the bedroom? A. No.

MR. CLERK. Q. Was there a slop-pail on the landing? A. No; they were generally left in a pan or a chamber on the landing; I then removed them, and took them down stairs myself—there were three chambers and a pan in the bedroom Mrs. Smethurst occupied, and two basins also. Q. When the pan or the chamber were placed outside on the landing do you recollect whether different things were poured into the pan together, or whether you had the evacuation there by itself? A. It appeared altogether, sometimes quite full.

COURT. Q. That is, all the slops of every kind appeared to be altogether in the same vessel? A. Yes; and sometimes that was full.

MR. CLERK. Q. Do you remember, during the time that she was ill in your house, saying anything about a nurse attending her? A. Dr. Smethurst. said he could not afford a nurse; I asked him if I might sit up at night, that he might get a little rest—he said "No," he thanked me, I had my work to do in the day; he would not disturb my rest; he then said he could not afford a nurse, he would rather attend on Mrs. Smethurst himself no one could do so well as himself for her—I had not mentioned anything to him about a nurse—I had not heard Dr. Julius say anything to him about a nurse before this—I recollect on one occasion Dr. Julius coming while the prisoner was away from home, and taking a motion—Dr. Julius brought it to me—I do not know where it was when Dr. Julius went up stairs—I do not remember when this was—I believe it was three or four days before her death—Dr. Julius took it away with him—I recollect Dr. Todd coming from London to see Mrs. Smethurst—I had on that day kept an evacuation of the deceased all day, in order that Dr. Todd might see it; that was by the prisoner's direction—I threw it away a short time before Dr. Todd arrived, in consequence of the lateness of the night—I did not always take the food to the bedroom; Dr. Smethurst fetched it very often from the door.

Q. When the things were brought out of the bedroom, or when you took them down stairs, was any part of the food that you had taken up remaining in the cup? A. I do not remember it, only on one occasion; that was some stewed rice that was turned sour—Dr. Smethurst asked me to throw it away, it was turned sour; and I did so—I do not remember any food remaining in the cup on any other occasion—the room was never thoroughly cleaned out—there was an old-fashioned secretary on the landing—there were two keys to it—Dr. Smethurst had the key—it was kept locked—I never saw the inside of it after that—I do not know what was put inside.

A JUROR. Q. Do I understand you that there were two keys? A. Yes; one for the drawers at the bottom, and one for the top—Dr. Smethurst had both.

MR. CLERK. Q. Did you observe anything of the colour of any vomit that was taken down stairs in the different pans or basins? A. No; I could not see the colour of it, because it was always mixed together—the evacuations looked a very bad colour—I saw blood in them—that was not the last week, but the week before she died—I did not observe any for the last few days.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. I believe they lived on the very best of terms while they were there with you? A. They appeared to be very happy, both he and she—he was always very kind—my judgment was that he behaved with great kindness, attention, and affection—there was no other room in my house to let, except the two they occupied—they paid 15s. a-week—the bedroom is a small room with only one window—the door was frequently open; I could not say that it was open day and night, but it was very often open; it was open day and night at times; it was frequently open—my bedroom door was directly opposite their room—the secretary was a piece of furniture belonging to me—Dr. Smethurst asked me for the use of it after they came, and I took my things out of it, and gave him leave—I did not know of any brandy being kept there; I did not know at all what was in it—Dr. Smethurst asked me to get him a bottle to make up some bottles to send, but I did not know what it was for; it was a wine-bottle—after that a hamper came down, Dr. Smethurst took it, gave it to the man, and took it from the man's hands again, packed it and unpacked it—I did not see it, I only saw the bottle I gave him—I do not know of any brandy coming down on the Friday or Saturday before Mrs. Smethurst died—a small quantity of ice was bought—two-pennyworth—that was all I know of—I do not mean two-pennyworth at a time, only once; it was put to ice some water for Mrs. Smethurst to drink—I have never stated that ice was used by Dr. Smethurst; I can only say there was one two-pennyworth of ice got; that was all to my knowledge—all Dr. Smethurst's things were kept outside the door—he was not in the habit of going out into the town every morning—he has gone out; not every morning—he has gone out once or twice to order things; he generally ordered what he had, not I—I don't know whether he must have gone more than once or twice—he said he was going to the post—I could not say how far he went, or whether he went beyond the post—I prepared the beef-tea or arrowroot, or whatever was taken—I prepared Dr. Smethurst's dinner—he ordered the things for his dinner—he went out for that purpose.

JURY. Q. Or did the trades people call for orders? A. No.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Was he in the habit of going out every day to order things? A. Not every day; not many times—I can't say exactly how far the shops are from Alma-villas—I should think it would take about ten

minutes to go down to the town—I did not recommend the trades people that came—he had his bread of the same baker as I did—he had no occasion to order that; the only thing he ordered was meat—I do not know the name of his butcher—he used to put the evacuations outside the door—he has said that he removed them from the room, which was very small, to prevent a bad smell; he has made that observation more than once—the evacuations were always standing outside the door until they were removed by me, so that Dr. Julius, Mr. Bird, or any one might see them—there was never any concealment of them that I know of—I always removed them from there—the evacuation that was kept for Dr. Todd I threw away in consequence of its being late; I did that myself, thinking Dr. Todd would not come that night—I had kept it there all day, for Dr. Todd, as I understood—I remember an evacuation that was taken away by Dr. Julius whilst Dr. Smethurst was absent—besides that, Dr. Smethurst himself brought me an evacuation to give to Mr. Bird; he put it in a white gallipot; I do not know whether he covered it up; I gave it to Mr. Bird—I do not remember whether Dr. Smethurst had requested me to keep an evacuation for Mr. Bird—I was just bringing it down, and he said, "Wait; I want to get some of that for Mr. Bird."—Mr. Bird was then in the house—I had gone up to remove it from the landing, and he came down behind me, and said he wanted it for Mr. Bird—I cannot say whether Mr. Bird was then in the parlour or in the bedroom—I was in the habit of making the bed once a a day; it was generally late at night when I made it—I had no servant, and no one to assist me in the whole work of the house—my husband was at home at the time, up to the 30th—I attended to my husband, and waited upon him, and also on Dr. Smethurst—I only made the bed in the sick room—I used to bring up the food to the door—I had the whole work of the house to do without any one to assist me—I first suggested to Dr. Julius about the nurse, the day he took away the evacuation—I think I spoke to Dr. Julius about it first—I never asked Dr. Smethurst to have a nurse.

COURT. Q. You offered to act as a nurse? A. I offered to sit up.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. And then it was he made the observation you state? A. Yes; that was it.

JURY. Q. Was the secretary usually kept open in the ordinary course of use, or kept locked? A. I do not know—after Dr. Smethurst had the key, I never observed the key in it—I never interfere with my lodgers.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Did you take any note or particular observation about it? A. No, I never think of looking into my lodgers' places—there were cupboards down stairs, in the parlour—when lodgers come I always leave the keys in the doors, and they may do as they please—they may lock the cupboards or not—when lodgers come sometimes they do lock up things in their cupboards—some are very particular—I never troubled myself about the secretary after I gave the keys to Dr. Smethurst—it was very convenient with reference to the bedroom—it stood by the sick-room, and would have been a very convenient place.

Q. Do you remember on one occasion Dr. Smethurst bringing you some tapioca, and complaining that Mrs. Smethurst did not like it? A. The first tapioca I made she said, when I was making the bed at night, how very nice it was—Dr. Smethurst had given her that tapioca—Dr. Smethurst did at one time bring me some tapioca, and say that Mrs. Smethurst complained of the taste of it; that was the second cup, the second time it was made—I cannot say whether he asked me to make some fresh, or what became of that tapioca—it was noton the same day that Mrs. Smethurst said she liked it, it was the

next day; I wondered it should be so, because I made it exactly the same—I generally made it twice a day—I think Dr. Smethurst said it was the bitterness of the medicine that had made it taste bad—Dr. Julius was attending her then—there is a grate in the bedroom; it was open—I do not remember at any time seeing a wine-bottle on the hob, or on the mantelpiece, or anywhere in the room.

MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. Had you taken up the tapioca that she liked? A. No, I gave it to Dr. Smethurst—to the best of my knowledge it was the first I made—it was the next night that Mrs. Smethurst made the observation to me, when I made the bed—it was before the sister came that he brought the tapioca down and said she did not like it—I can't say what he did with it—the bed-room door could open fully, quite free of the bedstead—the prisoner did not appear to be very long gone when he went out—I can't say how long.

COURT. Q. Was he ever gone for an hour? A. He might be; I could not possibly say.

MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. Did any one attend to her in his absence? A. No; I never remember going in once during his absence—I made the bed once a day—sometime she used to be in the bedroom when I made the bed, sometimes on the landing, and sometimes down stairs—I used not to have much conversation with the deceased when I made the bed—I could not say what exactly—I left the keys of the secretary in the drawers—I did not take my things out till Monday (they came on the Friday)—after that Dr. Smethurst had the possession of it himself—I did not take any notice whether or not the keys remained in the secretary—I never tried the drawers—I had nothing to do with it—before I threw away the motion that was kept for Dr. Todd to see, I asked the prisoner if it was requisite to keep it any later, and he said he thought, they would not come so late, and I removed it, because I was unwell that day, and wanted to go to bed a little earlier, I was very sick and had a very bad headache—I then threw it away, and then a note came from Dr. Julius instantly afterwards—it was then a quarter past ten by my kitchen clock, but I believe it to be fast—the note was brought by a lad—I know that Dr. Todd came that night; I let him in with Dr. Julius.

LOUISA BANKES . I am unmarried, and live at 10, Lanark-villas, Maida-hill—I am sister to the deceased Isabella Bankes—the signature to this marriage register is in her handwriting—she was older than myself, and in her 43d year, and was also unmarried—she and I had lived together; but in September last she went to reside at Mrs. Smith's boarding-house, 4, Rifle-terrace—I called there several times to see her, and I was introduced by her to the prisoner—I saw her again when she had gone to Kildare-terrace, and I heard of her departure—I was not aware previously that she was about to leave—I think I heard nothing at all of her afterwards till the 10th January—I then received a letter; this is it (produced)—it was from my sister—I see the address put to that letter; it is my sister's handwriting—it is not in the prisoner's handwriting, no portion of it—from that time I heard nothing of her until the 20th April—I then received this letter—I believe this to be in the handwriting of the prisoner (Read: "10, Alma-villas, Richmond-hill, 18 April, 1859. Strictly private and confidential. Dear Miss Bankes,—Your dear sister Isabella wishes me to request the favour of your calling upon her as early as convenient, as she is really very ill, and desirous to see you. She also begs me to say that you will greatly oblige her by coming alone, and asking for Dr. and Mrs. Smethurst (that you have

called to see your sister), and that you breathe not a word of the contents of this note to any one. She further wishes me to add that she cannot ask you to remain, but simply solicits seeing you for the present. Rail from Waterloo station about every half-hour; and Richmond busses from the White-horse Cellar, Piccadilly, about as often. I remain, dear Miss Bankes, yours faithfully, T. Smethurst.")

Q. I believe in consequence of that letter you went at once to Richmond? A. Yes, I did—I arrived there somewhere about 2 or 3 o'clock on the 19th—I saw the prisoner, and was taken up by him into the deceased's bedroom—when she saw me she said she was very ill, and she appeared rather agitated—she said to me if I would be quiet it would be all right—I had not said anything to her—she referred to the prisoner, and said it would be all right, and he said yes, it would—I remained there some hours—I did not remain in the bedroom the whole of that time—I was not with her for any time alone—whilst I was in the bedroom Dr. Smethurst remained there.

COURT. Q. Were you with her at all alone? A. A minute or two; not more.

MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. I believe you have a relation, a gentleman of the name of Lane, a surgeon at St. George's hospital? A. St. Mary's hospital—in the presence of the prisoner I proposed Mr. Lane seeing her; she said she would rather not; and he said 'he thought it would be better not—I don't remember who said first they would rather not, he or my sister—something passed between us about money matters—he said he thought she had not had so much as she ought to have received from the dividends; those were the dividends under Mr. Bankes's will—he died last October—I had received my dividend last April.

COURT. Q. Do you know what time in October he died? A. About 17th, I think.

MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. And the dividends were payable at the beginning of April. A. Yes—I said that I had received the same amount that she had, and it was perfectly correct it was 71l. 6s.—whilst I was there I noticed some tapioca in a cup; my sister said it had a nasty taste—she said she should like me to make some; I was willing to do so; I offered to make it, but the prisoner said the milk had not come—I afterwards proposed to make some blanc-mange for her—I did not make it; the prisoner said he would rathernot, it would interfere with the landlady—during the day I saw the prisoner give her some soda-water and a saline draught—it was a white mixture—I did not see it mixed; it was mixed outside the room—the prisoner said the saline draught was to check sickness—he went outside the room, and came back in a minute or so, and then the draught was mixed, and he gave it her—she was sick immediately—he gave her some milk—he gave her that after the draught—it came from some part of the room, I don't know where—after that she was very sick—I left somewhere about 6 o'clock—before going, my sister wished very much to see me again—that was in the presence of the prisoner—her excitement when I first came I thought had quite gone off, and I promised that I would see her again—I said I would come in the course of the next week—I received a letter from the prisoner, dated 21st April—I think I had written on the 20th April myself—this is the letter that I wrote (Read: "10, Lanark-villas, Wednesday. I have thought so very much of you, my own dearest Bell, that I cannot allow the day to pass without sending you a few lines. It was such a relief to see you, dear, and I felt so thankful to leave you

a trifle easier. I shall look most anxiously forward to a note on Friday morning. To hear of your gradual improvement will be a source of the greatest comfort to me, although I feel most grateful that you have such a tender and kind nurse. To say nothing about the Doctor's commendable patience, his countenance bespeaks amiability of disposition, and he must have the greatest anxiety for your speedy recovery. We must hope that you will be better than ever when this severe indisposition has passed away. The air is so pure and fresh that I hope all is in your favour. I quite enjoyed a sniff of the country, and got home very comfortably. Was quite beset with inquiries respecting you by Mr. and Mrs. Rigge. If there is anything I can make you fancy, let me hear through the Doctor: you shall have it at once. I shall run down and see you when quite agreeable; and rest assured I shall be perfectly silent about everything that concerns you. To-day I am going to purchase a little hat as a present for Rhoda's 'little Bee,' but having no bairns of my own, I am quite a novice in such matters. And now, God bless you, dearest, and with best remembrances to the Doctor, and affectionate love to your dear self, ever your own fond Loo.") This is the answer I received to that letter (Read: "10 Alma-villas, 21st April, 1859. My dear Miss Bankes,—We are in receipt of yours of yesterday's date, for which we are greatly obliged. After your departure dear Bella had a very bad evening and night of it, purely from the excitement of seeing you, and the fatigue consequent thereon. Vomiting and purging set in at a fearful rate, which of course prostrated her greatly. Her doctor therefore at once forbade any visitors for the present, or he would not be responsible for the effects attendant thereon. Last night was a good one, but I am sorry to say to-day has been a trying one. She is now, however, again better, and I am happy to say recovery is really expected by all. I will write again shortly. Dearest Bella sends her kindest love, and with kindest regards, believe me, yours faithfully, T. Smethurst.") On 23d April I sent her a jelly—I did not send any letter with it, I sent it by post, before I sent the jelly; this is the letter (Read: "Friday afternoon, 22d April, 1859. Dear Doctor, the jelly I shall forward by omnibus to-morrow, Saturday afternoon. If you will kindly send for it, I will direct it to you, and order the same to be left where the omnibus goes to. I sincerely hope the dear invalid is better: I am so anxious about her, poor darling. What do you think to Mr. Lane seeing her; it might be managed with ease, and I am sure you would feel pleased to have his opinion, being a very clever and experienced man. Best love to my own darling sister, and kind regards to yourself. Ever sincerely yours, Loo. Excuse great haste. I could make any arrangement with Mr. Lane you thought fit, and he need not know circumstances.") I think I sent this piece of paper inside that (Read: "These are for you, my own darling Bell. I am anxiously looking forward to to-morrow's post, and sincerely hope and pray you are going on favourably. I am preparing a little nice jelly for you, dear, and shall come down and take a peep at you, with the Doctor's consent, on Saturday or Monday, which I hope will be agreeable to you both. Prepare nothing, or I shall not like to come again.') Before I could pay that visit I received this letter from Dr. Smethurst (Read: "23d April, 1859. My dear Miss Bankes, Bella's dearest love and best thanks for your kind attention, in which I most cordially unite. She has not yet got over the emotion of meeting you, poor dear, and is still looking forward to a very early interview; indeed, she would like to name Monday next for your taking a chop with me," but I think it would be more advisable to say the middle of next week, for the doctors even this morning have prohibited

everything of a nature which might try her very weak powers, since it would be impossible to bear up against shocks to the nervous system; and on these grounds alone she is ordered to keep her room, in order to treasure up strength. The aspect of affaire is favourable if great care be observed, and we three doctors have every hope of a successful termination. I shall not fail to call for the jelly. I purchased some very beautiful yesterday, and dearest Bell has partaken of two or three glasses of it, and I think with benefit. Dearest Bell says she would rather not see uncle Lane; however, we will talk this matter over at our next meeting. With every kind wish, in which dearest Bell unites, believe me, yours faithfully, T. Smethurst.") In consequence of these letters, I abstained from going down—I received another letter, dated 27th April—this is it(Read: "Wednesday afternoon, 27th April, 1859. My dear Miss Bankes,—Dearest Bella requests me to thank you kindly for the jelly. Poor thing, she tries her very best to eat it; it is, however, I imagine, too sweet for her taste, especially so now, with constant nausea. Sometimes it is retained on the stomach, at others it is speedily vomited. I obtained some from town, which is not so sweet; but this she puts aside for yours. I very much regret to say she has not once properly rallied since seeing you. Her nervous energy must be very low indeed, or this would not have happened. Still we have every hope of a good recovery. To-day I have insisted on having a consultation with Dr. Todd, of King's College Hospital, the first physician of the day, with her two regular medical attendants, who are also the first doctors in this town. She is still ordered quietude, and all visitors to be excluded for the present; therefore dearest Bella begs of you to wait a little longer than was anticipated before calling here. As soon as I have got Dr. Todd's opinion, I will send you a few lines on the subject. With our united love, believe me, yours faithfully, T. Smethurst. P.S. Dearest Bella always reads your letters before sending. T. S.") On the 29th I received another letter(Read: "29th April, 1859. My dear Miss Bankes,—We saw Dr. Todd from London last evening, as late as 10 o'clock, in consultation with Dr. Julius, of Richmond, one of dear Bella's daily medical attendants. He not only acquiesces in what is being done, but recommends a perseverance in the treatment, with some slight addition of his own prescribing, and entertains favourable hopes, like the rest of us. The bilious vomitings are entirely arrested, but sickness still prevails to a great extent, with occasionally violent retchings, which almost shake her very life out of her; and the bowels continue to act from 8 to 10 times in the 24 hours, in spite of all we can do. This action is very different from what is usually called diarrhoea, and is the result of impacted bowels and congested liver, which must have existed for a very long period, judging from the amount of filth which has passed. I am sorry to say there is no appetite, and that is the only thing which raises a fear in my mind; for how nutrition is to be obtained equal to the expenditure of loss of strength under the circumstances does, I confess, somewhat puzzle me. Nevertheless, there are still good and improving points in her, which I sincerely hope may be the means of creating a rallying point from which we trust to build our hopes upon. I much regret the state of the case will not yet admit of even your seeing her for the present, since any or the least anxiety only tends to debilitate her nervous system. We both, however, anticipate very shortly seeing you here. Dearest Bella sends her kindest love and best wishes, in which I beg to unite, and believe me, yours ever faithfully, T. Smethurst.") I wrote a letter upon that, and I got this letter from him late on Saturday evening (Read: "30th April, 1859. My dear Miss Bankes,—In reply to your

favour of yesterday's date, I am exceedingly sorry to say dear Bella has passed a wretched bad night—passed 15 motions in the 24 hours, and of a very bad description: there is now much blood in the stools, and besides which there is an entire loss of appetite, consequently I have great dread for the result. She read your kind letter, and agrees with me that it would be better that you should be near to us; so that if you will run down as early as convenient, you can then take a room or rooms near at hand. It will indeed be a source of comfort to me to have you with us. I much regret there is no accommodation in this house for you, as we occupy all there is to let, and have not room enough for ourselves. Dearest Bella sends her kindest love, and with every good wish, believe me, yours faithfully, T. Smethurst. P.S. There was no wish on my part to prevent you calling, beyond the consideration for the critical state of dearest Bella, in which her medical attendants perfectly united. She has never rallied once since seeing you, and that alone was the reason for keeping her quiet. T. S.") On the receipt of that letter I did not go down until the Sunday, the following morning—I got down between 2 and 3 o'clock—I saw the prisoner—nothing was said to me about my sister's having made a will that morning—he did not take me up to see her at once—he said she was very ill—I had been to church, and came down after the morning service—I went up a few minutes after I got in—I found her in a very bad state indeed—she recognised me—she held out her hand—she could not speak—I only remained in the bedroom a few minutes—not alone, Dr. Smethurst was there—I then went down stairs—he asked me to come down—I did not go up again for some time after—he did not remain with me while I was down stairs—he went up stairs, leaving me downstairs—he gave no reason for that—he said she was too ill to bear me in the room—I had brought down some soup with me in a jelly, that was when I went up the first time—I gave it to the prisoner—he took two teaspoonfuls from it, put some warm water to it, and took it outside the room to cool it—he said he took it out of the room to cool—he was out of the room with it a minute or two—I could not see him when he was out of the room; I could hear him stirring it round—when he brought it back he gave it to my sister, and she brought it up immediately—I only saw my sister once afterwards that day—I remained with her a very short time indeed the second time; I left her because she was so ill the Doctor said I had better not remain in the room—he took me down stairs, and then he returned to the room—I don't think she took any arrowroot in my presence—nothing else was given in my presence that I remember—I recollect writing some letters there, which I wanted to have posted—I told the prisoner I wanted them posted, and he said I must take them, as he could not send any one out with them—I took them, and returned again—during the day he called my attention to the effect of Dr. Todd's pills; he said that they had made my sister much worse; he described the effect as a burning sensation all over the body—about 11 o'clock I proposed to Dr. Smethurst that I should remain all night with my sister; he said he would rather not; he would wait on her himself—I had taken a room at a cottage near, and an arrangement was made that I should attend at half-past 9 the following morning—the reason he gave for my not coming earlier was, that he should wish to prepare the room before I came—I came at that time on the Monday morning—when I got there, the prisoner came down stairs to meet me; and while I was there Dr. Julius came in—a conversation took place between the prisoner and Dr. Julius about some fresh medicine—Dr. Smethurst wished to try something else—he wished me to go and fetch it—that was

in the presence of Dr. Julius—I was to get it from Conduit-street, in London—Dr. Julius said he thought he had better send for it; that I had better not go—after Dr. Julius had left, Dr. Smethurst wished me to go and fetch it immediately, and I did so—he gave me a prescription, and I took it to Conduit-street—it was in his handwriting—I took it to Conduit-street, and there had it made up, and brought it back in two or three hours—when I came back I gave the medicine that had been made up to the prisoner; I was going to give it to him—I brought back the paper also—I think I returned it to Dr. Smethurst—when I was going to give the medicine to him, he said he had tried something else—I expressed a wish to see my sister, and he said she was too ill—I was not aware that any communication had been made to a magistrate until a constable came, and then the prisoner went away with the constable, and returned some two or three hours after—when he came back, he said to me, "Dr. Julius has been killing her"—while he was away, or soon after he came back, a nurse was sent by Dr. Julius, and from that time, down to the death of my sister, either I or the nurse attended to her the whole time—during the night I gave her some food—I sat up with her all night—the prisoner was downstairs during the night—he came up once or twice, but the greater part of the night he was belowstairs—he took no further part in administering medicine or food—I gave her a good deal of food during the night: some arrow-root and brandy—I did not make it myself—I gave it her several times—she did not vomit at all on those occasions—I gave her some tea, that was in consequence of her asking for it—she retained that on her stomach—there were no signs of retching when she took either the arrow-root or the tea—the following morning she died, about 11 o'clock—after the prisoner returned from the magistrate's, I asked him to get something out for the nurse, and he said I had taken that responsibility on my own shoulders, and he should pay for nothing, and get out nothing—my sister and myself both had 1,800l., that was lent out on mortgage to a man of the name of Tarte—I had been on very intimate and affectionate terms with my sister the whole of my life—the nature of her health generally was good.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. When Dr. Smethurst returned on the Monday was he labouring under very great excitement? A. Yes; he said, "Dr. Julius has charged me with poisoning her"—he said Dr. Julius was killing her; he appeared to be under very great excitement—he returned about 8 or 9 in the evening—he was taken away about 5 or 6 o'clock I should think—after he returned he went to the room, and kissed my sister—she appeared to recognise him—he did not interfere further—he remained down stairs the greater part of the night—he came up once or twice during the night—once I was there when he came up—there was a nurse attending my sister, of the name of Chetwood—I do not know whether she is here—I am aware that the nurse has been examined before—I did not go to sleep at all during the whole of that night—I was not in the room the whole of the night—I was up and down continually—that was not from the parlour where Dr. Smethurst was; it was from down stairs—I had seen Mr. Smethurst before I saw him at Richmond—I had seen him at Rifle-terrace twice or three times before—that was during the time my sister was staying there—I had not known him before that—my sister had been living away from me latterly, I should think for about three years—I used to see her always constantly during that time—I thought my sister fragile—I have known her suffering from bilious attacks occasionally; I have known her myself suffering from sickness—I know that she complained

frequently that when she rode in carriages she was sick, and was in the habit of vomiting; that has been the case when I have been with her—she suffered from a disease of the womb—I was cognizant of that myself—I had ministered to her in that—it was some time ago that she suffered from that; I should think two years from the time of her death—I was not aware that she was in the habit of using injections of nitrate of silver—she was in the habit of using injections; I did not know their nature—I don't know the duration of the disease; I don't know whether it was for a year or more—once she had a Mr. Hoffman, a physician, to attend her; a doctor in Rams gate—I remember a gentleman of the name of Bartlett attending her—she had a bilious attack which produced vomiting—she was only ill one day—that was a mere ordinary attendance for a mere ordinary bilious attack—I think that was two or three years ago—I had seen her two or three times in Rifle-terrace—prior to that I had seen her constantly, up to that time—my father did not die from diarrhoea; he died of a complication of diseases; I never heard it called diarrhoea.

COURT. Q. How old was he when he died? A. Fifty-five.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Was it purging? A. Yes; the climax was purging that could not be stopped—I do not remember being with my sister at Mr. Tarte's when she was compelled to remain there for a whole day sick and purged; I still give you the answer that I did on the last occasion, that I have no recollection of anything of the kind—while I was with my sister the first time, she expressed to me that Dr. Smethurst was very kind to her—I was sent up to town for the medicine on the Monday—it was to a chemist's, called Bullock's, in Conduit-street—I don't remember what the preparation was—I did not read the prescription, nor was I aware of what it contained—it was not mentioned to me that Bullock was famous for this preparation—several members of my family have had bilious attacks; it is no disease at all—Dr. Smethurst spoke to me about taking the responsibility on myself after he returned from the magistrate—he did not tell me that the magistrate had forbidden him to interfere any further—I did not know that the magistrate had forbidden his interference—he did not interfere after he returned—I was in the room when the nurse gave my sister food—she did not vomit between 11 and 12 o'clock; she only vomited when she had the first medicine given her—that was some that Dr. Julius sent—I do not know that she vomited twice between 11 and 12 o'clock; it was much earlier than that—I was not in the room when she vomited—I did not know that she vomited twice during the night, and that her bowels were purged three times; I heard nothing of it; it was not a matter brought to my attention at that time—the nurse told me she had not been sick.

(MR. SERJEANT PARRY wished a letter of the deceased's put in, that had been opened, as containing some writing of the prisoner's. MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE did not propose to read the letter, having alluded to it in mistake; but it might be read if it was desired.)

MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. Is this the letter referred to (produced)? A. Yes; this writing is the prisoner's—my sister had some discharge, but beyond that I am not acquainted with the nature of it; she used an injection for it—my father died of a complication of diseases, I never heard it called diarrhoea—the medical man who attended him is not here—either I or the nurse were in the room with my sister the whole of the night before she died—the medicine that was given, and which made her sick, was an antidote that had been sent by Dr. Julius.

JEMIMA CHETWOOD . I am a nurse at Richmond—on 2d May I was desired by Mr. Caudle, Dr. Julius's assistant, to go to 10, Alma-villas, to attend upon the deceased lady, Miss Bankes—I went to that house between 6 and 7 o'clock on Monday, 2d May—I saw Miss Louisa Bankes in the parlour first—I went up into the bedroom with Mrs. Wheatley, and Miss Bankes followed—some time after that the prisoner came back from the police-court—during that Monday evening and night he came occasionally into the room—I administered all the medicine to her after I came—Miss Bankes gave her a little food; I chiefly gave her the food—I did not see any medicine that was sent from Dr. Julius at the time I first went there—I administered to her the medicine I took with me—Mr. Caudle gave it to me—she vomited after taking it the first time—I administered it to her a second time, half-an-hour after, and she again vomited—I afterwards gave her some beef-tea, and a little brandy in it—she retained that on her stomach—she received food, either from me or Miss Bankes, several times during the night—she rejected the medicine twice, but not afterwards—she retained the food that was given her—I administered the medicine to, her four or five times; she retained it after the second time—I do not remember her asking for food, only for a little tea; she retained that—I remained with her until she died, on the Tuesday morning, at five minutes past 11—when she rejected the medicine, I placed the vomit in a basin) and from that into a glass, and gave it to a constable named Jukes—the prisoner was not in the room at the time of that vomit; he requested me to place it in a glass—he had seen it; he came into the room afterwards, and requested me to put it in a glass—I gave it to the policeman to take charge of; the prisoner sealed it up, I signed my name to it, and gave it into the hands of Jukes.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Were both the vomits you speak of in the same basin? A. She vomited into the basin each time; it did contain both the vomits—Mr. Smethurst was not present when she actually vomited; he came up afterwards, some time after—I did not call his attention to the vomits—he requested me to put them into a jar, and have them sealed, and I signed my name to the paper; he wished me to give the jar to the policeman—that was while I was attending upon Miss Bankes, and after he had ceased to have anything to do with her—the vomiting took place from, I might say, 9 till between 9 and 11—both the vomitings; there were only two—besides that there were three purgings that night, all before 12 o'clock—from 12, till the time she died, she appeared to get weaker and weaker; she did not rally at all—the medicines I gave her were given to me by Mr. Caudle; he went with me to Dr. Julius's surgery, and got them—I did not see Dr. Julius until the next morning.

MR. CLERK Q. Did you give more than one kind of medicine? A. Yes; I took two with me—I did not give any other medicines that night until her death, except the two that I received at that time—there were three purgings before 12 o'clock—the evacuations had a rather brown watery appearance—I showed them to Mr. Bird—I adminstered food to her after 12; between that time and her death, continuously.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Were the retchings, when she vomited on those two occasions, very violent? A. No; they were not.

COURT. Q. The vomiting was easy? A. Yes; there was no retching particularly besides the mere bringing up, and there was a very small quantity that came—it did not appear to be very violent.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. You have been examined before? A. Yes; at Richmond—I don't think I ever said that the retchings were violent; it was violent, but not so very violent.

FREDERICK BARNARD SENIOR . I am a solicitor at Richmond—on Saturday, 30th April, the prisoner came to my office, I believe in the afternoon, about 1 or 2 o'clock—he was a perfect stranger to me—he asked me if I could come up the hill, to make a will for a lady; she was too ill to come to the office—I said I would; I would go directly—he said, "No; not to-day, to-morrow"—I said, "Monday, you mean?"—he said, "No; I mean tomorrow, Sunday"—I told him I had an objection to doing anything on a Sunday; but he said if it was a work of necessity, would I come; and I said I would—it was arranged that he was to fetch me if there was a necessity—he said the will would be very short, and he then produced this paper, which he said was sent to him by a barrister, a friend of his in London—he said that the lady wished to write it out herself, but he thought it better that a professional man should do it—I just looked at it, and handed it back to him—about 9 o'clock the following morning, he came to my private house—he asked me if I could come immediately; at least, he said, "Come about 10 o'clock"—he said the medical men were coming at half-past 10, and he wished it all done before they came—I said I would come—I had asked him that the medical man might be present; but he said there was no occasion for that, as the lady was perfectly right in her mind, and was suffering from diarrhoea and vomiting—I went at half-past 10—I was shown into the parlour—the prisoner was there; in fact, he met me at the door, and asked me to walk in; and he then said he thought it better to tell me, before I went upstairs, that, although he and the lady were living as man and wife, they were not married, and he said that was the reason why he did not wish the medical man to be present—he said, as soon as she was better, and her Chancery affairs were settled, they were going to leave Richmond to be privately married, and return and settle there—after that I went up stairs; he accompanied me—I went into a bedroom over the room where we had this conversation—I found a lady in bed there—he walked into the room before me, and introduced me to her, saying, "My dear, this is the gentleman who has come to make your will"—she did not say anything; she merely bowed—I went towards her, and she handed me this paper from under her pillow; I immediately recognised it as the same paper I had seen the day before—I said, "You wish to make your will, do you not?"—she said, "Yes"—I said, "Then perhaps you will allow me to read this to you?"—she nodded assent, and I read it through slowly and carefully to her, and I asked her if that was right—she said yes; except that she wished to leave a brooch to a friend, and she said she did not know how I should describe it—Dr. Smethurst, who was standing by, said, "Why, it contains the hair of your late father, does it not my dear?"—she said, "Yes, it does, and set with diamonds and pearls"—I said, "Oh, that is quite sufficient; I will describe it as such"—she mentioned the name of the lady she wished it left to—upon that, I went down stairs again with Dr. Smethurst, and prepared this will (produced)—the prisoner was talking to me all the while I was writing it, but upon different subjects; about Richmond, and so on—when I had prepared it, I went up stairs again, and read the fair copy of the will all through to the lady—I asked her if it was according to her wishes; she said, quite so—I then asked for another witness; I said two would be necessary—Dr. Smethurst said he would fetch the daughter of the landlady, if that would do—he mentioned that she was a young girl—I asked how old she was—he said 17 or 18—I said that would do very well, and he fetched her—before he fetched her, he said, "I suppose you will tell her it is some Chancery paper?"—I said, "No; she must know what it is, that it is a will; and the lady must

ask her and myself to witness it;" and he said, "Oh, very well"—Susannah Wheatley was then fetched, and she and I witnessed the execution of the will by the deceased—on her entering the room, I told her what she was wanted for—after the will was executed and witnessed, I handed it back to the lady and left it with her—the prisoner and I then went downstairs together—this is the signature of the deceased—that was all I had to do with it. (The will was here read, as follows.)

"This is the last will and testament of me, Isabella Bankes, now residing at No. 10, Alma-villas, Richmond, in the county of Surrey, spinster: I give and bequeath to my beloved friend, Miss Jenkins, of Walthamstow, Essex, my brooch set with brilliants and pearls, and containing the hair of my late father; and as to all my real and personal property, estate, and effects whatsoever and wheresover, and of what nature or kind soever the same may be, I give, devise, and bequeath the same unto my sincere and beloved friend, Thomas Smethurst, doctor of medicine, now also of No. 10, Alma-villas, Richmond aforesaid, for his own use absolutely and for ever. And I hereby appoint the said Thomas Smethurst sole executor of this my will; and hereby revoke all former wills or testamentary dispositions at any time heretofore made by me, do declare this only to be my last will and testament. As witness the hand of the said Isabella Bankes, the 1st day of May, 1859.

Signed by the testatrix, Isabella Bankes, and declared as her last will and testament in the presence of us present at the same time, who at her request, in her presence, and in the presence of each other, have hereunto subscribed our names as witnesses—FREDERICK B. SENIOR, Solicitor, Richmond, Surrey; SUSANNAH WHEATLEY, 10, Alma-villas, Richmond, Surrey.


(The other paper, containing the instructions for the will, was to the same effect, except that it did not contain the bequest of the brooch.)

LOUISA BANKESL (re-examined). I believe this paper (the instructions) to be in the prisoner's handwriting.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Had your sister ever complained to you of suffering from rheumatism? A. Yes; not often; she wrote that she had had rheumatism; never before.

MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. You had never known her to suffer from rheumatism at all? A. Never; she never complained of having rheumatism when I saw her.

ALEXANDER MCCROSTY (re-examined). I have no doubt that the whole of this paper is in the prisoner's handwriting.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY to MR. SENIOR. Q. Did this lady, when she made this will, thoroughly understand what she was about? A. Perfectly—she was perfectly sound as I believe—I read the will over to her—I read it clearly and distinctly and slowly, so that she could thoroughly understand what I was reading and what she was about to sign—she did not make the slightest objection, but nodded assent—she spoke of her friend, the lady to whom she wished to leave the brooch—she did not make any other suggestion whatever—I read these words to her: "This is the last will and testament of me, Isabella Bankes, now residing at No. 10, Alma-villas, Richmond, in the county of Surrey, spinster"—she did not make the slightest observation on that—I had two interviews with her; first, to take her instructions—she handed that paper to me—I read it through slowly to her the same as I did the will afterwards—she handed it to me from her pillow—it was lying on

her pillow—I read it slowly to her, and then she suggested the alteration—then, afterwards, when I had written the fair copy, I read it to her again—I might have been with her five minutes on each occasion, more or less.

MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. Did she appear at all excited or agitated when she saw you? A. No; not at all.

COURT. Q. You read the will itself over to her? A. Yes; I read over the portion the counsel put to me—before I wrote that, the prisoner told me that they were living together as man and wife, and as soon as she was better and her Chancery affairs were settled, they were going to leave Richmond, to be privately married, and to return and settle in Richmond—he said distinctly that they were not married.

WILLIAM TARTE . I am a lead merchant—I have known Miss Bankes about 25 years—at the time of her death I had some money of hers in my hands, about 1,740l. on mortgage—her general state of health was very good during the time I had known her.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Had she a life interest in a large sum of money? A. I believe she had, about 5,000l.—the 1,740l. is adequately secured; I am sure of that—I am no relation of hers, a connexion; her brother married a daughter of mine, who is dead—I never knew her complain of weakness, or of sickness, or vomiting.

COURT. Q. Were you on intimate terms with her, so as to see her continually and know the state of her health? A. Yes.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. You had never known her complain of anything at all? A. No; I used to see her perhaps two or three times every three months—she would call, and have her interest from me—she called on business; that was all that I knew of her—she used to come and receive her interest from me—I used to pay it every quarter—I used to see her every quarter, and frequently oftener; she would call besides that time. [Adjourned.]

Tuesday, August 16th.

DR. FREDERICK GILDER JULIUS . I am a doctor of medicine, practising at Richmond, and am also a registered surgeon—I have been in practice since 1832—I was called in to see the lady who I now know to be Miss Isabella Bankes on the 3d of April—I found the prisoner there—he stated that she was suffering from diarrhoea and vomiting—I put very few questions to her as to her previous state of health—I came late—when I got to my surgery I sent some medicine—all the medicine that I sent from my surgery was made up by my assistant, Mr. Caudle—I went to see her on the following day, and she was not any better; she was still suffering from vomiting and diarrhoea, and the medicine had no effect in arresting it—Dr. Smethurst had given ten drops of laudanum as an injection, and also some castor-oil—that was not the medicine I had sent; I sent chalk mixture, containing catechn, and so on—nothing was said about the probability of her being in the family-way at that time—I saw her on the following day, the 5th, and learnt from the prisoner that things were going on still in the same state; he drew my attention to the vomiting and purging, that she was very bilious, that a very large quantity of bile came away, and said she would not be better until it did come away—I sent medicine containing grey powder and Dover's powder, which is compound ipecacuanha powder; that did not seem to have any effect whatever—he proposed to give her a mixture containing quinine and gentian, dilute sulphuric acid, ether and gentian, and hydrocyanic acid—I said that I did not think that prescription calculated to do good, that it was not quite the right treatment for the case; he said that he was constantly

there, and would watch it; he gave it with an idea to give her an appetite, and should it disagree he would stop it immediately—I accordingly sent that mixture—hydrocyanic acid is prussic acid—I went again on the 6th, and learnt that she had taken that medicine, but that there had been no ill effect from it whatever, but no good had been derived from it, the vomiting and purging still continued—I saw the motions and the matter vomited, which was of a grass-green colour, and which was shown to me by the prisoner as evidence of her bilious state, but I did not see any yellow bile—there was blood found in the evacuations, not so early as the 6th, but on the 8th; there was nothing particular, about them—I continued to send medicine to her from time to time, and saw her every day up to the time she left those lodgings; the symptoms kept increasing from day to day, the diarrhea as constant, the vomiting still continued, with violent retching and straining, and frothy mucus was brought up off the stomach—there was great hardness of the abdomen, and I perceived that her strength was failing daily—she used to complain of burning heat in the throat and mouth, burning all through the bowels, and she told me that the very act of swallowing made her sick.

Q. Had you made inquiries as to whether she was in the family-way? A. Early in my attendance, Dr. Smethurst told me that she was poorly, that her usual periods were on her—that was within five or six days of my first attendance on her—I am not certain as to the date—I tried a variety of remedies, but the same effect was always produced by whatever was given; no medicine produced any effect in arresting the disease, the symptoms continued the same after taking everything that she did take—I learned from Dr. Smethurst that during the purgings there was a great deal of straining and a great deal of tenesmus—I cannot say whether he used the term tenesmus; most likely he did—tenesmus is a continued desire to go, without doing anything—I noticed her mouth, and before the 18th I noticed on her tongue what in common language is called thrush, apthous spots, up to the time she left Old Palace Terrace—Dr. Smethurst was always present when I saw her, with one or two exceptions—I got the character of her symptoms from him in her presence—she removed to Alma-villas on the 15th, and I continued to attend her on the 16th and 17th; I found that she was gradually getting weaker; there was no change in the symptoms; they continued precisely the same—about that time Dr. Smethurst wished to give her a mixture containing prussic acid, which I did not precisely approve of, and I told him that it was a remedy of an uncertain character, and to a person in her delicate state, it was hardly advisable to give it; he told me he was accustomed to its use, and he could always test its effect by throwing pieces of bread out which had it dropped on them, and seeing its effect on the sparrows—a mixture was made up in accordance with his wishes, but milder than he had directed, milder than he wished it to be—at this period, the 18th, I had formed an opinion that there was something being administered which had a tendency to keep up the irritation existing in the stomach and bowels—I am not, on reflection, able to account for it in any other way—in consequence of that opinion I requested my partner, Mr. Bird, to visit her.

Q. Did you communicate to him what your opinion was, or did you leave him to form an unbiassed judgment? A. I left him to form an unbiased opinion—I did not see the lady again until after three days—I next saw her on the 21st or 22d, I think the 22d—I then found her decidedly much worse, much weaker, and looking very ill and reduced—I inquired into the

symptoms that had been exhibited during the period I was away, from Dr. Smethurst—I learnt from him that the medicines which had been administered had been of no use, that the effect of certain remedies which had been given had been excessively violent, producing excessive irritation of the bowels and stomach—I learnt from him that injections were administered—the injections were being administered throughout the illness, so he told me—the symptoms of blood in the motions continued throughout from the 8th of April—there was a proposal on his part to have another medical man—that was before they left the Terrace—he said, did I not wish to see some one else, and asked whether I would like to see Mr. Hills or Dr. Hassell—I said I had no objection to meet any one, but I would rather meet a person from London, as I was the senior practitioner in Richmond, I preferred seeing a person from London—I never heard the lady herself express a desire about having other advice—I continued attending her—I found no difference, except that she was getting weaker from that time—I continued varying the remedies from time to time in conjunction, at the latter part, with Mr. Bird—I was not present at her death—I saw her a few hours before her death—Dr. Todd came down on Thursday, the 28th—he came to me, and I drove him up to Alma-villas—with the further opportunity that I had had of observing the case, I did not at all alter the opinion I had formed—I purposely abstained from communicating my suspicions to Dr. Todd.

COURT. Q. Do you mean the opinion that something was going on counteracting your medicines? A. Yes; I did not alter that opinion.

MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. But I understand you to say you did not communicate that opinion to Dr. Todd? A. I did not; I and Dr. Todd saw the lady together, and Dr. Smethurst also—I mentioned her symptoms to Dr. Todd, and what she had taken—after he had examined her I drove him down to the train—he prescribed for her—he expressed to me some opinion about the illness—the medicine he prescribed was sent up on the following morning; she took it at 11 o'clock; it was to be taken every six hours; it was a quarter of a grain of sulphate of copper, and a quarter of a grain of powdered opium, to be made into a pill—I had never prescribed that mixture; I had recommended it, but the prisoner had objected to it; he said he objected to the use of the sulphate of copper, because it had often produced symptoms of poisoning—I learnt from him that she had taken Dr. Todd's medicine; I learnt that on the Saturday; he said it had produced intense burning in the mouth and throat, constant vomiting, and fifteen bloody motions; he said the burning was throughout the whole intestinal canal, throughout the whole of the bowels and intestines; his expression was, "from the mouth to the anus"—in my judgment the medicine could not have produced those effects; I should say decidedly not—from what had passed between myself and Dr. Todd, I took the opportunity of obtaining a portion of an evacuation—I met Dr. Smethurst in the town on Friday 29th, and I went early to Alma-villas, and procured an evacuation that had just passed; that was before 11 o'clock; she had not then taken the pills; it was before she had taken the first copper pill.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. How do you know that? A. Because the pills came there when I was in the house; I think it must have been about a quarter to 10 when I went up there.

MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. With that exception, had you ever been alone with the lady during the time you were at Alma-villas? A. Not in Alma-villas; I did see her alone on that occasion, but I merely took the

evacuation; she was then very low and excessively exhausted; and I did not wish to speak much to her—I took the evacuation home, and gave it to Mr. Caudle—I saw her again the same afternoon; I did not see Dr. Smethurst that afternoon; I saw her again on the following morning, Saturday, the 30th; I saw her again on the Sunday and on the Monday; she died on the Tuesday morning—during the whole of the period, the disease was not at all arrested by the medicines that had been administered to her—the symptoms certainly could not have been produced by the medicines I administered—in consequence of what passed between me and Dr. Todd, and what I observed myself, I made a communication to a magistrate on the Sunday, and in consequence of that, the prisoner was taken into custody on the Monday—I appeared before the magistrate and made a statement—before I made any communication to the magistrate I had received an account from Dr. Taylor, in relation to some evacuation that had been seat to him—after death there was a post-mortem examination of the body; I was merely present at it—the stomach was sent up to Dr. Taylor; I did not minutely examine it; the examination was conducted by others, not by me—I met the deceased's sister there on the Monday; I was not aware that she had been there before.

Q. Did you give any direction at any time that she should not see her sister? A. I never heard the subject alluded to—I never heard of her having made a will—up to the time of her death I had no idea of the nature of the connexion between her and the prisoner; I supposed them to be husband and wife—supposing small doses of some irritant poison had been administered from time to time, I think that would decidedly have accounted for the appearances that were indicated throughout the disease.

COURT. Q. Supposing that small irritant doses had been administered from time to time, that would account for the symptoms you met with? A. It would.

MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. As far as you know, was either arsenic, or antimony administered during your attendance upon her? A. Not to my knowledge—I never heard of any chlorate of potass being used, or of any mixture being made from chlorate of potass; it is an innocent medicine in itself; it is a cooling draught—after the prisoner's committal to prison, I received this letter from him (Read: "Horsemonger-lane goal, May 5th, 1859. Dr. Smethurst will feel much obliged by forwarding as above, by return of post, copies of the prescriptions of the following medicines prescribed and dispensed by the firm of Dr. Julius and Mr. Bird; required for defence:—the sulphate of copper and opium pills (Dr. Todd); 2d, the nitrate of silver pills; 3d, the bismuth mixture; also please to send him word if arsenic is kept by them in the surgery, or what other part of the premises. To Dr. Julius and Mr. Bird.") There is no mention in that letter of antimony in any shape—I did not from the beginning to the end of the treatment prescribe antimony—I answered that letter.

DAVID RICHARDSON CARR . I am an articled clerk to Messrs Symes, Teesdale, and Co., the solicitors for this prosecution—on 3d July last I served upon the prisoner a notice, of which this is a copy. (This was a notice to produce, amongst other things, the letter of Dr. Julius in reply to the prisoner—it was not produced.)

DR. JULIUS (continued). I kept a copy of the letter I sent him—this is it (Read: "5th May, 1859. In answer to Dr. Smethurst's communication of the 5th instant, Dr. Julius begs to state that Donovan and Fowler's solutions of arsenic are the only solutions of that mineral kept in his surgery or

any other part of his house.") I sent a copy of the prescriptions, the prescriptions are here—I sent a copy of those, there is no antimony among them—I received another communication from Dr. Smethurst (Read: "6th May, 1859. Dr. Smethurst will thank Dr. Julius to supply him with the formula of the acetate of lead pills and opium, and the date when sent out; ditto, the nitrate of silver pills; ditto, the bismuth mixture; ditto, the pills with sulphate of copper; likewise the dates when the two jars of motion were taken from the house, 10, Alma-villas, for evidence of defence.") On 9th May I received another letter from him—I had answered the other letter previously, the letters crossed each other—this is a copy of the letter I sent him (Read: "Richmond, 9th May, 1859. Dr. Julius begs to in close the prescription for the lead pills, and to state that the other questions are found in his deposition. The acetate of lead and powder of opium make the prescription he wanted.") That was written by me on 9th May, and on the same day I received this letter from the prisoner (Read: "Second application. 9th May, 1859. Sir, I made application for the acetate of lead prescription prescribed by you or Mr. Bird, with date—also the dates of prescriptions sent which were wanting, namely, 1st, antimony; 2d, sulphate of copper; 3d, nitrate of silver. I also require the dates when the motions were removed from 10, Alma-villas, and when forwarded to Dr. Taylor, for my defence. I am, sir, yours truly, T. Smethurst. To Dr. Julius or Bird.") When I first saw Dr. Smethurst he told me that the lady had been ill just one week—he told me that she had been in a very good state of health before, that she was able to take long walks, and in fact, was out a great deal.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. I suppose that statement, that she was able to take walks, and so on, coincided with what you learnt, that she had been out walking, did it not? A. No; I did not know that she had been out walking, except from what Dr. Smethurst told me—he made the statement to me as to her condition without the slightest reserve, apparently in the most open and free manner—when I was first called in by him he told me all the symptoms he had observed about the patient throughout the whole of my attendance upon her in Old Palace Terrace, and throughout all my communications with him he always stated to me the symptoms he observed, in the clearest and plainest manner—what he stated to me as the symptoms from which she was suffering, tallied and agreed with my own observation—Dr. Smethurst saw me very nearly every day during my first visits in Old Palace Terrace—I think there were two occasions upon which I saw her alone there—I would not be on my oath that it was not more—to the best of my recollection, I saw her twice alone—I can recollect those two occasions—I will not be positive it was not oftener—whenever I saw him, he communicated freely to me the condition of the patient—he called my attention constantly and regularly to the vomits—I did not always see the vomits every day—when I went, I took the account of the state of the vomitings from Dr. Smethurst—I saw them occasionally—I thought they were of a green character, during my attendance at Old Palace Terrace, and up to the 18th April—they were at Old Palace Terrace up to the 15th—as far as I can remember, the vomiting continued green up to the 18th; what I saw after that was merely mucous—it was in Old Palace Terrace that the conversation first occurred between me and Dr. Smethurst as to further medical attendance—that was before the 15th of April—he suggested to me further assistance—he suggested the names of Mr. Hills and Dr. Hassell—I said that, being the senior medical practitioner in Richmond, I preferred

somebody from town—he did not suggest Dr. Todd at that time; I am certain of that—I did not suggest that my partner, Mr. Bird, should attend then—I don't think I suggested it to him until some days later than that—Mr. Bird began to attend on the 18th—I suggested his attendance before that, that he should attend instead of me—there was no arrangement that I should cease to attend—he had not suggested that Dr. Todd should be sent for before I suggested Mr. Bird—I told him Mr. Bird had been a pupil of Dr. Todd's; that was not in consequence of his suggesting Dr. Todd to me—I told him that Mr. Bird had had great experience in diarrhoea, and diseases of that kind—it is a fact that Mr. Bird has had considerable experience, in the Crimea; knowing that, I recommended him to Dr. Smethurst—at that time I had formed an unfavourable opinion that my remedies were counteracted; I had at that time formed an unfavourable opinion, as to the possibility of the lady's recovery; I thought her in a very precarious state; I mean on April 18th, there is no mistake about that—I did not communicate my impression to Mr. Bird—I was present when Mr. Bird was examined here on the last occasion—I heard him examined—I did not hear him say that I had communicated to him my unfavourable impression; I certainly had not—Dr. Smethurst suggested Dr. Todd's coming down after this; I think that was on Wednesday, the 27th—he came down on Thursday night, the 28th—I wrote a note to Dr. Todd, and sent it up by my son—I saw Dr. Todd when he came down; it must have been a few minutes before 10 when he came; I met him at the station, I should think about a quarter to 10; that was the time the train was due—I had not communicated to Dr. Smethurst that he was expected by that train—that was not the latest train; there are several later than that; there is one at 12 o'clock—I had not told Dr. Smethurst the time I expected Dr. Todd to call—it was a little before 10 when I went with Dr. Todd to Alma-villas; we went there direct from the station—I simply told Dr. Todd the symptoms from which she was suffering, and the remedies that had been used—I told him that all those symptoms had failed to yield to my remedies—I told him what the remedies were that I had used—I never conveyed to him any further impression than what I have stated—I did not express to him my great surprise that they had failed—I will undertake to say that I never expressed anything more to him than just detailed the symptoms and the medicines I had used—I have not got the note I sent to him—I cannot recall to my recollection Mr. Smethurst saying, that if the patient had been under his responsibility he should have preferred soothing remedies; I do not recollect his saying he should have given her a slight occasional emetic, with calomel and opium, and no irritants—nothing of the kind was expressed to me, to my recollection—hydrocyanic acid, or prussic acid, is very frequently used to check sickness; it is used to check vomiting in the early stage of pregnancy; it is a medicine that is very frequently used for that purpose; it is of a very sedative character—I thought, the dose that Dr. Smethurst suggested was a very large dose for a person in the weak state in which she was; it was 2 drops of Scheel's strength, mixed with the ordinary dose of water, of course—I have the prescription here; it is 12 drops of hydrocyanic acid, 2 drachms of carbonate of soda, syrup of orange-peel, and 6 oz. of water; that would be 2 drops to 1 oz. of water—an ounce of water is 2 table-spoonfuls—that was not the dose to be taken, because she had to dissolve a powder in some more water, so that she would perhaps take 3 or 4 table-spoonfuls of water; that would dilute it still more—there were 6 doses in the bottle, to be taken with a powder to make it effervescent—I sent a dose that was one-third less than that; Mr. Caudle

made it up—(referring to the book)—the entry in my book is a copy of the prescription.

COURT. Q. Can you tell how many drops were sent? A. I cannot exactly; Mr. Caudle must tell you that.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. You say you thought the dose was too large, and you ordered a milder dose; cannot you tell what that milder dose was? A. I don't say that I ordered a milder dose; you are misunderstanding me; a milder dose was sent, not by me, by Mr. Caudle—I did not order a milder dose to be sent—Mr. Caudle did that upon his own responsibility—he had no time to consult me—this prescription was not written out by Dr. Smethurst; he dictated it to me, and I came home and entered it—I entered it according as he gave it me—I entered 12 drops, and Mr. Caudle, without consulting me, sent less—Dr. Todd had not been expected the day before he came—I have copied out from the book all the medicines I administered to the deceased—the book itself is here—on the 3d of April there was some chalk mixture, with aromatic confection, tincture of catechu, compound tincture of camphor, and camphor-water (that is the same as camphor-julep)—on the 4th of April, 2 grains of grey powder, and 2 grains of Dover's powder, or compound ipecacuanha powder; three of those pills were sent—on the 5th of April there was 8 grains of quinine, dilute sulphuric acid, a sufficient quantity to dissolve it, dilute hydrocyanic acid, or prussic acid, 15 drops, 2 drops of chloric ether, and infusion of gentian—that was Dr. Smethurst's prescription—on the 6th of April there were six pills sent, as on the 4th of April; and she also had a rhubarb draught, with salvolatile and compound tincture of cardamums—on the 7th the mixture was repeated—on the 9th the mixture was repeated—on the 12th six more of the pills that had been ordered, with grey powder—on the 14th the mixture was again repeated—on the 17th the mixture was repeated—on the 18th there was the hydrocyanic mixture that we were speaking of just now, and a solution of the acetate of morphia in water; that is all; the other things that were ordered were prescribed by Mr. Bird—I did not at any time prescribe bismuth, nitrate of silver, or acetate of lead—sulphate of copper was prescribed by me, in conjunction with Dr. Todd, not before—there were 2 grains of grey powder in each grey-powder pill—that was to be repeated every four hours, but it was not given nearly so frequently—I think I made up altogether fifteen pills, each containing 2 grains of grey powder—grey powder is a metallic medicine; it is a preparation of mercury—that was the only metallic medicine that I administered—acetate of lead, bismuth, nitrate of silver, and sulphate of copper, are all metallic medicines—I was present on the 4th of May, when Dr. Taylor was examined before the magistrate—I cannot recall to my mind whether I then heard him mention both arsenic and antimony—I had not before the 5th of May heard Dr. Taylor mention both arsenic and antimony—I was present when he was examined—I did not say when I was here, on the former occasion, that I had heard antimony suggested before Dr. Smethurst's letter of the 9th of May—I said that I had hoard of antimony, but I had not heard it mentioned; it was in a letter that I became acquainted with it—until I was asked upon cross-examination on the last occasion, I never mentioned to any one about the deceased being pregnant—I had not, in fact, the slightest suspicion of it—I knew nothing of it until the post-mortem examination—if I had known it during my attendance upon her it would have made no difference whatever in my treatment, nor does it, now that I am acquainted with it, make any difference in my opinion—the age of forty-three is generally a critical time of a woman's

life, or rather later, I should say; the age at which the periods stop varies so much—it is generally from about 45 to 50; it may be at times from 40 to 45, or even earlier than that occasionally; as a rule I should say it was from 45 to 50.

Q. In the case of a woman who becomes pregnant for the first time at 43, is her state likely to be more critical than if she had become pregnant just after maturity? A. No; I think not; her confinement would be very much more difficult; I do not think her pregnancy would be more critical—I do not think the age of 43 would make a state of pregnancy more critical or more likely to disturb the system,' than any other age, such as 20 or 25—I state that decidedly as the result of my experience; the confinement would be very critical indeed, but not the period of pregnancy—as a rule the periods stop within a month or six weeks of pregnancy; there are some very rare exceptions where they do not, but they are very rare, I think; in my opinion there is rather less danger of miscarriage in a woman's becoming pregnant for the first time at 43, than at 20 or 25, I should say that from my experience; the danger is rather less at an advanced age than in early youth—you may have the usual symptoms of pregnancy—vomiting is a very common Symptom—if I heard that a woman who was pregnant vomited, or felt sensations of sickness when she awoke of a morning, I should consider it was likely to arise from the pregnancy—it would be an exceptional case if sensations of sickness occurred in moving across a room—sickness in moving is a common symptom.

Q. Have you never known an instance of vomiting and diarrhoea conjoined, arising from pregnancy? A. I have known a person pregnant who has had the common sickness of pregnancy, and who has also had diarrhoea—my experience is founded partly upon what I have witnessed in practice, and partly from what I have read—I am constantly reading medical books, getting up the experience of others, and keeping up with the times—I cannot say that I have known of an instance where a woman pregnant has suffered from severe vomiting and severe diarrhoea, which have yielded to no ordinary treatment—I have heard of vomiting being unable to be stopped, but I have never found it so bad when it has been conjoined with diarrhoea—I cannot say that I have known or heard of an instance of a woman's being pregnant, suffering from severe vomiting, burning sensation, diarrhoea, and dysentery, which have not yielded to any treatment applied to diarrhoea or vomiting—I do not know Dr. Barker, of Bedford—I have not heard of an instance of a woman pregnant at the age of between 40 and 45 suffering from severe vomiting and severe diarrhoea, and her life only saved eventually by the abortion of the foetus—I have heard of vomiting being so severe that it would yield to no remedies, and where, to save life, they have been obliged to produce abortion; but I have not heard of it conjoined with diarrhoea—I have never made a post-mortem examination of a body that died from arsenic or antimony—I know Dr. B. W. Richardson, of St. George's Hospital; I am not aware that I have ever consulted him in difficult matters; I think I met him on one occasion; I think not more; when he was living at Mortlake, I used to see a good deal of him professionally; I have not had opportunities of seeing him since he has been in London; we have occasionally been engaged in post-mortem examinations together—in the course of the treatment of the deceased lady, laudanum injections were used constantly; that laudanum was obtained from my surgery; Mr. Caudle can tell you better than I how much was supplied; the opium injections were used with my full approval—I am a doctor of medicine; my degree is not

the London degree, it is the Archbishop of Canterbury's; he has the power of granting it; I did not take it out as a matter of form, it is a very uncommon thing—I am a member of the College of Surgeons, and a general practitioner; I took out my M.D. degree about 1850, I think; in order to obtain it, I had not merely to pay the fees, I had to go to two Fellows of the Royal College of Physicians, who stated they had known me a certain length of time, and that I was a person upon whom a doctor's degree might be conferred; upon that you are enabled to call yourself Doctor, that is all; that was my object.

COURT. Q. You are a member of the Apothecary's Company? A. Yes; and a Fellow of the College of Surgeons; either of those entitle me to practice.

MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. In relation to the burning sensation, which was one of the symptoms of this lady, when did you first of all hear of it? A. About the 8th of April; I then heard of it from herself; from that time, during the whole progress of her illness, I heard it referred to, sometimes from her, and very generally from Dr. Smethurst; as far as my experience goes, that is not a symptom of pregnancy in any stage.

COURT. Q. Has the vomiting that arises from incipient pregnancy anything to do with a burning in the mouth or throat? A. No; I do not think it has; I don't think it ever accompanies the vomiting.

MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. Not in your experience, at all events? A. Certainly not in my experience—assuming the lady to have been only 7 or 8 days pregnant at the time I was called in, I have never met with combined diarrhoea and vomiting at that stage of pregnancy; I have known vomiting; vomiting is almost the very first symptom of pregnancy; I have known it occur at the very earliest stage of all, but it has never occurred in my experience in combination with diarrhoea at that early stage; with regard to the sickness itself, it was decidedly not of the same character that is met with in pregnant women; there was excessive violent retching, and a burning sensation; and generally, as a rule, the sickness from pregnancy is a rejection of the food, unaccompanied with any very violent exertion—as a rule, there are exceptions to it—the appetite is very often excessively good after sickness in pregnancy—as far as I have known or read, diarrhoea in pregnancy has not been a dangerous or a difficult symptom to manage; such a medicine as that prescribed by Dr. Todd administered to a pregnant woman would not occasion the symptoms that Dr. Smethurst stated occurred after the administration of it; where diarrhoea is met with in pregnant women, the character of the stools is generally bilious, containing feculent matters; there would not be a shreddy appearance in the evacuations; the combination of diarrhoea and sickness in pregnancy is quite exceptional; having learnt that she was in a state of pregnancy during my attendance upon her, does not at all alter my opinion that irritative substances were being administered to her during her illness.

COURT. Q. Can you in any other way account for the course of symptoms which you had an opportunity of seeing from 3d April down to her death? A. Indeed I cannot.

SAMUEL DAROAN BIRD . I am a registered surgeon, and am practicing medicine in partnership with Dr. Julius at Richmond—I have been with Dr. Julius between 2 and 3 years—before that I was practising my profession in the Crimea—I had opportunities there of seeing many cases of bowel complaint and dysentery—I was requested by Dr. Julius to go and see the deceased lady, Miss Bankes, about 18th April—I did so—at the time Dr.

Julius requested me to attend Miss Bankes he did not mention or allude in any way to any suspicions he entertained with respect to her treatment—I saw her on the 18th or 19th—the prisoner was there—I found her labouring under diarrhoea and vomiting—the prisoner did not tell me that he was a medical man, but I gathered it from my conversation with him—he described to me what she had been suffering from, and what treatment Dr. Julius had adopted for her—he gave me his opinion of the cause of her illness; he said that the lady had neglected her bowels for a considerable time, and that now he thought the liver and bowels were unloading themselves by means of the diarrhoea and vomiting—he read notes to me, which he said he had made of her symptoms and the course of her treatment—I at first continued the treatment that Dr. Julius had been adopting previously, which was an effervescing mixture, containing hydrocyanic acid and other medicines—I continued that about 3 days, and I also recommended that ice should be used, and that she should have enemas of beef-tea—I also coincided with what the prisoner said he had been doing before, which was enemas of small doses of laudanum—this treatment had not the least effect in mitigating the symptoms under which she was labouring—the prisoner was always there when I visited her—I noticed the evacuations during the time I attended—at first the evacuations that were shown to me presented no remarkable appearance, but afterwards they contained blood and considerable quantities of mucus—the mucus was stained with blood, and there were also shreds—some of the motions I saw consisted almost entirely of mucus stained with blood—there was no foecal matter at all—the prisoner reported to me what he said was the effect of the treatment I recommended; he said that the effervescing mixture did not seem to check the vomiting, that the beef tea enema seemed rather to increase the diarrhoea, and that the ice also did not check the vomiting—I have been present when she has vomited; there was a very great deal of straining—finding these remedies ineffectual, after a few days, I suggested bismuth—I did not suggest acetate of lead before that—I spoke to the prisoner about it—he said that Dr. Julius had suggested that before, and that he (the prisoner) had thought it was not a likely medicine to do good; however, I over persuaded him, and the medicine was prescribed and sent; it was in doses of 5 or 6 grains, I forget which—(Mr. Caudle here referred to the book, and stated that it was 7 grains.")—the acetate of lead was afterwards prepared by me, combined with opium at first—I suggested that it should be combined with opium—the prisoner remarked that he thought it would act equally well without the opium; but he at last coincided with me that it would be better to give opium with it, and it was given with opium—the nitrate of silver was given on my suggestion—the prisoner informed me, which I found to be the case by my own observation, that the opium which I had combined with the acetate of lead, had had rather too much effect upon the patient, and accordingly, we decided at first that the opium should be omitted from the prescription, but, upon fur there consultation, we decided that nitrate of silver should be given instead without opium, and it was sent out without opium—I heard from the prisoner that it had been given—he said it had produced a very hurtful effect upon the patient; he said it had caused violent burning pain throughout the whole of the intestinal canal, and that the diarrhoea had been increased, and the motions had contained more blood—in my opinion the nitrate of silver was decidedly not calculated to produce the symptoms that he described—it was given in the form of pills—it was discontinued in consequence of that statement of the prisoner—the quantity given was a 1/4 of a grain in one pill

—I think 3 pills were sent, but the prisoner stated that only 2 of them were given; it is my impression that 3 or 4 were sent.

Q. After this, did you find tenderness in the abdomen of the patient? A. Tenderness was not a symptom that I particularly noticed certainly; not at any time—I observed that the symptoms fluctuated; were more intense at some periods than at others.

Q. Did you at that time form any opinion as to the cause of the continuance of these symptoms and their resisting all your efforts to mitigate them? A. At which time do you mean?

COURT. Q. At any time, and if so, when? A. The opinion I formed was that some irritant was being administered which counteracted the effect of the medicines that were given.

MR. BODKIN. Q. Was that the result of your own judgment on the symptoms, or had you any conversation upon the subject with Dr. Julius before you formed that opinion? A. I had a conversation with Dr. Julius about it; that was about three days after my first visit to the lady—Dr. Julius asked me what was my opinion of the case, before he told me his own suspicions—in answer to that enquiry from him I gave the opinion I have now given, and upon that he told me his own—I believe Dr. Todd was sent for and came down to Richmond—I did not see him—I had a conversation with the prisoner upon the subject of Dr. Todd being called in; that was, I should think, certainly more than a week previous to the time that Dr. Todd did come—the prisoner informed me that he should like to have Dr. Todd sent for—the deceased had previously expressed herself desirous of further assistance, in the prisoner's hearing and in mine; she expressed that desire more than once—I went to see her on the morning following Dr. Todd's visit—I also saw the prisoner; he said that Dr. Todd had prescribed sulphate of copper and opium—he said that it had been administered, and that the result was exactly the same as when the nitrate of silver pills were given—I think it was past mid-day when I went there; I am not quite certain—I can't say quite certainly; but my impression is that he said only one of Dr. Todd's pills had been given—he said that the pills prescribed by Dr. Todd had produced violent palpitation of the heart; he used the expression, that it seemed as if her heart was jumping out of her body—I never heard of sulphate of copper combined with opium producing any such effect—he spoke also of an injection ordered by Dr. Todd; it consisted of catechu and starch, and he informed me that this seemed rather to increase the irritation of the bowels—I should have expected to have found the effect exactly the reverse; they are astringents—I then said that as the sulphate of copper pills seemed to have produced such a bad effect, they had better be left off, and she had better take no medicine by the mouth at all, but she had better continue the injection of 10 minims of laudanum; and I also recommended that brandy should be given; that had been given previously; that was by the mouth—her mouth was sore, she had apthous spots on the mouth, and she had complained of a sensation as of a ball in her throat—she complained of thirst, and the prisoner informed me that she drank very large quantities of cold water—on the 30th I told the prisoner that I wished to take away a portion of one of her evacuations, that it might be examined under the microscope to see if there was any purulent matter in it, that we might judge if there was ulceration of the bowels—the prisoner upon that poured out a portion of an evacuation, about 4 oz.; he tied it over in a tumbler with a piece of old newspaper, and gave it to me—I took that to the surgery and gave it to Mr. Caudle, who labelled it and sealed it with my seal in my

presence; another bottle containing some liquid was sealed at the same time; that was numbered 1; Dr. Julius brought that to the surgery—those vessels numbered 1 and 2 were then put in a basket in my presence and sent to Mr. Buzzard by Master Julius—he left the room with them intending to go to Mr. Buzzard—he is a medical man, living at 41, Great Marlborough-street, London—sometimes the evacuations were removed from the room to the landing, and the prisoner either fetched them into the room to me to look at, or I went out to look at them, but sometimes I saw them in the room; they were not more offensive than ordinary motions—I know the term dysuria; it signifies pain in making water—the prisoner informed me that that was one of the effects of the sulphate of copper pills—I went there on Sunday, 1st May, the Sunday before the death; I found the deceased very weak, and much worse than I had seen her before; her tongue was of a very bright red, and covered with a white fur, and she had also apthous spots on the tongue, as I had noticed before—her pulse was quick and weak, I counted it; it was about 130—the diarrhoea was still frequent—the vomiting had to a certain degree subsided; was it less than it had been previously—a nurse came on the following day—I saw Mr. Buzzard on the Sunday; a conversation then took place between Dr. Julius, myself, and Mr. Buzzard, in my house—after that conversation Dr. Julius and I went to Mr. Penrhyn, a resident magistrate at Richmond; a statement was made to him, and he wrote a note to Dr. Taylor, which was given to Mr. Buzzard to take to London—next day I went again to the house—I saw the prisoner—on my entering the house he remarked that she was rather better—he proposed that syrup of iron and quinine should be given—I said I thought that was a most inappropriate remedy, and that we had much better give some vegetable astringent, as we found that the mineral astringents had not produced a good effect—the prisoner showed me an evacuation at that time, and I took a portion of it in a white jam-pot—I put it into a bottle myself, and sealed it myself, which I had not done in the other cases; Mr. Caudle had done it; it was numbered 3—the prisoner was taken into custody on the Monday after, I think about 5 o'clock—he was taken before the magistrate and admitted to bail, or released on his own recognizance—I returned to the deceased's house with Inspector Mclntyre and the prisoner; we all three returned together—Mr. Mclntyre then took possession of the bottles and vessels about the deceased's room.

Q. How was that done? A. I went into the deceased's room with the prisoner, and we together handed the bottles and pill-boxes to McIntyre, who stood outside the door—at this time the nurse, Chetwood, was in attendance upon the deceased; whilst she was there I gave the deceased some arrow root mixed with brandy, also beef-tea mixed with brandy, and I saw some given her by the nurse; I think I gave it myself at least three times, and I must have seen the nurse give it two or three times more, at short intervals—I gave her a whole teacupful myself at one time; that was retained on the stomach, all of it—the prisoner had been away from the house about four hours before he returned with me—the deceased did vomit during that day; the prisoner informed me that she had vomited in the morning, before my visit—I did not see her vomit after the giving of the arrow root and brandy, but I was informed by the nurse that she did vomit—on the following morning I was sent for suddenly to go up to the house—I found the deceased sinking—there was no vomiting or diarrhoea at that time: she was perfectly conscious, though evidently dying—I was up and down stairs, talking to Miss Bankes, and coming up again every minute or two to the patient, and at the time she expired I was below.

COURT. Q. I suppose you saw her at intervals very frequently? A. I saw her at intervals of five minutes, I should say.

MR. BODKIN. Q. Having attended her from time to time, from the time you first went until her death, to what do you attribute the symptoms that she was labouring under? A. I attribute them to some mineral irritant poison, administered in frequent small doses—arsenic would produce those symptoms—antimony would also produce those symptoms—I was not then aware that she was in a state of incipient pregnancy; that fact would not alter my judgment in the matter in the least—antimony would decidedly not be a proper drug to administer to her in the state she was.

COURT. Q. As far as you know, was any administered? A. As far as I know, none was administered.

MR. BODKIN. Q. Have you seen in the East many cases of dysentery? I have seen a great many cases—dysentery, in its acute form, is not a disease of this climate—taking all the symptoms together, in my judgment they are not referable to a case of acute dysentery, or to any other natural form of disease.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. How long have you been in practice? A. Since the year 1854—what I mean by being in practice is that that was the time I took my diploma; at that time I was one of the resident clynical assistants at the Hospital for Consumption, at Brompton—I passed the College of Surgeons in 1854—I went to the Crimea in February, 1855, as a staff-surgeon of the second class—it was there that I had my experience of dysentery—they were all male patients; I prescribed for them—I have never attended a patient who was found to have died from slow arsenical poisoning—I have never made the post mortem examination of a body that was found to have died of slow arsenical poisoning.

(MR. SERJEANT PARRY proceeding to put the question, whether the witness had formed the opinion that the deceased was the subject of slow arsenical poisoning, until Dr. Julius had first mentioned it, MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE objected to the question, the witness not having made such a statement.)

COURT. Q. What you stated was that you attributed the symptoms you witnessed to some irritant mineral poison, administered in small doses, and that arsenic or antimony would do; for anything you know, perhaps many other things would do as well? A. Exactly; any of the mineral irritant poisons would cause the same symptoms.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Then have you never formed an opinion that this lady was the subject of slow arsenical poisoning? A. I have.

COURT. Q. What is your opinion then about her being the subject of arsenical poisoning? A. I have formed the opinion that she was the subject of slow arsenical poisoning.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Did you ever form that opinion before Dr. Julius suggested it to you? A. I did not—he first suggested it to me, and then I agreed with him—other mineral poisons might have caused the same effect—what I am now speaking of is a matter of opinion founded on my experience and reading—bi-chloride of mercury might have caused it; that is, corrosive sublimate—I venture to state that in the presence of the medical gentlemen who are here; I mean all the symptoms, and none other, particularly—salivation would not necessarily be a symptom of the use of bi-chloride of mercury.

COURT. Q. Is the bi-chloride of mercury ever prescribed by a medical man? A. It is frequently, in very small doses, one-sixteenth of a grain perhaps.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. I believe Dr. Smethurst called your attention

regularly to the symptoms, to the vomitings, and to the evacuations? A. He did; and I saw them regularly from day to day—I have mentioned three vessels containing evacuations sent for analysis; they were all three ultimately sent to Dr. Taylor—that was on Saturday, April 30—the bottle No. 2 was the one given to me by the prisoner on the Saturday, and No. 3 was given subsequently, at the time of my visit on the Monday—the prisoner gave me both No. 2 and No. 3—I directed the administration of acetate of lead, nitrate of silver, and bismuth—the acetate of lead was the first; there was one grain of it in each pill; Mr. Caudle, I think, made up four pills; I will not be certain; it was either three or four, I think—the prisoner informed me that two were taken, if I remember right—the next thing was the nitrate of silver; there was a quarter of a grain in each pill—I think four were sent; I think she only took one of those, but I am not quite sure about it—I can't say how many were sent; Mr. Caudle will be able to state that—there was no bismuth pill; it was a mixture; either five or six grains for a dose; that can be told by referring to the book—I directed it to be taken every four hours, I think for three or four days, I can't say exactly—when I first went to the deceased I continued the mixture that she was then taking, which Dr. Julius had left her taking—that mixture contained hydrocianic acid—I continued that from the 18th to the 22d—I do not know what quantity of sulphate of copper was administered; I don't know that Mr. Caudle had the opportunity of knowing that—the bismuth and other drugs were purchased of Hearon, McCulloch and Squires; I really cannot say where they reside; I leave that to Mr. Caudle—I was present at the first part of the post mortem examination; I took no part in it; I was merely present when the brain was opened, and then I was compelled to go away—Mr. Smethurst particularly requested that I would attend the consultation with Dr. Todd; I believe he said, because I had been in the more immediate and direct attendance upon Mrs. Smethurst while she was at Alma-villas—I did not attend, because I had another engagement; he begged of me to attend; and if it had not been for that engagement I should have attended according to his request—I arrived at the opinion that death was caused by some irritant poison partly from my own observation, and partly from the symptoms, the nature of which Dr. Smethurst described to me from day to day.

COURT. Q. But did the symptoms that Dr. Smethurst told you of, differ at all from those you had an opportunity of seeing yourself? A. Not in the least—I saw the vomitings myself; the motions were shown to me, apparently having been just, passed; and partly the lady told me herself of her symptoms—the account that she gave of herself completely agreed with that Dr. Smethurst told me, and with what I observed.

WILLIAM ADOLPHUS FREDERICK CAUDLE . I am assistant to Dr. Julius, and have been so for about a year and a half—I had studied medicine before entering upon my employment with Dr. Julius—I made up the whole of the medicines sent from Dr. Julius's surgery for Miss Bankes—the first I made up was an ordinary chalk mixture, on 3d April, consisting of prepared chalk, aromatic confection, tincture of catechu, and compound tincture of camphor—the following day there were three pills of grey powder and compound ipecacuanha powder; I put two grains of the grey powder into each pill; they were to be repeated every four hours, one to be taken at a time—on 5th April, by Dr. Julius's direction, I made up a quinine mixture; that consisted of eight grains of quinine, a sufficient quantity of dilute sulphuric acid to dissolve the quinine, two drachms of chloric ether, and infusion

of gentian to make up six ounces; there were also fifteen drops of dilute hydrocyanic acid—the next medicine sent was a few more of the pills similar to those on 4th April; four of them, I think, or six—there was also a draught containing powdered rhubarb, tincture of cardamums, and magnesia—on the 7th of April the quinine mixture was repeated the same as before—on the 9th the same mixture was sent again—on the 12th six more of the grey-powder pills were sent, the same as those sent on the 4th of April; "the pills as before" was directed to be put on the box; I do not know how many were to be taken; it was one every 4 hours—on the 14th of April I made up another bottle of the quinine mixture as before—on the 17th another bottle of quinine mixture as before—on the 18th I had to make up a prescription with 12 drops of prussic acid of Scheel's strength; Scheel's acid is stronger than the ordinary Pharmacopoeia acid; I had not Scheel's acid in the surgery at the time, and instead of the 12 drops of Scheel's, I used the Pharmacopoeia acid, 4 drops in each dose, instead of 2 drops of Scheel's; that would be 24 drops in the mixture, instead of 12; my reason for that was, partly because we had none of Scheel's; I could have got Scheel's with a very little trouble; but the 4 drops of the Pharmacopoeia acid was not quite so strong as Scheel's would be, and I thought 2 drops a very large dose, and was rather nervous at giving it; I thought it rather safer to give under the dose than over it; Dr. Julius was not at home at the time, and I wished to send it at once, and I thought it the safest thing to do; the rest of the prescription I made up precisely as Dr. Julius had prescribed it; there were 6 powders to go with it to cause effervescence, to take with each dose of the mixture; those powders were citric acid, simply to cause effervescence—on the 22d of April Mr. Bird prescribed for Miss Bankes; the first prescription of Mr. Bird's that I made up contained bismuth, carbonate of soda, hydrocyanic acid, and water, and, I think, a small quantity of the solution of acetate of morphia (referring to the book); there were 7 grains of bismuth for a dose, 42 grains in the mixture; it was a 6-oz. bottle; the sixth part was to be taken at a time; there were 20 drops of the Pharmacopoeia dilute hydrocyanic acid, 20 drops of the acetate of morphia, 2 drachms of carbonate of soda, 2 drachms of gum-powder, containing bismuth in solution, and water; that mixture was to be taken 3 times a-day—on the 24th that mixture was repeated—on the 25th I made up 8 pills of acetate of lead and powdered opium; the dose in each pill was 1 grain of acetate of lead, and half a grain of powdered opium; one pill to be taken every 6 hours—on the next day, Tuesday, the 26th, I made up 4 pills of nitrate of silver; there was a quarter of a grain of nitrate of silver in each pill; the prisoner saw me make them up, and saw me weigh the nitrate of silver; he appeared to be very particular how I did it, unnecessarily so; I used great caution, and mixed them very well, and he requested me to do it more, with my hand; I asked him whether Mrs. Smethurst was better or no, and he said no, he thought she was in a very critical state; that was on Tuesday; at that time he also obtained some laudanum from me; he gave me a bottle that had had laudanum in it before; as nearly as I can remember, I filled it—I did not see Dr. Todd when he came on the 28th—on the next morning I made up some sulphate of copper pills; I sent 4; I beg your pardon, I sent 6 sulphate of copper pills; there was a quarter of a grain of sulphate of copper in each pill, and a quarter of a grain of powdered opium; one pill was to be taken 3 times a-day, about every 4 hours—on that same day there was some tincture of catechu sent, 4 ounces, and another quantity of laudanum; they were sent separately; I suppose they were sent for injections—on the morning

of the 29th, Dr. Julius brought to the surgery a bottle, apparently containing an evacuation; it was a 6-oz. bottle; it was not marked then; subsequently it was marked No. 1; I put that bottle in a cupboard, locked it, and kept the key in my own possession—on the following day, Mr. Bird brought a tumbler containing part of an evacuation; he gave it to me, and I put it in a bottle; I was very careful in the selection of the bottle, in the first place, and very careful to wash it as well; it had contained simply liquorice-water before I put the evacuation into it; I took the liquorice out, and washed the bottle, and then poured the evacuation into it from the tumbler; that bottle, and the one I had received from Dr. Julius, were then labelled; Mr. Bird was present; he wrote the labels, and I put them on; Dr. Julius's bottle was labelled No. 1, and Mr. Bird's No. 2; and I sealed them with Mr. Bird's seal, in his presence; it is a Turkish seal, with his name on it, I believe, in Turkish letters; when they were sealed, they were placed in a small basket, and given to young Mr. Julius, with directions to take it to Mr. Buzzard—On Monday, 2d May, I called on Mrs. Chetwood, the nurse, and took her to Alma-villas; I called at the surgery with her in a cab on the way, and took with me some medicine that had been made up; some hydrate of magnesia; that is an antidote to arsenic: I believe that was ordered by Dr. Taylor; if I remember rightly, Dr. Buzzard said so; I left that with Mrs. Chetwood at Alma-villas, with instructions how to use it—after the 29th of April, either Dr. Julius or Mr. Bird were always present when I made up the prescriptions; I must except the hydrate of magnesia; Dr. Buzzard was present on that occasion; I helped Dr. Buzzard to make it—we have two preparations of arsenic in our surgery; they are Donovan's solution and Fowler's solution; they are kept in a cupboard by themselves entirely, with other poisons, in a cupboard apart from other drugs—we have also antimony in the surgery, in the form of tartarized antimony, what is called tartar emetic, and antimonial wine; the tartarized antimony is placed on a shelf in a small bottle, with a small row of bottles of a peculiar shape, on a very high shelf; it is a row of bottles quite different from any other bottles in the surgery, and very small.

Q. In any one of the prescriptions which you made up, and which were sent to Miss Banker's house, was there any arsenic, or antimony, or bi-chloride of mercury? A. Most certainly not—after the death of Miss Bankes I gave some specimens of the bismuth, the sulphate of copper, the nitrate of silver, and the acetate of lead to Inspector McIntyre—they were taken from the same stop-bottles of those drugs from which the medicines had been taken that were administered to Miss Bankes—a boy named William Marchant took out the chief of the medicines from the surgery; another boy took a note, I believe, and I think one bottle of medicine; I am not quite sure; I delivered one or two myself in the early part of the illness.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Give me the date when you delivered the specimens of bismuth and other things to McIntyre? A. I really cannot remember; I did not make a note of it—I should think it must have been about a week after the death, but I really could not say; it might have been a fortnight—I gave it him when he asked for it.

Q. You have said something about Dr. Smethurst coming for these nitrate of silver pills; did not he come because you would have been unable to send for some time, and he wanted them as speedily as possible? A. I did not ask what he came for, and did not know—I do not make the mixing of the pills a matter of complaint; they are not difficult to mix, perfectly easy—I really mean what I say—I did not know what the laudanum

was for that I furnished to Dr. Smethurst—Mr. Bird lent him an enema—I sent it to him—I did not weigh the quantity of bismuth that I gave to the inspector; I gave him perhaps about two drachms, and I should think about the same quantity of the others—I don't remember weighing any of them—I gave fully sufficient to analyze—no doubt Dr. Taylor will know.

GEORGE FREDERICK JULIUS . I am the son of Dr. Julius—on the 30th of April I received two bottles and a basket from Mr. Bird—the bottles were sealed—I took them to Mr. Buzzard's, at 41, Great Marlborough-street, London, and delivered the basket and its contents to a female servant in the same state as I had received it.

WILLIAM MARCHANT . I am in the service of Dr. Julius, and take out medicines for him when they are delivered to me by Mr. Caudle—I took medicines to Mrs. Smethurst in Old Palace-terrace—I delivered them to Mrs. Robertson, who keeps the house; I have also taken medicines to Alma-villas, to Mrs. Wheatley's—I delivered them to Mrs. Wheatley—I remember taking a box of pills there—I did not meddle with them.

GEORGE ARRAY . I have delivered medicines for Dr. Julius for three years past, in the evening after 6 o'clock—I have taken some medicines for Mrs. Smethurst to Mrs. Wheatley's, at Alma-villas—I delivered them in the same state as I took them from Mr. Caudle.

CATHERINE MURRAY . I am servant to Mr. Buzzard, of 41, Great Marlborough-street—on Saturday, 30th April, I received from young Mr. Julius two bottles; I placed them on the hall table, that they might be there when Mr. Buzzard came in.

THOMAS BUZZARD . I am a Member of the College of Surgeons—I reside at 41, Great Marlborough-street—on Saturday, April 30, on my return home, I found two bottles on my hall table, labelled No. 1 and No. 2, and sealed with Mr. Bird's seal, which I knew well—I sent those two bottles by Hughes, my servant, to Dr. Conway Evans—on the following day (Sunday) the same two bottles were brought back to me from Dr. Evans with the seals unbroken; the bottles could not have been opened without opening the seals—on the Sunday morning I took those bottles myself to Dr. Alfred Taylor—after some hesitation, Dr. Taylor agreed to examine the contents of those bottles—the bottle labelled No. 2 was opened at that time in my presence, and about two teaspoonsful of the contents were poured out for analysis—(No. 1 was not opened at that time)—I then replaced the glass stopper, and took the bottles back to my house and locked them up—I then went down to Richmond, and saw Dr. Julius and Mr. Bird—I received a letter from Dr. Julius directed to Dr. Taylor; I delivered that letter, and the two bottles which I had locked up, to Dr. Taylor on the Sunday night—on the Monday I was at Dr. Julius's surgery, and prepared the hydrate of magnesia at Dr. Taylor's suggestion.

RICHARD BARWELL . I am a Fellow of the Royal College of Surgeons, and Assistant-surgeon and Lecturer at Charing-Cross hospital—I have been in practice about eleven years—I made the post mortem examination of the body of Miss Bankes, about nine o'clock in the morning of 4th May, twenty-two hours after death—I performed the examination; I was assisted by Mr. Palmer, of Mortlake—the back part of the body externally was of a dark purple, on account of being full of blood, from the position in which the body lay; I gathered from that that the blood was fluid, more fluid I should say than usual; the arms were perfectly flexible; the legs were very rigid; the feet were a good deal bent downwards and turned in, and the muscles at the bottoms of the feet were hard; that would indicate that there

may have been some cramp or spasm in the lower extremities of the body; the abdomen was drawn in; and the muscles were also tense and hard; the tongue was rough; and the papillae, the little rough eminences, were more elevated than usual—I saw no signs that I could put down as apthous—the face was much emaciated, and of a dull clay or earthy colour; and the lower lip was drawn in under the upper teeth; the front of the body generally was of this dull earthy colour—I examined the head; the result of my examination of it was that the brain was perfectly healthy, and that there was nothing whatever to remark except that there was the same engorgement backwards, on account of the position of the body, from her lying down, the fluid blood naturally gravitates towards the back—there was nothing at all about the lungs wrong; they were healthy; but there was the same engorgement at the back or lower part—I hardly examined the liver carefully at that time; I did not cut into it; I examined it afterwards, but I saw at that time that the liver was firm and full-sized, rather large—I examined the uterus; I found the common signs of pregnancy, and there was a foetus with a deciduous membrane a vascular fold attached; I believe it was somewhere between the fifth and seventh week; it is not a very easy thing to determine accurately; I think I could determine accurately within those limits; it was somewhere between the fifth and seventh week—the heart and great vessels connected with the heart were perfectly healthy; there was, perhaps, a little more serum than usual in the bag of the heart, the pericardium, as it is called, but nothing to amount to a morbid or diseased appearance—I examined the liver subsequently; it was slightly fatty, rather fatty, the remainder hard; the liver when it becomes fatty is usually soft, but in this instance it was hard, and it was coloured in the usual manner, speckled—the oesophagus, or gullet, was healthy; I saw no signs of inflammation upon it—the outside of the stomach, the smaller end, that nearer the intestine, was red; the larger end, that near where the gullet enters, was of a dark colour; in the center it was pale—upon subsequently examining the inside of the stomach the narrow part or small end was also red; at the larger end was a large black patch from effused blood; near the small end of the stomach the mucous membrane was congested, that is at the other end from the black spot and near where the red part was—the contents of the stomach were a brown mucus mixed with blood and some bile, I should say—there were no ulcers in the stomach, and no perforation, nor appearance of acute inflammation—I have some short notes of my observation of the intestines made for my own guidance—on the outside of the intestine I noted on 4th May, that was at the first examination, that the commencement of the intestine was very red; the small intestines generally were inflated and minutely injected with blood, and in certain spots they were roughened by lymph, the result of inflammation, and glued together at certain turns where this lymph or glutinous inflammation was effused; they were coherent together from that cause; that did not apply to the entire length of the intestines, only to a few parts, and chiefly quite the lower parts; those are the external symptoms—internally, the first part of the intestine, technically called the duodenum, was inflamed for about three inches from its commencement, but the mucous membrane was quite firm, and there was no ulceration—from that point the rest of the mucous membrane was only slightly injected, not inflamed—in the next intestine, the jejunum, the mucous membrane was still firm—in places the vessels were injected with it's own blood, showing the branching way in which the vessels run remarkably plainly, but this only in spots—then I go to the ilium, or lower part of the intestines—there was

much the same appearance at the commencement as in the last, except that on approaching the lower part the injections increased very much, and at last, about three feet from its end, the mucous membrane was greatly altered; there was a deposit of lymph therein, and a thickening of the membrane; an ill-organized granular lymph; the membrane at the same time was roughened, and the glands, which are in the intestine there, were less visible than usual—this deposit of lymph did not begin in the glands, but went over the whole surface of the intestine, and concealed the glands instead of rendering them more prominent.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Are you now reading from notes that you made at the time? A. I am reading from notes that I made; these notes were taken very short at the time of the examination, and were filled up afterwards; the next day or two days afterwards; it was within from twenty-four to twenty-eight hours.

COURT. Q. So that you can take upon yourself to say that that is a faithful report of what you saw? A. This report is a faithful report of what I saw.

MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. You say the deposit of lymph commenced with the lower part of the ilium, and not with the glands? A. It commenced at the lower part of the ilium, about three feet from its end—what I mean is, that the lymph, instead of being deposited in the glands, was rather around the glands at first—this brings me to the coecum—on the mucous membrane there were many large spots—the appearances within the coecum indicated very serious disease indeed; inflammation, sloughing, ulceration, and suppuration—those appearances diminished as I went lower down in the intestines—when I reached the termination of the intestines, the colon, there was still ulceration, but in a minor degree—in the rectum there were three ulcerations—I should also have said that in the coecum were black spots of effused blood, which were also found along the rest, and in the rectum—I have heard the evidence given of the symptoms exhibited during life, and the treatment adopted by the gentlemen who attended; taking those into consideration, and also the post mortem appearances, they are not reconcilable with any natural disease with which I am acquainted—I have seen a great many bodies.

COURT. Q. What is the conclusion you have formed from the symptoms that have been detailed and what you saw upon the post mortem examination? A. That the symptoms and appearances together, have resulted from some irritant administered frequently during life.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Have you stated all the material and important appearances that you observed upon this post mortem examination? A. Yes—I could state a great deal more, but I have stated all that I conceive material, and all that is material in my own mind to the formation of an opinion—I was examined both before the Magistrate and the Coroner—these are the notes of the post mortem examination (producing them)—I dictated, I may say, to Dr. Julius, who had a pencil and paper, certain short notes, which he put down; and when I reached home, I think even before the close of the day, I wrote out the first two pages—that was from notes taken by Dr. Julius, at my dictation—the second examination was made on 5th May—Dr. Taylor took some notes at that time—I did not go through the same process with them; I wrote out, when I came home, what I had observed at that time, and Dr. Taylor subsequently lent me his pencil notes, from which I may have added a little, or I may have altered—I should not have added or altered, except from my own remembrance of the matter—my note of the liver is, "large, pale, hard, fatty, and

speckled; first stage of cirrhosis"—I did not refer to my note particularly, when I spoke of it—that was written on 4th May; I have struck out cirrhosis here, because on the subsequent examination on 5th May I thought it was not a stage of cirrhosis—cirrhosis is a disease which hardens the liver; it is simply a thickening of the common cellular tissue of the liver; it arises frequently from drinking, and it arises from other causes, which I should have great difficulty in stating; I am afraid I cannot give you a popular term for it; it means a hardening, not of the liver itself, but of the cellular tissue of the liver; it is a disease which seldom, if ever, kills of itself; it would, after some time, produce jaundice, and then comes on a degeneration of nearly all the tissues of the body—that was the observation I made before I cut into the liver, when I had only made the external examination, before putting the parts into the jar—I should think the hardness was that which had existed always; it was a normal hardness; it was nothing extraordinary, nothing abnormal—I apply that to the whole of the liver—the use of the term "hard" does not imply that the liver had been diseased; the term "fatty" does—"fatty" implies that the liver contains a certain amount of fat which it ought not to have; it implies disease—the liver ought not to have this fatty appearance—it had hardly reached the stage of fatty degeneration of the texture; it was not a stage of cirrhosis; I have scratched that out; and I tell you that the liver was not in the first stage of cirrhosis—I made that observation from the liver being speckled—I have never attended a person who has died from slow irritant poisoning—I have never made the post mortem examination of a person who has died from slow poisoning—I believe the appearances between slow and rapid poisoning are different in degree—I tell you I have not made such an examination—I believe the difference is only in degree.

COURT. Q. Have you made the subject your study as a professional man? have you read of post mortem examinations made by others? A. Certainly.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Did you deliver an opinion on this subject before, or is this the first time you have been called upon to deliver an opinion as to the cause of this lady's death? A. I really forget whether the Magistrate asked me; I believe the Coroner did—I believe I did deliver an opinion before the Coroner, but would not be perfectly certain; I may or I may not; I can't say; I believe I did; I could not be quite certain—the liver is always speckled in health; that is its normal state or condition, it is nothing out of the way—the second examination, on 5th May, was made at Guy's Hospital, in Dr. Taylor's laboratory—no one assisted me—Dr. Taylor was present, and his assistant—I do not know his name—I believe he was only a chemical assistant—Dr. Taylor and I were the only medical persons present; the only persons that took any part in the examination—I took out the stomach and intestines on 4th May, to forward to Dr. Taylor—I delivered them to Inspector Mclntyre—they were placed in a jar—I sealed them myself—when I came to make the examination, on 5th May, that seal had been broken—I think the intestines were then on a dish on the table, or they might have been in a little glass closet that Professor Taylor has; they were not in the jar that I sent them in—I saw the jar on the table, but the contents had been taken out by Dr. Taylor before I came.

MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. I think I understood you to convey that there were no signs of disease about the liver, except this fattiness? No signs at all except that—that is not a disease of a nature to affect the coecum and the intestines in any way?

COURT. Q. Is it in any way connected with diarrhoea and vomiting? A. No.

MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. I believe Dr. Wilks also saw it? A. On a subsequent occasion I met Dr. Wilks there.

DR. SAMUEL WILKS . I am a Fellow of the Royal College of Physicians—in company with Dr. Alfred Taylor, I made an examination of the deceased's intestines—the examination took place in Dr. Taylor's laboratory at Guy's Hospital, on Saturday, 7th May, I believe—I found nothing that at all calls for remark until I came to the lower part of the bowel—I have heard those parts described by Mr. Barwell; I concur in the accuracy of his description, with the exception that I could not hear what he said about the liver—my opinion is that it was healthy, with the exception of its being slightly fatty—I have heard the description that has been given of the symptoms of the disease of this lady, and of the remedies applied—taking those into consideration, and also the appearances that I observed with Dr. Taylor, I should think her death was most probably to be attributed to an irritant—I am not familiar with any form of natural disease that would account for the symptoms and appearances.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. What is your position at Guy's Hospital? A. Assistant-physician and lecturer on anatomy; demonstrator of morbid anatomy—I examined the intestines on 7th May; they were then in Dr. Taylor's laboratory—severe dysentery produces great inflammation of the intestines, particularly the larger; it also produces ulceration—inflammation, if continued, results in ulceration and destruction of the tissues—the coecum and the rectum would be affected in that way by severe dysentery—dark spots of blood effused is also a consequence of severe dysentery.

Q. And may I take it that severe dysentery would produce the inflammamatory symptoms that have been described? A. I judge so from my reading, acute dysentery not being a disease which we are familiar with in this country; it is very rare—I have had but little experience in obstetric medicine; it is not a branch to which I have given my attention.

MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. Is dysentery the only disease that is at all similar in its appearances? A. The only disease—excluding dysentery, there is no other natural form of disease that would account for the symptoms—acute dysentery is sometimes called Eastern dysentery—it is generally considered to arise from a specific poison acting on the system—I have had the opportunity of examining a vast number of bodies—I have seen a number of persons at Guy's.

Q. Have you ever attended a case of acute dysentery? A. If I was to answer that question fairly, I should say that I have seen, in all my experience, two cases in, which we have not been able to arrive at any conclusion as to the cause, and we have been obliged to call them by that name; in those cases we only had the post-mortem appearances to assist us—they were not patients that I attended; they had died shortly after admission into the hospital, and after a strict investigation as to the cause of it, not being able to find any, they were put down as natural disease.

DR. ROBERT BENTLEY TODD . I am a physician of long standing—I am physician to King's College Hospital—I was called in to see Miss Bankes—I accompanied Dr. Julius to see her—I made inquiries of Dr. Julius previous to seeing her, as to her symptoms, and the remedies that had been applied—I did not learn from him that he entertained any suspicion that any irritants were being administered—I did not see the lady, until somewhat late

at night; I then proceeded to examine her in the presence of Dr. Julius and Dr. Smethurst—I felt her abdomen—my attention was attracted by the remarkable hardness and rigidity of the muscles of the abdomen, and there was a very peculiar expression of countenance, a peculiar terrified look, as if she was under some influence of fear or terror, which did not look to me like the effect of ordinary disease—the condition of the abdominal muscles suggested to me the presence of some great irritation within the abdomen—I cannot charge my recollection with ever having observed the same aspect of countenance in any case of acute abdominal disease that I have ever witnessed.

Q. You have heard to-day the list of the medicines read out, and had learnt from Dr. Julius the general medicines that had been given, and the symptoms that were exhibited, did you at that time form any opinion of what she was labouring under? A. I was very strongly impressed with the opinion that she was suffering from the influence of some irritant poison—it was by my desire that an evacuation was obtained, a part of a motion—I directed Dr. Julius to make up the prescription that he has mentioned, the sulphate of copper and opium—I suggested that—I also consented to the continuance of opiate enemata which were being administered—I have never known any bad effect produced by the sulphate of copper and opium—I have heard it stated that the prisoner said after the administration of one of these pills the diarrhoea was much increased, and that a burning sensation was produced in the throat, and from the mouth to the anus—I do not think that possible—I think the medicines directed to be given by Dr. Julius were substantially the proper medicines, supposing the form of disease to be diarrhoea and bowel-complaint; none of them, in my opinion, would have caused the symptoms that were said to have been attendant upon them—considering the post-mortem appearances, with the symptoms and the remedies, I believe that this lady died from the administration of irritant poisons—antimony, arsenic, and corrosive sublimate, are irritant poisons.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. You did not actually yourself examine the intestines. A. No; they were brought to me, but I declined to examine them—when I gave my opinion before, I stated that, in order to arrive at a perfectly accurate opinion, the intestines ought to be carefully examined; not a mere cursory examination—I advised the gentlemen who applied to me, to put the intestines into the hands of two competent men, who had more leisure than I had, in order that a very accurate examination should be made—I have never made the post-mortem examination of a body that has died from the administration of slow irritant poison; that answer includes the three poisons I have named—slow poisoning is of very rare occurrence—I have never known any case or cases of the early pregnancy of a woman of about 40 or 45 years of age, in which there has been violent vomiting, violent diarrhoea, and severe dysentery, which no ordinary medicines would stop, and in which the life of the mother has only been saved by the abortion of the foetus—no such cases have come under my cognisance—I think it possible that excessive vomiting and great diarrhoea may be caused by the early stage of pregnancy, and symptoms somewhat allied to those under which this poor lady died; but I think it is quite impossible that pregnancy alone, in an early stage, or in any stage, could produce intense ulceration of the bowels—I think where it is a doubtful case, it is conclusive evidence against the theory that the symptoms were caused by early pregnancy, that you have found such extensive ulceration as existed in this case.

Q. Have you yourself in your great experience ever come across cases of

dysentery, from which the patient has died, which you have been unable to refer to any cause? A. I have come across many cases of chronic dysentery, dysentery of a long standing, which were connected, generally speaking, with exposure to miasmata—I have not seen any isolated case of very acute dysentery.

COURT. Q. It is a thing that does not occur in this countay? A. Only as an epidemic under particular circumstances.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Are there not constantly cases of dysentery occurring here and there in this country? A. No; not of this kind.

Q. But dysentery generally; rapid and acute dysentery? A. No; the term is used, very clumsily very frequently for ordinary diarrhoea—the fact that this lady had been the subject of bilious sickness, and occasionally of bilious purging, and that she was of a highly bilious temperament, would not at all alter or modify the opinion I have expressed, not when the whole circumstances of the case have been brought before me; I mean the whole circumstances of this case.

Q. Supposing an early stage of pregnancy, in which you admit it is possible that violent diarrhoea and violent vomiting might occur, would not the fact that the patient had suffered from bilious sickness and bilious purging form any element at all in your consideration? A. It would during the life of the patient, but it does not affect my opinion in this particular case; I have got the whole case before me.

COURT. Q. Would it produce inflammation and ulceration? A. No.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Are you aware that there were greenish vomitings up to the 18th or 20th of April? did you hear Mr. Bird state that? A. Yes; that would direct my attention to another form of poison.

COURT. Q. What is that? A. Antimony; I mean the incessant vomiting of green matter.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Is not bilious matter green? A. Bile is not green; bile, when it passes into the stomach and is acted upon by the acid of the stomach, becomes green; if it was then vomited it would be green; that explains the green colour of the vomit—it would not be the green colour of the vomit alone that would direct my attention to antimony; the green colour shows great intensity of vomiting; it shows that bile is carried into the stomach; and when by a sort of inverted action, it shows that a large portion of the bowel below the stomach is involved in the effort of vomiting; it shows that the vomiting is an intense vomiting—what I mean to say is that antimony would produce intense vomiting—I have taken that into consideration in the opinion I have expressed; it is one of the elements upon which I formed my opinion; as far as the green vomiting goes, I explain it in that way—I have no experience of a case of violent vomiting in the early pregnancy of a woman between 40 and 45, which has only been checked by procuring the abortion of the foetus—I don't know that I was here when that was stated by Dr. Julius—I do not say it could not happen—by "experience" I mean my own personal experience, and my general knowledge and reading.

COURT. Q. In the term "experience," do you include your general learning, and acquaintance with the profession? A. Exactly.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. You must have read, I apprehend, of cases of very violent vomiting from early pregnancy which has been incapable of being checked by ordinary remedies, and where, in order to save the life of the mother, the foetus has been aborted? A. It is quite possible I may; but I do not charge my memory with any case of the kind—I am certainly

not prepared to say that it could not happen—Dr. Julius did not mention a word to me about irritant poison—he told me that this diarrhoea and vomiting had failed to yield to any of the medicines he had applied; and he stated to me that Dr. Smethurst was very impatient of the continuance of remedies, and that after each change of remedy the symptoms became worse—when I first formed my opinion, I stated that I had formed it not only from what I had observed in the bedroom of the dying woman, but also that I had been amply informed as to the case by Dr. Julius, as to the symptoms—it was then that I stated that, without a full examination of the intestines, I should not like to deliver a positive opinion—it was upon my seeing the patient and hearing the description Dr. Julius had given of the symptoms, that I at once formed a strong suspicion of the existence of irritant poison—I think I said arsenic, or some other irritant; I think those were my words—I cannot undertake to swear that my exact words were, "I said that I had a strong suspicion that this was a case of arsenical poisoning."

COURT. Q. Or that they were not? A. Or that they were not—my impression is that that is not a correct statement of what I said; I said, "arsenic, or some other irritant poisoning."

MR. SERJANT PARRY . Q. Did she complain to you of the sensation of a ball in the throat? A. I understand that she complained of the sensation of a ball in the throat, and of a burning sensation in her throat—as to the look of fear on the face which I have described, it is scarcely a question of degree; I do not think I ever saw such an expression in connexion with ordinary disease.

COURT. Q. Was it what medical men call anxiety? A. No; it was not anxiety, it was something beyond that, it was terror.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Where there is great exhaustion and great debility, is there not always a look of anxiety. A. There is a peculiar look which a practised eye is familiar with, but it is very different from that—I was not with her very long making these observations, more than five minutes—I really cannot say the time, for I did not look at my watch; perhaps about ten minutes; I was in the house longer than that, a good deal—I was observing her perhaps about ten minutes—I was there a sufficient time to enable me to form a judgment of what was proper to do in the case—I did not think it necessary to ask her many questions; she said very little to me—I have nothing to do with midwifery, or that branch of the profession.

COURT. Q. It forms no part of your practice? A. No.

MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. You used the expression that you formed a judgment from the circumstances of this case; do you by that mean the medical facts alone, or all the circumstances? A. I mean simply the medical facts; I speak of it as a case in a medical point of view—the only form of dysentery that would account for any portion of these grave symptoms would be what is called acute dysentery—in arriving at a conclusion whether it was acute dysentery or not, the time of year, and the position in which the lady was living would lead to an inference—I should expect it more in the hot period of the year, and in a malarious or unhealthy neighbourhood.

HARRY SMITH PALMER . I am a surgeon at Mortlake. On 4th May I placed the stomach and part of the intestines, at the house in Alma-villas, in a jar, and delivered them to Inspector McIntyre—the following day I placed the kidneys and some blood in a jar, sealed it up, and gave it to Mclntyre to take to Dr. Taylor—they were portions of the body of Miss Bankes.

ROBERT GRAHAM MCINTYRE . I am the inspector of police at Richmond—on Monday, 2d May, I apprehended the prisoner on a warrant which I received from the Magistrate on a charge of administering poison—he was

taken before the Magistrate at Richmond—Miss Bankes was at that time alive—he was allowed to go at large on his own recognizance that afternoon—the prisoner said before the Magistrate, that the poor lady might die in his absence; it was essentially necessary he should be with her—when I apprehended him I searched him, I found on him two letters, some keys, and a knife; these are the letters (produced)—I returned with him and Mr. Bird to Alma-villas; Mr. Bird and the prisoner went into the bedroom where Miss Bankes was, and they handed out to me a number of bottles and pill-boxes—I afterwards delivered the whole of those to Dr. Taylor, at Guy's Hospital—I searched other parts of the house at that time, boxes and things—I examined the secretary on the landing—the prisoner was at liberty the whole of the evening and night of that day, up to 11 o'clock the following morning—soon after 11I heard of the death of Miss Bankes, and I then took him into custody on the charge of murder—on that day I took possession of some other bottles, which had not been given to me the day before—on 5th May, two days after the death, I received from Mr. Palmer a bottle and a jar, which I delivered to Dr. Taylor, at Guy's—I afterwards received two other bottles which I took to Dr. Taylor; I believe I also received those from Mr. Palmer—a case of homoepathic medicine was found in a box in the bedroom, I gave that also to Dr. Taylor—after the prisoner was in custody, I went to No. 4, Rifle-terrace, and there saw a person who called herself Mrs. Smethurst—in consequence of the conversation I had with her I went to Kennington Church—on 13th May I received from Mr. Caudle four small parcels—they were sealed in my presence, I think with the seal of Mr. Bird—I took them also to Dr. Taylor on the 14th.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. How many bottles altogether did you receive? A. I can scarcely tell; I should think more than 30—the whole that I took away were given to Dr. Taylor for analysis—there was sugar in the secretary; I saw no tea—there were wine-bottles there; at least I took them to be wine-bottles; I did not examine them—there was some brandy in a bottle in the secretary, which I took, and gave to Dr. Taylor—there were drawers to the secretary, and there were clothes in the drawers—a policeman named Jukes was there employed under me—I cannot recollect whether or not the Magistrate, on releasing the prisoner on his own recognizances, forbade him to interfere further with the lady; he might have done so without my hearing it.

ALEXANDER MOCROSTY (re-examined). I have no doubt that this letter (the one found on the prisoner) is in Mr. Smethurst's writing (Read: addressed to "Mrs. Smethurst, 4, Rifle-terrace, Queen's-road, Bayswater, London, Monday, 2d of May, 1859. My dearest Mary,—I have not been able to leave for town as I expected, in consequence of my medical aid being required in a case of illness. I shall, however, see you as soon as possible; and should any unforeseen event prevent my leaving for town before the 11th instant, I will then send you a cheque for Smith's money and extras. I will send 5l. I am quite well, and sincerely hope you are the same, and that I shall find you so when I see you, which I trust will not be long first. Present my kind regards to the Smiths, and all old friends in the house. I heard from James the other day; he said he had called on you, but that you had gone out for a walk. With best love, believe me, yours, most affectionately, T. Smethurst.")

At the request of Mr. Serjeant Parry the following letter of the deceased was here read:—"The Grubs, Withyham, Sussex, 18th Jan. 1859. My dearest Loo,—In reply to your very kind note, I am happy to inform you that I am now quite well, and take my rambles in the country, as usual, and with no

inconvenience, and with a deal of pleasure, for I am in a very pretty part. Since seeing you, I may say I have truly enjoyed the change, having had every happiness and comfort, and remain in the same fortunate condition; I am much obliged to all kind friends for their kind inquiries and good wishes. I shall write to Mrs. Williamson. Tarte has annoyed me much by his delay in paying the balance of the last quarter, as I paid Miss—her account, which has left me without cash; you will, therefore, greatly oblige me, dearest, by having the 11l. 15s. made up in a small parcel, and written "Cash" on the outside, and directed to me in the care of Messrs. Marshall and Snellgrove, until I send a note for it to them, for I shall have an opportunity of getting it so without charge. Please, dear, to leave it on receipt of this. Give my affectionate love to dear Tiny and darling child. I grieve to have so bad an account of darling Jane Hoffenden. If writing, give my fondest love to her; and, with many thanks, believe me your affectionate Isabella. Pray write soon, and all news. My sweet little Bob is well; he sings in the railway carriage. I am covered with plaisters, and am obliged to have flannel drawers. I send you twelve stamps for the shoes, with thanks."

ALEXANDER MCCROSTY (re-examined). Mr. Smethurst had an account with the London and Westminster Bank—I have the books here—on 7th or 8th April, and during the whole of April, he had a balance in our hands, of perhaps from 100l. to 150l.—that is simply from memory—I find an account of 71l. 5s. paid in to the credit of his account on 16th April—I don't know what the balance was to his credit on that day, perhaps 150l. or 200l., I dare say—I speak from memory only.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Does it remain or is it exhausted? A. I do not know exactly—his usual balance might be from 100l. to 150l.—we expect a balance of from 150l. to 200l. in small accounts—we do not open accounts except on those terms—we make a charge unless there is that balance.

MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. I suppose his drafts would have been honoured down to the last farthing? A. Certainly.

THOMAS BUZZARD (re-examined). I have seen patients for many years past—I was staff-surgeon in the army during the Crimean war—a large number of cases of bowel-complaint, in different forms, came under my observation at that time—I have been present during the examination of the witnesses, and have heard the symptoms of Miss Bankes described, and the post mortem appearances—I have no experience of any form of natural dysentery or bowel-complaint reconcilable with those symptoms and appearances, taken together; I should refer them to the action of some irritant substance taken into the system, either swallowed by the mouth, or injected into the bowels, or perhaps both—I was present when Dr. Taylor began to analyze the small quantity of the contents of the bottle, No. 2, that he poured out—he proceeded to test it by what is called Reinsch's test—he made an examination of the materials before he made use of that test; the materials were tested to ascertain their purity, their freedom from arsenic or other metallic poison—Dr. Taylor, that same evening, showed me some crystals, which I recognised as those of arseneous acid—I did not see them extracted—I saw no more of the process performed than I have mentioned; that is, I saw Reinsch's process applied to two tea spoonsful of the liquid—the result was that the copper wire introduced became coated with a dark grey substance—a further process was required in order to determine what the nature of that deposit was.

COURT. Q. And into that process you did not go? A. I did not.

MR. CLERK. Q. But was it on the discovery of the deposit of the grey metal on the copper that you proceeded to Richmond to obtain the letter which you brought back to Dr. Taylor? A. I proceeded to Richmond immediately after the metallic deposit on the copper, taking with me a paper from Dr. Taylor to Dr. Julius.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Are you a personal friend of Mr. Bird's? A. I am—I should imagine, from the note sent that it was not originally intended that I should make the analysis—I cannot explain why it was sent through me to Dr. Taylor—I was with Mr. Bird in the Crimea—our experience was pretty much the same, not entirely, but substantially—the patients were all males—I had been seeing patients long before I went to the Crimea, assisting some gentleman in practice—I was not then established by myself; since I returned from the Crimea I have been—I am on visiting terms with Mr. Bird, and with Dr. Julius—since this matter I have been in the habit of visiting them, and they me—Mr. Bird has called upon me several times, as he was constantly in the habit of doing before this—I have never attended a patient who suffered or died from slow arsenical poisoning—I have never made the post mortem examination of a body killed by arsenical poisoning—Reinsch's test was the only test that Dr. Taylor applied in my presence; that was to about two teaspoonsful of the liquid, two drachms—the rest I replaced at the time, fastened down the stopper, and sealed it in Dr. Taylor's presence, and took it home and locked it up; and that same night, on my return from Richmond, I took out those two bottles from the closet in which they were locked, and conveyed them to Dr. Taylor—when Dr. Taylor applied Reinsch's test in my presence, he commenced by taking an empty test-tube; he placed in that a mixture of hydrochloric acid and distilled water; he then introduced into that a bright copper wire, and placing the test-tube over the flame of a spirit-lamp, he boiled this liquid for several minutes; he then removed the wire from the test-tube, and we observed that it was as bright as when it entered the solution.

COURT. Q. What was the object of that? A. The object was this: very often arsenic is present in hydrochloric acid, and it was to ascertain the existence or non-existence of arsenic in that particular sample, and also to ascertain the cleanliness of the test tube.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Very often arsenic present in hydrochloric acid, you say? A. Yes; I understand so—it is part of my business to be acquainted with that fact; I believe it is not invariably found.

COURT. Q. But it is found so often, that Dr. Taylor thought it necessary to test this hydrochloric acid? A. Yes.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Does Reinsch's test consist of the putting a fine copper gauze into the liquid? A. Putting copper in; any copper, copper wire—on this occasion Dr. Taylor used a quantity of copper wire, thin wire—he put that into two spoonsful of the evacuation.

Q. Before that did he test the copper wire in any way? A. No more than by the process I have described; boiling it in the hydrochloric acid.

COURT. Q. Would that be a test for both? A. I don't think it would be much of a test for the copper, because the copper is not dissolved by it.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Then, in fact, the copper wire used by Dr. Taylor was not tested? A. I can't say that the copper wire was tested—the arsenical crystals were shown to me that same night.

MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. As long as the copper remains undissolved, the only question is the external surface, I suppose? A. Exactly; to take care that that is properly cleansed.

DR. CHARLES METCALFE BABINGTON . I am a Fellow of the College of Physicians, and am physician of Queen Charlotte's Lying-in-Hospital, assistant-physician to the Children's Hospital, and am a physician accoucheur—in the course of my practice I have seen cases of acute dysentery; it is nearly eighteen years ago; about six or eight cases then came under my notice—they were of an epidemic character, in Lower Chelsea; I think in 1847 I also saw two cases in the same neighbourhood—I am not certain whether they were epidemic; I only knew of the two cases—I have heard the evidence given here of the symptoms of disease under which this lady laboured, and also of the appearances which her body presented after death; I have also heard the remedies that were administered—taking all those circumstances into consideration, I do not think she died from acute dysentery—I should think that she died from having taken some irritant medicine; from the effect of irritant medicines.

COURT. Q. You call them "medicines?" A. Irritant poisons.

MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. Has your practice as an accoucheur been extensive? A. Yes, very large; I have delivered more than 2,000 women—I do not consider that the death of this lady was in any way attributable to the fact of her being in an incipient state of pregnancy.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Have you ever in your practice been acquainted with instances of very violent and severe vomiting and very violent and severe purging and diarrhoea in an early stage of pregnancy? A. Not in the early stage—it is a complication generally at the later period of pregnancy; I mean the diarrhoea—I have certainly been acquainted with it in an early stage—I don't think that advanced age has anything to with it—the condition of a woman between 40 and 45 years of age, pregnant for the first time, is not more critical in the early stage—I have known instances of violent vomiting in the early stages of pregnancy; not of violent diarrhoea; there are such cases recorded, certainly—I don't remember any of so severe a character as to endanger life; I do not know of any case in which the life of the mother has been saved under such circumstances by procuring abortion; not within the first three months of pregnancy; rather later, between the sixth and seventh month it is more common, I should say—I do not remember having read of an instance within three months; I would not pretend to say it was impossible, but improbable—I was present on the former occasion; I had been called upon to give evidence before that—I made a post mortem examination of the cases of dysentery that I have spoken of, assisted by the apothecary of the dispensary, in each of the six cases—I have no notes of the two last—I believe the six cases arose from an epidemic—that was in 1841; that was not the cholera year; the cholera years were 1832 and 1848—they were not cases at all in the nature of cholera; no symptoms like cholera; severe dysentery simply—they were accompanied by vomiting and violent retching—violent retching is a frequent symptom in the early stage of pregnancy, but it is not an unfavourable symptom, the patient is not at all the worse for it afterwards; on the contrary, it is rather looked upon by accoucheurs as a good symptom—I have not known, in my own practice, of cases of violent vomiting which was unable to be stopped; I have heard of such cases—violent vomiting would then become unfavourable, but as an ordinary symptom I do not consider it at all unfavourable—I do not remember ever to have heard of a case of violent vomiting without diarrhoea within the first three months of pregnancy, in which, to save the life of the mother, abortion has been procured—I do not know Dr. Barker, of Bedford.

MR. BODKIN. Q. Will you describe the points of difference that exist

between the present case, and the six cases in which you made the post mortem examinations? A. There was not the same amount of sloughing in those cases, that there was in the post mortem appearances described by Dr. Wilks; I mean of the coecum; there was not the same amount of destruction of the mucous membrane; the glands were in a different condition; in the dysentery cases, the glands were entirely destroyed, quite obliterated; and, in three of the cases, there was perforation of the intestine—the symptoms in those six cases were different from the symptoms of the case I have heard described to-day—there was no burning sensation of the throat in those cases.

COURT. Q. Is that burning sensation of the throat a sensation at all connected with dysentery? A. I think not; the burning sensation and constriction described, is not a symptom of dysentery.

MR. BODKIN. Q. To what, in your judgment, would you refer the burning sensation? A. To the effect of some irritant poison—in my judgment, there was no connexion whatever between the state of pregnancy, in which the deceased is described to have been, and the state of the intestines, as described by the witness.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Are you acquainted with Dr. Churchill, of Dublin, as an eminent practitioner? A. Certainly; not personally—I know him by his writings; he is well known in the medical world.

DR. LEWIS SQUIRE BOWERBANK . I have been for 23 years in the island of Jamaica, practising as a medical man—acute dysentery is a common disease in that country—I have seen a great deal of it—I have heard the evidence given in this case—in my opinion the symptoms and appearances are not reconcilable with any form of acute dysentery.

COURT. Q. You heard not only the symptoms, but the mode of treatment? A. I did—in my opinion the case is not reconcilable with any form of dysentery I am acquainted with.

MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. Are the symptoms and appearances reconcilable with any form of disease that you know? A. Certainly not with acute dysentery—some of the symptoms, I think, may be traceable more to acute inflammation of the coecum, and the head of the colon—that is distinct from dysentery.

COURT. Q. The course of this disorder beginning on 3d April, and ending on 3d May, does that correspond with the course of the disease? A. Not with the natural course of coeco-colitis.

MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. Bearing in mind all the symptoms, the burning sensation, the resistance to the medicines, and matters of that kind, is there any natural form of disease to which you can attribute them? A. There is not—I have had no practical experience of what is commonly called slow poisoning—from my knowledge, acquired by reading and otherwise, I should say that the symptoms described were the symptoms of irritant poison.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Is coeco-colitis a disease that is known? A. It is; it has been ably described by Dr. Copland, and also by M. Dupuytren—it would produce violent inflammatory symptoms, injection of the mucous membrane, and ulcers, and patches of effused blood about the coecum—the disease of dysentery is generally much more severe in a tropical climate than a temperate one—I have only been in this country five months—the dysentery I have observed in Jamaica has been amongst all classes and all colours—all colours and classes are liable to it there.

MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. In coeco-colitis, is the ilium generally

affected? A. Generally, more or less; the glands especially—the disease arises from different causes; cold may produce it, or the retention of the faeces, costiveness, and so on; or it may be the sequel to dysentery.

DR. JAMES COPLAND . I am a Fellow of the College of Physicians—I am the author of different medical works; amongst others, "The Dictionary of Practical Medicine"—I was in Africa in 1817, and at that time had an opportunity of observing a good many cases of dysentery, generally acute dysentery; I may add that I had opportunities of seeing a good deal of dysentery, in 1815 and 1816, on, the Continent, after the peace, where inspections were frequent in the French and German hospitals; I saw them merely as a spectator—I witnessed several post mortem examinations—I have been for many years practising as a physician in this country—I have been present during this trial, and have heard the symptoms under which Miss Bankes is said to have laboured; I have heard described the different remedies which were from time to time administered; and I have paid attention to the evidence with regard to the post mortem appearances—viewing all the evidence, in my opinion her death is not referable to acute dysentery—in my opinion, the symptoms during life, and the appearances after death, are referable to the exhibition of irritant poisons, either by the mouth, or by injection, given at intervals, or in small quantities, frequently exhibited.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Have you ever made the post-mortem examination of any animal body, human or otherwise, that has been killed by slow arsenical poisoning? A. I have not; I may mention that I have seen within the last few years several cases of slow poisoning by arsenic to which I have been called in; arsenic taken by mistake, or prescribed, and its use extended beyond the proper time; but in only one case, that I know of, has the case terminated fatally, and in that case arsenic was given by an iodate of arsenic—the gentleman who called me in in consultation inspected the body; I was to have been present, but was prevented from being present; he furnished me with the particulars of the examination—in the last three or four months I have seen, I think, two cases of poisoning by arsenic; one was from accident or mistake, and the other was from continuing arsenic for too long a period; they produced very severe symptoms of vomiting and purging; those two cases recovered—they produced burning pain in the oesophagus, down the gullet into the stomach; the stomach was obviously inflamed to a certain extent at the time, but whether the parts would exhibit appearances of inflammation afterwards, is a different matter—in a case of slow arsenical poisoning I should look for inflammation of the oesophagus, but I should not be disappointed in not finding it—I might expect to find traces of the poison in some parts of the tissues—I might expect to find it in the liver, certainly, and in other tissues; but if there was, as there would be, constant vomiting and purging, I should consider a considerable portion of the poison would be eliminated from the system—purging and vomiting do accompany slow irritant poison, if the poison be frequently exhibited.

Q. Would you not expect to find in the tissues of a body traces of the actual arsenic, of the metal? A. I have never made the examination.

COURT. Q. But referring to your knowledge, as a medical man, reading works? A. Certainly I should; I should expect to find a certain amount of poison in some of the tissues; I have said in the liver especially.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. That is what I mean; I do not mean the whole portion of the poison; but would you not expect, in a case of slow arsenical poisoning, to find traces of the actual metal in the tissues? A. I should

expect to find traces of the metal in the tissues, more especially in the liver, but I should scarcely expect to find much where there is much sickness, vomiting, and purging; because when a mucous surface is in a state of inflammatory action you have active discharge from the surface, and the other vital function of absorption scarcely takes place—absorption ✗n scarcely take place from a surface from which there is a constant discharge—vomiting and purging are not invariably the constant and continued attendants of slow arsenical poisoning; they are the general attendants—the poison may be exhibited in such a manner as to produce very little vomiting, although it may afterwards produce a great deal of purging—I have paid very little attention to midwifery diseases; I do not practice in that way—I am intimately acquainted with Dr. Herbert Barker, of Bedford; he was a pupil; he attended my lectures at the Middlesex Hospital.

MR. SERJENT BALLANTINE . Q. With regard to the inflammation that you would expect to find, supposing arsenic was taken through the throat, would it depend at all upon the mode in which it was taken and what it was mixed with. A. Certainly, to a certain extent at least; if no arsenic or antimony was found, but some small quantity in an evacuation, I should still entertain the opinion that the death was occasioned by an irritant poison, and, of course, the poison that is detected after death is the most likely to produce it; but poison may be exhibited not only alone, it may be combined, and combined with other substances which may mask their detection—I am unable to give a decided opinion whether that would be the case if antimony or arsenic, or both, were given as different times or at the same time—I have no experience on that subject. Adjourned.

Wednesday, August 17th.

COURT. to SAMUEL DARGAN BIRD. Q. Attend to this, (reading from the notes). "To the best of my belief the prisoner mentioned the visit of Miss Bankes on the 9th; he told me that the patient had been excited by the visit of the sister, and that it had done her a great deal of harm, upon which I said, perhaps she had better not come again"—is that correct? A. It is; but I stated before that I could not speak very certainly about the matter at all; I believe that that was so.

DR. ALFRED SWAINE TAYLOR . I am Professor of Chemistry at Guy's Hospital, a Fellow of the Royal College of Physicians, and a Fellow of the Royal Society—I have had long experience in enquiries of this nature—on Sunday, 1st May, Mr. Buzzard first called on me, about one o'clock, at my private residence—he brought a parcel wrapped up in paper—he told me it contained two bottles, and I ascertained that to be so—the cork of one of the bottles, No. 2, was sealed with a Turkish seal—in consequence of a communication made to me by Mr. Buzzard, I consented to test the contents of No. 1—I made no selection—he opened the parcel—I said, "I will test one, I shall not test both; I think one will answer the purpose of both"—he opened the parcel, and took out the first bottle that came—No. 2 was then opened, and a portion of the contents measured out, two drachms—I first tested my apparatus—I applied a process to see whether there was arsenic—my apparatus consisted of copper wire, hydro chloric acid, or muriatic acid, as it is called, of distilled water, and an ordinary test tube—I tested my materials, as also the vessels I used, and ascertained they were perfectly clean—I then used the same tube, the same acid, the same water, and having repeated the experiment with the liquid in No. 2, I found that a metallic deposit of a greyish steel colour had become attached to the wire—that deposit indicated the presence of either arsenic or

antimony, but I cannot say distinctly what metal, or whether there might not be mercury—I did not proceed further at that time—I desired to have the authority of a magistrate to proceed further—bottle No. 2 was then resealed in my presence, by Mr. Buzzard, and taken away by him—he also took away bottle No. 1—after he had left, I proceeded further with my process—the application had been made to me to do something to save the life of this lady; and though I do not make analyses on a Sunday, I thought it proper to come to a conclusion as soon as I could—I knew that the enquiry had reference to a living person, with a view of seeing what treatment should be adopted—I tested the liquid further by boiling some copper gauze in the remainder of the liquid that was in the tube, so that I removed all that could be deposited on copper from that liquid—I examined the copper under the microscope, and there I saw an appearance closely resembling metallic arsenic—I then proceeded further—I heated a portion of the gauze, coated with metal, in a tube, and obtained crystals of arsenic—this is one of the tubes containing the arsenic (produced)—I have no doubt that these are crystals of arsenic; not the slightest—the shorter tube is the one with the experiment performed—if you take the tube out, under the microscope the crystals are perfectly clear—in this little sediment, if you put it against a dark cloth, you will see a little ring of crystals—it is quite plain in the sun-light—I examined it still further—I have applied another test-tube, not to these crystals, but to some I obtained in the same way, a further examination of No. 5—a portion of the crystals are sublimed; I first obtained crystals from the tube; I then examined them by the microscope, and afterwards applied the test of nitrate of silver and nitric acid, and found that it was really metallic arsenic—on the evening of the same day Mr. Buzzard came again; he brought back both the parcels, and a letter with an order from Mr. Penrhyn, the Magistrate, to proceed further; this was still at my house—on the following morning I proceeded to analyse the contents of both bottles; I took two ounces of the liquid of No. 2, and made a still further examination by the same process, further to satisfy myself that there was arsenic—the result satisfied me that I was correct—I used a portion, of the copper gauze—I repeated the process and had the results on a stronger scale; that was the only difference.

COURT. Q. You repeated the same process you had used on Sunday; what was the difference in quantity? A. The quantity was more, but I did not estimate the quantity; the estimate I made on Sunday was with two drachms; supposing the drachms to represent the whole liquid, I calculated that there was less than a quarter of a grain in the whole four ounces of the evacuation, certainly less than that; it was evidently a very small quantity that was present—there is a point which I omitted respecting the analysis; I endeavoured to ascertain whether the arsenic was in a liquid state; that is, whether it was dissolved—there was a quantity of blood in the bottle; I filtered a portion of it, and I found arsenic in the filtered liquid, therefore clearly showing that there was arsenic in the blood contained in the bottle.

Q. Did you find anything else besides arsenic? A. I made a subsequent analysis and found copper; merely a trace; just enough to enable me to say that there was copper there.

MR. BODKIN. Q. Was there any indication or trace of antimony? A. None; nor of mercury, nor bismuth—the deceased taking a copper pill on Friday morning, 29th, might account for the copper—hearing that copper pills had probably been taken, induced me to search for copper—the great feature of the process I use is, that it detests all the metals at the same

time; bismuth, antimony, and mercury are all detected by it; it is the only process known to chemists, that will at once enable them to give an opinion upon the probability of any one of these four metals being present, antimony, arsenic, bismuth, and mercury—I examined the organic matter of No. 2, by the microscope, and found it consisted of fibrous matter, feculent matter, such as one sees in watery evacuations; apparently food changed more or less, and mixed with bile and blood; it also contained mucus—I did not perceive any indication of pus—I noticed nothing very remarkable in those organic contents, except this, that I came immediately to the conclusion, from the discovery of arsenic in the blood, that it was such an evacuation as a person labouring under that form of poisoning would probably pass—I advised immediately the use of the antidote for arsenic; the hydrate of magnesia—I examined the contents of No. 1 next morning, and found no arsenic, no metallic matter at all; the contents of it were simply biliary matter, foecal matter with mucus—there was no blood, merely feculent matter with mucus, and no metallic compound; no metallic matter at all; it was of a greenish yellow colour, rather of altered bile, biliary matter and mucus, feculent matter—I ought to mention that it had also a smell rather of feculent matter—on Thursday, 5th May, I received a large jar from McIntyre sealed up, which was found afterwards to contain a portion of the viscera, the stomach unopened, the spleen, the large and small intestines, the liver, part on the oesophagus or gullet, and the uterus or womb—and on 7th May I received other viscera; I received a bottle containing the two kidneys, and a small bottle containing blood said to have been taken from the heart—I received a number of medicine bottles from Mclntyre; I can hardly tell the number separately; I labelled both the bottles, packages, parcels, pill-boxes, and a great number of other articles; I numbered them all; they are in the hands of Mclntyre, I believe—the highest of my numbers was 26 at that date; I afterwards received others, making a total of 28; then there were others that followed on 14th May, which I numbered 29, 30, &c.; those are chiefly specimens of the medicines supplied from the surgery of Dr. Julius—I examined the contents of all those twenty-eight bottles or packages—omitting No. 5, and No. 21; I found nothing that it is at all necessary you should be acquainted with; I examined them with reference to arsenic—I did not examine them before—I examined the bottles containing the viscera—I first examined the uterus, I did not analyse it, but examined it; and I concur in all that Mr. Barwell has said respecting it—it was in an impregnated state; I agree with what Mr. Barwell says, between the fifth and seventh week, as nearly as I could judge—I next examined the oesophagus or gullet; there was only a portion of it sent, about one third of its length; that was injected on the mucous surface slightly, which indicated some cause of irritation of the throat—there was no arsenic or antimony in the gullet—I next analysed the stomach, and found none there—the appearances have been already described—I concur in them; it contained a yellowish liquid, coloured with blood—on analysis I found antimony in the small intestines in two distinct places; the middle portion of the small intestines contained the largest quantity, the other part was above and below; some was found both above that and below that, and some was found in the coecum—altogether the quantity was very small that was found in the body—I found some in one kidney, and there were traces in the blood of the heart, and traces of antimony in the blood from the jar; the drainings of the jar—the other kidney was not examined—there was none in the liver or in the spleen—I was assisted by Dr. Odling in the analysis, and we calculated that the whole quantity did not exceed probably

from a quarter to half a grain—I also observed that the coecum was ulcerated, and its lining membrane nearly destroyed throughout—the colon was also ulcerated; the large intestines were ulcerated more or less throughout, four feet of them, and in parts of them there were dark patches where blood had been effused, and patches of inflammation in the rectum, or rather of irritation—the most remarkable appearance was the almost entire destruction of the lining membrane; there was no perforation in any part of the intestines—I tested the contents of the stomach; the only remarkable point I can state is that there was blood and biliary, matter in the contents—the appearances were such as were described by Mr. Barwell yesterday—my judgment and knowledge suggested that some great cause of irritation was the cause of the blood in the stomach—there was no appearance of disease in the other organs at all to account for death; that is the spleen and liver, I observed nothing about them to account for symptoms or death—I next proceeded to examine the contents of certain pill-boxes, which I received on 7th May from Mclntyre—I found that they were what they were represented to be, and contained, one mercury, another silver, another copper; they were not all labelled, but the account I had of the prescriptions corresponded with the contents—of the pills containing metallic medicine there were four of the sulphate of copper; one was taken for analysis—by copper pills I mean pills containing a quarter of a grain of sulphate of copper, with a portion of powdered opium corresponding with what was prescribed by Dr. Todd—I found nothing but what corresponded to the labels or prescriptions—I examined besides an Indian rubber enema bottle and a glass syringe—I found in the wadding of the glass syringe, which I removed, traces of some white metal; it was neither mercury, bismuth, or silver, but what I cannot say; it was a mere trace of white metal—I then examined the large number of bottles and packets of powders which Mclntyre had delivered to me—there were two bottles of the bismuth; it looked to me as if an ounce or an ounce and a half had been removed from one; the other was unopened, and quite full; in the other bottles I found prussic acid, quinine, and sulphuric acid; that corresponded with the prescriptions—I examined also some sugar and tapioca, and matters of that sort, brought to me by the constable: I found nothing at all suspicious in them. Bottle No. 5 was among the articles delivered to me by Mclntyre, the inspector; it was unlabelled, and contained, I found on examination, 355 grains of chlorate of potass; I examined that, and found it was free from anything; it was what I found it to be—in the first instance I had to determine its nature by analysis; there was nothing to guide me to it—it is not muriate of potass; nothing of the sort; that is a detonating salt, an explosive compound, used instead of saltpetre in making explosive mixtures—that bottle has been broken since it has been in my possession; it is broken in two—bottle No. 21, about which an error arose, purported to be a bottle like the other medicine bottles with a label that I could recognise by the handwriting, corresponding to a quinine mixture; it contained about one half of a clear watery liquid, of a saline taste—I handed an ounce and a half of it to my assistant to boil for testing by Reinsch's process, as I had done with the other 20 bottles—I had not at that time Dr. Odling's assistance in applying that test—what I did with the bottle was this: on the 13th, I think, of May, in proceeding to the analysis, I found that, in using the test that had served my purpose throughout the whole of this investigation, that the copper was destroyed, entirely destroyed, and was dissolved; that seemed rather a remarkable circumstance; at any rate, it had never occurred to me in my experience

before; and thinking, from the appearance of the copper when first put in, that there was something like arsenic about it, I plunged a portion of copper gauze into it for a very short time; removed the copper gauze, examined it, and obtained crystals of arsenic; that was in an ounce and a half of it, about one half the quantity—I then put this bottle aside, and went on with the other analyses, thinking there was something remarkable about it, and wishing to have the assistance of another chemist in the matter.

COURT. Q. Did that lead you to suppose that there was arsenic in it? A. It did; Dr. Odling assisted me in a further examination, and we both came to that conclusion; it turned out ultimately that there was none—there was no arsenic or antimony in the fluid; the arsenic was found, by subsequent research, to come from the copper gauze we had used.

MR. BODKIN. Q. The copper gauze being dissolved, set free any arsenic that was in it? A. Yes; chlorate of potass is a cooling medicine, and acts as a diuretic—we had not tested the copper before using it by destroying it in that way; we had in the ordinary way by boiling it; but it was the chlorine in this salt that destroyed the copper—the test would have been one to be relied on if the effect of the experiment had not been to destroy the copper by the chlorine of the chlorate of potass—the arsenic was set free; our testing had not gone the length of guarding against that; that is to say, it is never necessary to dissolve the copper; as a general rule, in applying the test we never dissolve the copper—the chlorate of potass is a cooling mixture, and it is also moderately diuretic; it acts on the kidneys, and so far tends to carry off other matters—I have heard the evidence of the symptoms under which this lady laboured, the remedies applied, and the post mortem appearances; taking all the circumstances into consideration, I can ascribe the death to nothing but the action of irritant poison.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Were you examined in this case before the Magistrate and the Coroner? A. Yes; I think twice before the Magistrate and once before the Coroner—I have spoken of finding traces of arsenic in the evacuation No. 2; it was altogether less than a quarter of a grain—I have stated that it was about the hundredth part of a grain from the two teaspoonsful, and there were 17 teaspoonsful; 34 altogether in the bottle; and if the amount were the same throughout it would be about seventeen-hundredths of a grain, that would be the proportion of one-sixth part of a grain; I always reckoned it so; I think you will find in my deposition before the Magistrate that I stated it—I used the copper gauze that is here—I have got in my laboratory copper gauze, copper foil, and copper wire—this was a portion of the same copper gauze that I afterwards used with bottle 21—in every experiment I tested the copper to see whether it contained arsenic by boiling it, as I have explained to his Lordship—the copper was used in every other vessel, and observe, there was no change until the suspected liquid was added; that is, until the evacuation was added—from the copper I used in my experiment on bottle No. 21 I actually deposited, myself, arsenic in the liquid that remained; and the reason was this, it was the only bottle of the whole number which contained chlorate of potass, and it was the chlorate of potass which destroyed the action of the test—Dr. Odling assisted me; he made an independent experiment himself on the mixture, and came to the same conclusion that arsenic was present in bottle No. 21 in the liquid we were analysing: in that respect he was wrong, as I was wrong—besides Reinsch's test I applied March's teal to bottle 21, that is, to a portion of the same liquid

that I was examining, and which contained the chlorate of potass; I did not know fully then, when I was making this examination, that the chlorate of potass was present; I had to find that out—we found, ultimately, that we had deposited arsenic, but our belief at the time was that the arsenic was in the liquid—I stated that belief most positively, both to the Coroner and to the Magistrate—I made the discovery on the afternoon of the 20th—on the morning of the 21st I went down, and having communicated the matter to my friend, Mr. Serjeant Ballantine, he thought that it was such an important subject that it ought not to be for one moment concealed—I did solemnly, on my oath, before the Magistrate, and before the Coroner, state, more than once, that I had discovered arsenic in the bottle, and it was my belief at the time that it was there—Q. Were not your words before the Magistrate, "Understand, Sir; I tested all my tests before I made this discovery of arsenic"—A. That is, we tested them in the usual way in which they are tested for the application of this process—I have used the copper gauze for fourteen years, and I never found a trace of arsenic in it until this—I have given evidence before on the faith of this copper gauze, and shall do so again; but I shall take care not to put chlorate of potass in my liquid—I have made in this case seventy-seven analyses—arsenic was found, only in one; and if there were any strength in your remark, arsenic would be found in every one—I first gave evidence about this on the 21st of May, I think; I think it was the 21st of May; either the 21st or 20th; I think it was the 20th—I have a note of the day on which I attended; it was on Friday, May 20th (The deposition being put in and read, contained Dr. Taylor's statement that he found arsenic in the bottle.)

Q. At the time you delivered that evidence before the Magistrate and Coroner you firmly believed, did you not, that you had made a correct analysis of this bottle, and had discovered arsenic in it? A. Yes—and I firmly believed that that arsenic had been placed there at that time, not by my tests, but by somebody else—that did not enter as an element into my judgment—I intended by the term "the analysis," the discovery of antimony in the body—I did not include that, when I used the expression, "and from the analysis I have made"—I excluded it, in so far as this, that I told the Magistrate and Coroner that the symptoms were more referable to antimony than to arsenic—I am not sure whether that is in my deposition, but that is what I said, whether it is in the deposition or not. (The other depositions were put in and read. In the deposition of 20th May it appeared that the witness stated, "I can only account for death by supposing it to be the result of antimony and arsenic administered in small doses at intervals.") I have to state that I had not made the analysis at the time of the deposition which has just been read; therefore, I could give no opinion of the cause of death—at the time I gave that evidence, the result of it was this, that if this 6-oz. bottle had been full of the mixture that I analyzed, in each ounce there would have been a grain of arsenic, which would certainly have been a very serious mixture to administer to any one situated as the deceased was—the bottle I had was only partly full—I formed no judgment about the administration of this liquid to the deceased at all—we fully and finally came to the conclusion that it was the copper which had deposited the arsenic somewhere about the 7th June—I made my original analysis, in which this mistake was made, from half of the contents which had remained in the bottle—Dr. Odling took a portion afterwards to make his independent examination—we then sealed the bottle, and resolved to do nothing more with it—we did not receive special directions to analyze the remainder; we advised

it ourselves, considering the circumstances—the subsequent analysis was made in conjunction with Professor Brande; we asked him to be present—Professor Brande, Dr. Odling and myself were together—Professor Brande used Marsh's test—Reinsch's process was also used; no other, we had so little liquid to operate upon; there were only two or three teaspoonsful to operate upon; three teaspoonsful altogether—one teaspoonful was subjected to one test, and two to the other; one to Reinsch's, two to Marsh's—we then agreed that there was a mistake in the original analysis—my copper was tested before that; that led to the necessity of testing the contents of the bottle—by being tested. I mean entirely destroying the copper—we destroyed it with chlorate of potass, and also with nitric acid—the acid of the human stomach would have no effect at all in dissolving copper—I do not think it would—it might, to a limited extent, dissolve copper: to a very limited extent—it would be difficult to suppose that any quantity should be dissolved, because copper is not dissolved by acid except under the free access of air, which cannot get into the body—it might have a limited, or a very limited effect—my tests have been contested; they have been disputed sometimes; at least, they have been examined into—I never remember an occasion when I conscientiously believed my tests were correct, and they were found not to be correct upon further examination—I have no recollection of an instance of that kind occurring with Professor Rodgers—I never analyzed powders for the purpose of discovering arsenic with that gentleman; but I remember, eleven years ago, I had to give an opinion about his analysis here: I do not remember analyzing; I do not remember an instance in which my tests were objected to, I myself believing them to be correct, and afterwards finding that I was wrong; nothing of that sort, most certainly—I speak of chlorate of potass as a diuretic, and capable of carrying off the arsenic in the urine.

Q. Supposing no foreign agent of that kind to be used in cases of slow poisoning by arsenic or antimony, would you not expect to find traces or deposits in small quantities, more or less, of antimony or arsenic, in the tissues of the body? A. That would depend upon several circumstances—in cases of slow arsenical poisoning, I look, as a general rule, for arsenic in the tissues, and expect to find it—I communicated, by a paper to Mr. Penrhyn, that I had found arsenic in the evacuation; but not to Mr. Buzzard, that I know of—this was while the lady was living, and I judged it was passing from her body—I wrote a letter, I think it was to Dr. Julius or to Mr. Penrhyn—supposing there is no disturbing influence, we expect, as a general rule, in cases of slow arsenical poisoning, to find the actual metal in the tissues—the question was put to me, as to whether chlorate of potass would have any particular effect, and I said it would act as a diuretic, and carry off the arsenic or any mineral matter that might have been administered—before I analyzed this bottle, I had never had any actual experience of the effects of chlorate of potass in carrying off any mineral poison—when I found the chlorate of potass, I did not form this as a theory in my own mind to account for the absence of arsenic in the body, that it had been carried off by means of this diuretic; there are other causes which might lead to that in this particular case; that is not one; it did not enter into my consideration beyond this, that it acts generally as a diuretic; and the question put to me by Mr. Serjeant Ballantine was with regard to mineral matter, or foreign matter, not arsenic—(if you look at the depositions; you will see) whether it had not the property of carrying off foreign or metallic matter from the body—that was

the question—I was called in, in the case of Mr. Wooler, who was tried at Durham, for the murder of his wife in 1855, by slow poisoning—I went down by order of the Government—I made myself master of all the details of that case—there was no question there that the poison had been administered; the only question was, by whom—arsenic was discovered in the tissues of that lady's body, and in the liver—it was found in all parts of the body, more or less—I had to examine the liver and intestines—the total quantity I found was a grain—Dr. Richardson, of Durham, found half a grain, and she had taken the poison for seven weeks—I found a grain in the liver and intestines, taken together; that allows for calculation for the whole—there might have been more in the rest of the body, but I cannot say that—that was the whole I found—the liver is the great criterion; it is the great seat of deposition—I did not examine the stomach; it was examined by Dr. Richardson of Durham—I did not see it at all, and know nothing of the state of it from my own knowledge—I heard the evidence of some other gentleman about it (THE COURT considered that evidence as to this could not be given, not being within the witness's own knowledge)—As a result of slow arsenical poisoning the stomach might present this appearance, that all the groups of vessels might be gorged with blood, that might be so great as to be almost universal, I mean congestion of the vessels of the stomach—it was so in this case—there might be effused blood under the mucous membrane—there would be a great effusion, undoubtedly—in irritant poisoning there is generally effusion of blood—pustular eruption of the skin is sometimes the result of poisoning by arsenic, but it is not very common—inflammation of the conjunctiva, or lining membrane of the eye, is a frequent consequence of slow arsenical poisoning—it existed in Mrs. Wooller's case—I did not see her living; I only know it as a fact that I heard at the trial—I can state as a matter of science that it is so—inflammation of the conjunctiva is a frequent result of slow poisoning by arsenic—there is an eruption known to science called the eczema arsenicale; it has received its name because of its appearance on the skin in the case of slow arsenical poisoning—excoriation of the anus is a symptom in slow arsenical poisoning—great redness of the nostrils, and even ulceration, would be a symptom of slow arsenical poisoning—sometimes the mouth and the lips are excoriated—when the arsenical eruption takes place, it appears on the arms, and sometimes on the free and neck—the arms and hands are the parts generally affected—a hacking cough is a frequent attendant upon slow arsenical poisoning, where there is irritation in the throat,—a mucous discharge any way is always increased by the action of arsenic—I am not acquainted at all with instances of dysentery; I only know about it as a matter of general medical knowledge—I never attended any cases of dysentery—I do not practice or visit patients—my avocations are chiefly in regard to legal medicine—in antimonial poisoning a clammy sweating is chiefly observed where there are not discharges in other directions; where there is not diarrhoea—I have myself stated that that is what I look to as a consequence of antimonial poisoning—supposing the discharge takes place more from the bowels, then there is less from the skin; if the bowels are constipated, then these perspirations occur; still that is a symptom—if the bowels are constipated there will be a clammy skin; but if there is diarrhoea and vomiting, then the fluids pass out in that direction, and I should not expect it—in all cases of antimonial poisoning there is not invariably vomiting; it depends upon the dose—in antimonial poisoning I have recorded instances where there was no vomiting: one instance; but as a rule I expect it from the administration of doses of antimony—I also expect purging generally as a consequence—I believe

that a cold clamminess of the skin would exist, but not a feverish state of the skin—the administration of small doses of antimony would have a tendency to enlarge the liver, and to cause a deposit of fat, and sometimes to soften it; the chief thing is the deposit of fat—small doses of antimony have been found to cause enlargement of the liver and also to cause a deposit of fat on it, and also sometimes to render it brittle—this liver was firm, decidedly—according to my experience, slow poisoning by antimony has not a tendency to soften the liver, but cases are recorded in which it has softened the liver; I believe it depends more upon the amount of fat deposited—I have stated in a book that I have written on this question of antimony, before this case, about a deposit of fat being a consequence of it, and in a remarkable way, that at Strasbourgh they actually give sulphate of antimony in their food to fatten their livers—it has a tendency to soften the liver, to deposit the fat; I stated that in my book in the case of the poisoning of Ann Palmer; in the Guy's Hospital Reports there is a full account of that case.

MR. BODKIN. Q. After you had been examined before the Magistrate in the first instance, and had deposed, as we have heard read, to your finding arsenic in the saline draught, did you institute experiments for the purpose of ascertaining the integrity of the copper test, that you had used in your analysis of the evacuation? A. I did—Dr. Odling and I had a suspicion that the arsenic might have been an accidental impurity in the chlorate of potass; chlorate of potass is manufactured of sulphuric acid—we took scientific means of correcting our error—we subjected the same copper gauze that we used in the analysis of the evacuation, to certainly seventy-seven different experiments, and that is considerably under the number—in seventy-six there was no arsenic at all; the only one in which arsenic was detected was in the evacuation marked No. 2.

COURT. Q. Does the blunder that was made about the bottle and the mixture in it at all affect what you said in your examination-in-chief about the arsenic you found in No. 2? A. Not in the slightest degree—it would render it objectionable to employ copper at any time with chlorate of potass in that way, but it does not in the slightest degree affect the inference I have drawn, or the application of the test in the usual way—I have made other experiments since to verify and prove that; and sent some of the copper to professors in Scotland and Ireland to have it tested—I have been engaged in these researches twenty-nine years—I have never met with chlorate of potass in any analysis I ever practised before, and when I do not meet with it the test answers perfectly.

MR. BODKIN. Q. If half a grain of copper had been administered to this lady during life, would that not at all by any action of any acid in the stomach, account for the quantity of arsenic found in the evacuation? A. Certainly not—I examined two of the copper pills, and could detect no arsenic in them—the circumstances that have been put to me are sometimes present in cases of slow arsenical poisoning; some one or more of them may be found in a particular case—we never have two cases alike in all their symptoms—sometimes we find the irritation in the mouth, and sometimes inflammation of the conjunctiva of the eye; that is not produced by antimony—there is occasionally an irruption of the skin, but it is different to that of arsenic; it is very unusual—I have recorded one or two cases of it—I have stated that the groups of vessels of the stomach might be congested, and that they were so in this case—there was not exactly a sheet of blood, but still the larger vessels at the greater end of the stomach were greatly distended, and there was some small quantity of blood effused in their course.

MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. Did you examine the four specimens of medicine that you received from Dr. Julius's surgery? A. Bismuth, silver, and copper; they were all examined; the acetate of lead also—in ten grains of the sulphate of copper we found distinct traces of arsenic, in two of the pills, separately examined, as representing half a grain of the sulphate of copper, and two of the pills have been examined by Professor Brande, and Dr. Odling, with, I believe, the same result; there was not a quantity to be seen—I apprehend that the ten grains would contain a quantity we could speak to, but the two grains and the half-grain did not—there was none in the bismuth—there was no antimony in any of the medicines.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. How did you examine the bismuth? A. By Marsh's process only—I took what would correspond with a full dose of the mixture, and dissolved it in strong hydrochloric acid; I then placed it in a test tube and procured the gas which issued from the action of the zinc on the acid—I applied a test to it—that was by boiling it and applying a cold plate of glass or porcelain to it, and there was not the slightest indication of arsenic—that was the only test I applied—I was satisfied, because I found arsenic in bismuth in using the same process—arsenic is sometimes found in bismuth—it is perfectly efficacious for the detection of arsenic in bismuth, and there was none in the contents of this bottle—I have spoken of a certain quantity of arsenic being found in the evacuations, and a greater quantity of antimony in the body—I ascertained the quantity by subliming a portion in a tube, and estimating the quantity of crystals obtained by comparative tubes of weights of arsenic treated in the same way—the weights I tested it by were the 1/100th, the 1/70th, 2/100ths of a grain—I have materials by which I can easily weigh the 100th part of a grain—I sublimed the quantity in a tube, and kept it as a kind of standard to compare other sublimates with—No. 3 was brought to me—that is included in what I have stated—there was nothing in it.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY to MR. PALMER. Q. You were examined yesterday very shortly, I think? A. Yes—I did not give my opinion as to the cause of death—I made the post mortem examination with Mr. Barwell—we found the liver enlarged, hardened, and in, I believe, an incipient condition of fatty degeneration—I noticed that it was very much hardened in the left lobe—that might be the effect of continuous bilious irritation.

MR. SERGEANT BALLANTINE. Q. I believe you were not present at the time the liver was opened? A. No; I simply judged from the external appearance—we thought it best to send them up to Dr. Taylor.

DR. WILLIAM ODLING . I am a physician; a Fellow of the Royal Society, and a Professor of Practical Chemistry at Guy's Hospital—I assisted Dr. Taylor in analysing a portion of the intestines of the deceased—we used Reinsch's test, and Professor Taylor's gauze—I have heard Dr. Taylor's account of antimony being found in the tissues of different parts, I concur in the statement that he has made—I am satisfied that there was antimony present in the body—I also assisted in the analysis of bottle No. 21 with Dr. Taylor's gauze, and came to the same conclusion with him—I also partly assisted in testing a portion of evacuation No. 2 for antimony, but none was found—the result of my examination of the contents of the bottle does not in any way alter the opinion I then formed of the existence of arsenic in the tissues.

COURT. Q. You fell into the same mistake, I understand you, as Dr. Taylor did? A. Yes; that mistake did not relate to antimony at all—it would leave the results of the probabilities about antimony just where they were.

Q. Does the blunder you made about the bottle that contained the fluid at all break in upon the conclusion that a chemist would form of their being arsenic in any fluid that did not contain the chlorate of potass? A. In a case where the copper is not dissolved there is no fallacy whatever in Reinsch's test—unless the copper is dissolved the test is as good notwithstanding; it is the best.

MR. SERJEANT BALLANTIINE. Q. Have you been present during the whole of the trial, and heard the evidence? A. I have—I believe that the death was caused by irritant poison—there is not, to my knowledge, any form of natural disease to which I am able to attribute it.

Cross-examined by MR. GIFFARD. Q. Do you attend patients much, or are you principally confined to chemistry? A. I do not attend patients now.

WILLIAM THOMAS BRANDE . I was formerly Professor of Chemistry to the Royal Institution, and have been engaged in the practice of chemistry for fifty years—I was required to examine a portion of the liquid that had been in the hands of Dr. Taylor, with a view to ascertain whether, in reality, there was any arsenic in it—I examined a portion of it by Reinsch's test, and a portion by Marsh's test, and the conclusion I arrived at was that there was no arsenic—I have heard of the liquid composed of chlorate of potass; it turns out that that has the effect of dissolving copper—when matters do not contain any substance that does not actually dissolve the copper, Reinsch's test is in all cases an admirable one; in my opinion and judgment it was properly applied to test the intestines and evacuations; and in my opinion the result obtained was a correct one, one upon which I would act.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Do all nitrates dissolve copper? A. I believe not; some nitrates do—any acid nitrate would act upon copper—several powerful acids act on the copper; I do not know that all do—our object in the first instance was to get rid of the chlorate of potass, or to decompose it, so as to render it inert, which we did; and we then examined the liquid in question, and found no arsenic in it.

COURT. Q. But did you examine it by Reinsch's test? A. After having destroyed the chlorate of potass we did—I was not aware that the test would be inapplicable to such a compound—if I had applied Reinsch's test to that fluid, and the result appeared as it did to Dr. Taylor and Dr. Odling, I should have come to the same conclusion as Dr. Taylor did, that there was arsenic in the substance—the matter that has appeared since, is to a certain extent new to the chemical world—we have always been aware of the presence of very minute quantities of arsenic in copper, but we have never considered it as interfering in any way, until this particular case.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Then, until this case, you have had that faith in the copper test that you believed it would never interfere with the accuracy of the test; is that so? A. I have—I have not been particular where I got the copper that I am in the habit of using in the laboratory; I have generally got it rolled down from a piece of coin; from a halfpenny, which I considered to be pure enough for the purpose—I applied Marsh's test after I took away the chlorate of potass—I never applied Marsh's test with the chlorate of potass—I should presume there was nothing in the chlorate of potass which would interfere with Marsh's test, but I have not made experiments.

MARY SMITH (re-examined). Dr. Smethurst left my lodging-house on the Saturday, May 12th, I think, it is so in my book, and am not quite aware of its being incorrect—I am sure it was on the Saturday (Saturday was the 11th)—I never knew where the prisoner was on the 9th or 10th—I do not remember whether he was at home—I think it was on the 11th that

he made the arrangement to pay for Mrs. Smethurst to remain with me—it was paid on that day fortnight.

MARIAN GRABOUSKA (re-examined). Miss Bankes left my house on the 9th, saying that she was going to Clifton; but she did not leave town for two days afterwards—I only know that by a letter.

D. R. CARR (re-examined). I served a notice on the prisoner, dated June 29, 1859; it contained a notice that Professor Brande would be called to prove that he had analysed the contents of bottle No. 21, and that in his opinion it did not contain arsenic.

DR. FREDERICK GILDER JULIUS (re-examined). I heard the statement made by the prisoner, before the Justices, the first time he was taken before them—no deposition was taken—a charge was made of attempting to poison—his statement was that it was very necessary that he should go back to his wife; that her death might be occasioned by his absence, and that it was imperative that he should go; that everything that had been administered to her had been administered by himself, both of medicine and of food, and that if any metallic substance had been administered, it must have come from my surgery.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Did the Magistrates, at that time, direct or require him not to interfere further with the patient? A. I do not think it was addressed to him, but it was addressed generally; it was in his presence—it might have been a general direction, but he might have heard it.

MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE to DR. TAYLOR. Q. On what day did you discover the antimony? A. On 9th May.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. In your deposition of 4th May, you mentioned that you expected to find tartar emetic; did you not? A. Arsenic or tartar emetic, that is antimony.

The following witnesses were examined for the Defence.

DR. BENJAMIN WARD RICHARDSON . I am a Doctor of Medicine, and a Licentiate of the College of Physicians; I am also Professor of Physiological and Pathological Anatomy at the Grosvenor School of Medicine; I obtained the Cooper Prize and the Abernethy Prize in 1856; I am also the author of various works upon toxicology, and some upon medical jurisprudence—I have been in court, and heard the description of the symptoms under which the deceased, Miss Isabella Bankes, laboured—those symptoms, in my judgment, are not reconcilable with slow arsenical poisoning; not in the main.

COURT. Q. Or, I suppose, with slow antimonial poisoning? A. No.

MR. GIFFARD. Q. They are not consistent with slow arsenical poisoning? A. No; nor with antimonial poisoning; nor with both together—I will enumerate the symptoms which, in my judgment, are absent in the case of Miss Bankes, if it was a case of low antimonial poisoning: 1st, inflammation of the conjunctival membrane of the eye—2d, soreness of the nostril; the inner surface of the nostril—3d, a skin disease, peculiar to arsenical poisoning—4th, excoriation, amounting to absolute destruction, possibly, of surface at the orifice of the mucous tracks, the mouth, the anus, the vagina, and the lips—and, lastly and most importantly, above all, the entire absence of the peculiar nervous symptoms which characterize arsenical poisoning—the nervous symptoms I should expect to find would be frequent convulsions of a violent kind, in many cases; or, in others, where the symptoms may be prolonged, tremor of the whole of the limbs, a suppressed convulsion, in fact—although I might not find all these symptoms in every

case of arsenical poisoning, I believe it quite impossible that a case of arsenical poisoning could exist from which they would all be absent.

COURT. Q. You say the result of the post mortem examination, taken altogether, is not, in your judgment, consistent with arsenical poisoning? A. No; the inconsistency consists in this, that the inflammation which would establish arsenical poisoning was most demonstrated in that part which is ordinarly most free in arsenical poisoning; the inflammatory mischief was more developed in that part of the alimentary canal which is usually most free from mischief in arsenical poisoning—in chronic arsenical poisoning, the organ mainly affected is the stomach at first, while the large intestines, not unfrequently, are much less affected, excepting the rectum, the termination of the large intestine, which is affected frequently in arsenical poisoning—I put the coecum among the large intestines; it might be a point raised whether the coecum is not independent both of the large and small intestines; it was originally looked upon as a second stomach, but it is ordinarily included amongst the large intestines—I know that the coecum is very large in the rabbit, so as to give the appearance almost of a second stomach; it had just escaped me, but I believe it is very large—in chronic arsenical poisoning, the organs mainly affected, are the stomach and the large intestines, except the rectum—the small intestines are ordinarily affected.

MR. GIFFARD. Q. In your judgment is it possible for a person to be poisoned by slow arsenical poisoning without arsenic being afterwards found in the tissues? A. In my judgment it is quite impossible—it would make no difference whether the arsenic was introduced by the mouth or by any other means, or whether it was introduced in combination with any other substance—I have made experiments upon the subject and have my notes; the first experiment commenced on 20th May, this year, with regard to arsenic—in the first instance my experiments were made without any reference to the prisoner or any communication with him or his friends, but as a matter of science, after reading Dr. Taylor's account in the newspaper—I made them in conjunction with Dr. Webb, and I may add, that every experiment I made he has witnessed, and the majority also in conjunction with Dr. Thudichum—I took a large dog, and made a mixture of arsenic and chlorate of potassa; I gave it daily, arsenious acid and chlorate of potassa; I gave the chlorate in such excess as to insure a diuretic action—I gave it 16 days, giving small doses each day of the two, three times daily, with food, I gave 18 grains of arsenic; the full amount of 18 grains of arsenious acid and 365 of the chlorate of potass.

COURT. Q. How much did you give each time? A. About one-third of a grain for a dose, as near as possible, from one-third to one-fourth, and with a scruple of the potassa upon an average, but it varied a little; when the animal was ill it would not take its food; sometimes it refused its food, and then I had to vary the dose a little; I then killed the animal and made a post mortem and chemical analysis in conjunction with Dr. Thudichum and Dr. Webb—I found arsenic in the liver, in the lungs, in the heart, a trace in the spleen and in the kidneys, but by far the greater part in the liver. Q. That is what you would have expected to find if you went on feeding it and giving it arsenic, and then killed it suddenly and made the examination? A. It was a question whether chlorate would eliminate it; that was what I was aiming at; that was the chief object of the experiment, to show that chlorate of potassa does not eliminate it, that is the whole value of that special experiment chemically; I

would add that there was intense inflammation in the stomach of that dog, and in the lower part of the alimentary canal intense ulceration; the alimentary canal of a dog generally resembles the human—arsenious acid is what is ordinarily called arsenic; it is the white arsenic—I administered arsenic, the metal—when they talk of a grain of arsenic, they do not mean a grain of the metal, they mean a grain of white arsenious acid—I cannot say how much arsenic I found altogether, but there was abundant evidence of very fine mirrors of arsenic on glass—I will not venture to say that I found half a grain, or a grain; I could not venture to give that kind of evidence at all which was not determined absolutely by the balance—I did not take it for the purpose of making a quantitative analysis at all.

Q. Give me leave to say the value of the experiment is nothing if you give a dog arsenic day by day for 16 days, and then it is killed, and some arsenic is found left in it; is that all it proves? A. No; it was done to prove whether after arsenic had been given in small quantities with an overwhelming portion of chlorate of potassa, the chlorate would eliminate the arsenic as fast as it was introduced—I left twelve hours between the interval of the last dose and the destruction of the dog, which was purged and was sick in the meantime—I did not examine the motions, I did the urine, and found arsenic in it—I think I could really venture to say that I found one-fourth of a grain in the body, but, with your Lordship's permission, I would rather put it in this way; that if in the case of supposed death from arsenic I found as much arsenic as I found in the tissues of that animal, I should have no doubt about connecting the case with arsenical poisoning.

Q. All that the experiment proves is, that chlorate of potassa does not eliminate the whole of the arsenic, because it eliminated all but half a grain? A. But if there had been no chlorate of potassa given, as I shall show by a future experiment, the result would have been the same; the chlorate made no difference—I had given 18 grains in 16 days, and there was some arsenic left, but what I cannot say, in the tissues I examined—I examined a limited portion of the body; I think I could from that say that there was in the whole body half a grain, but what I meant was the amount of arsenic that came before me—I could not form any opinion how much was left in the whole animal; there were no data to guide me to such an opinion, not even whether there was a grain or half a grain; my attention was at that time directed to a supposed discovery of a mixture of chlorate of potass and arsenic in this case; I afterwards took two other dogs, and placed them under the same conditions, I mean living in the same way and fed with the same food, in the same way and gave the same quantity of arsenic, one had antimony and one had arsenic on alternate days; one with, and one without chlorate of potass, that animal died in eleven days; it had two and a quarter grains of antimony; I gave it three doses a day; that would be little less than one-third of a grain in each dose; the other dog was started at the same time, June 15th; it was commenced with the same day and continued in the same way, with alternate doses of arsenic and antimony—that third of a grain applies both to arsenic and antimony; this dog had chlorate of potassa besides; it had three grains with each dose—it died the morning after the other, on the twelfth day from the commencement of the experiment—the object of these experiments was to compare the effect of having the chlorate of potassa and the not having it, and it made no difference, either as regards symptoms, pathology, or the chemical result—I collected the urine of the dog that was taking no chlorate of potass, and found arsenic in that also, as well as in the other, during the time.

MR. GIFFARD. Q. In cases of arsenical poisoning does the arsenic always

pass away to some extent by the urine? A. Always—the symptoms detailed as having taken place in the case of Miss Bankes are not altogether reconcilable with slow poisoning by antimony, not taking them altogether; sweating would be one of the symptoms in a case of slow antimonial poisoning, profuse sweating, especially in the early stage of the process—a kind of pustular eruption is also a symptom—I have seen it in one case, and it is frequent.

COURT. Q. You have seen it in one case? A. Yes; where antimony was given in excess; that was not a fatal case, it was where antimony was continued for a long time and in large doses—it was virtually a case of poisoning, but it was given properly as a medicine—the pustular eruption appeared in consequence of the excess of the antimony; it was given in moderately large doses; the doses were one-third of a grain of the tartar emetic every four hours—I have seen no other case where the poison acted slowly, but I have seen two cases of acute poisoning by antimony, neither of them fatal—they had not pustular eruption; the attack was not long enough—I have seen no other cases of slow poisoning.

MR. GIFFARD. Q. As a matter of medical science and reading, would you expect to find those two symptoms, sweating and pustular eruption? A. They have been very commonly noticed in cases of this kind—I can only speak of the effects of antimony on the liver from experiments I made in 1856-7; it was a series of experiments that I performed on animals—there are really no data upon which to form a judgment of the effect of antimony on the human liver—it has been found softened—there is nothing of this sort recorded in any medical book that the profession at large can refer to; the evidence is exceedingly scanty—there have been so few cases of chronic antimonial poisoning carefully recorded—the liver is very imperfectly noticed in the best case of the kind, that is McMullen's case—there is a reference to it in Dr. Taylor's book—I hope I am quite understanding the questions; I am speaking only of chronic cases, where the antimony has been given over a long time; the case in question is what I should call a chronic case—in a case of slow antimonial poisoning I should expect an effect on the lungs, congestion possibly, from the great fluidity of the blood, which exists always in antimonial poisoning—I have no experience of that fact in the human subject, only on animals—if antimony were exhibited in small doses, I should expect to find it on analysis in the liver; that is from experiments on animals, and from experiments that have been made on the human subject, from what I have read, and from experiments—I heard Dr. Taylor examined—the liver is the great depot both for arsenic and antimony—I have not had very much experience of dysentery—I have seen a few cases; I can scarcely recollect how many; perhaps two or three in this country—I have suffered from it myself—the word dysentery is of very general import or construction; it is used very loosely—I should prefer to take Dr. Abercrombie's definition of it; he being the greatest writer on the subject, both of the acute forms and the chronic—my description of it would be a disease marked by purging, the matters thrown off by the bowels being tinged with blood, or mucus, or bile, not always the same in each case, but ordinarily, and marked definitely, occasionally or always, with blood, sometimes with shreds of membrane, taking on a form of dysentery, which I believe has been called, by the German school, diptheretic dysentery, more recently; attended not unfrequently with vomiting, intense thirst in proportion to the purging and vomiting; in fact, in proportion to the loss of fluid sustained by the body; and attended with great prostration and sinking—fatal cases of dysentery

are by no means uncommon in this country, if we take the mass of cases—the dysentery I have described, if carried to an extreme extent, would have the effect of injecting the coecum, and effusing it with black patches—I have never in my own experience met with a case of dysentery in the early stage of pregnancy—I have seen diarrhoea and vomiting.

Q. Having heard the description of the liver, as examined after death, in your judgment would Isabella Bankes have been a likely subject for dysentery? A. I think so; dysentery sometimes comes on of its own accord.

Q. You tell me that, having heard the description of her liver, you think she would be a probable subject of dysentery; I ask you whether, having heard that she was liable to nausea and frequent sickness, that would confirm or alter your view that she was a favourable subject for dysentery? A. So far, that it would point out that she was a favourable subject for disease of the liver—I mentioned that I had seen one case of diarrhea in early pregnancy—I know, apart from my own experience, that diarrhoea and sickness are met with in pregnancy—persons in the family-way are subject to diarrhoea as well as other people—I have met with one instance of diarrhoea arid vomiting as a consequence of pregnancy, arising from it—that was between the third and fourth month—I never met with it between the fifth and seventh week—the sickness and vomiting of pregnancy ordinarily increases, then decreases, and sometimes increases again—the earlier stages are those in which it is the most violent ordinarily—sickness is sometimes the very first indication of pregnancy—if a person were subject to bilious attacks I should consider them predisposed to irritation of the mucous membrane from any cause—I have analysed the ordinary drug, trisnitrate of bismuth, which is the form of bismuth usually administered in medicine, and every specimen of bismuth in London that I have examined contained arsenic—I have not made a quantitative analysis—as a matter of medical science, I am aware that arsenic is generally found in bismuth; the quantity varies very materially—the largest quantity that I am acquainted with is very nearly half a grain to the ounce; there are 480 grains in an ounce—I examined but one specimen myself, but I saw ten—the specimen that I examined came from Squire and McCulloch's—I have a patient to whom I have given bismuth as a medicine—I analysed the urine of that patient.

COURT. Q. How much did you give? A. Five grains of bismuth three times a day, from Tuesday morning till Sunday night, six days; that would be 90 grains—the urine passed on the seventh morning was subjected to analysis—I did it with Dr. Thudichum and Dr. Webb, and found arsenic—I could not give the quantity; it was a distinct evidence, a good metallic mirror in the tube, but I would not say that there was the fiftieth part of a grain represented—the medicine was commenced on July 26th this year (looking at a book), and continued to Sunday, the 31st, but I did not put the termination—it was for dyspepsia, a form of disease I frequently give bismuth for.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. Was it tried for this case? A. He being under bismuth I collected the urine; I did not find bismuth as well as arsenic—I used all the urine: and it would not have been chemically very easy to discover it—to work for the two is not so easy—I did not work to ascertain whether bismuth and arsenic passed—I did not doubt whether I should find both in the evacuation; it is quite impossible to say, because I never tried—I began the experiments on the dogs on the 26th May—it was a philosophical inquiry of mine, entirely; to ascertain whether the chlorate would pass off the arsenic—I had read the report of the examination before the Magistrate—I had read Dr. Taylor's

evidence carefully through, and then I got a dog to try it—the experiments on the other dogs were a continuation—I did not communicate the result of those experiments to Dr. Smethurst or to anybody—Mr. Humphreys, the solicitor for the defence, called on me and asked me, not in reference to the experiments, but as a scientific man, some particulars, without knowing I had been antimonising the dogs or giving the arsenic—it was not done so that it might come round to Mr. Humphreys' ears—I had communicated it to two or three of my fellow lecturers at the Grosvenor School; that is what was called St. George's School in Palmer's trial—it is the school established by Mr. Lane; and in order to distinguish it from the hospital, it is called the Grosvenor School—Mr. Lane has nothing to do with it now—I have not the slightest knowledge how it was that Mr. Humphreys called on me—I was not quite surprised—the experiments I made in 1856 were likewise to discover arsenic; they were not for the purpose of Palmer's trial; they were both before and after the trial—I did not mention them in that case at all—I was a witness in that case—I did not come to prove that the death was caused by angina pectoris; I gave evidence about it.

Q. In that case the imputation being, death by strychnine, you came to prove that it was angina pectoris? A. That it might be angina pectoris; I did not say that it was—I gave a case that was caused by it, and which was analogous to the man Cook's case.

Q. Were you not asked "Are the symptoms described in the evidence more like the symptoms of angina pectoris," and was not your answer, "Speaking scientifically, I should say that the person suffering under them was more likely to be labouring under angina pectoris." A. I cannot answer whether those were my words or not; it is not the effect of them, not if the case was put correctly—I in no way endorsed the theory of angina pectoris—I gave it on the trial of Palmer, who, it was said, poisoned a person by strychnia, but I gave no negative opinion about strychnia, it was affirmative all through that it was analogous to Cook's case, and that Cook's symptoms might be taken for what I had seen—I gave the opinion from a case of my own, that the death of Cook might be from angina pectoris—I did not say that the symptoms were more likely.

Q. Did not you say they were more like it than death by poisoning?—did not this pass: "Do I understand you to say that, in your opinion, it was a case of angina pectoris?" "I do; it accords with all the descriptions of angina pectoris by the best authorities." And did you not then quote Latham, Watson, Bolleau, Sir Everard Holme, and Ridge? A. Latham I quoted; that is, Latham on diseases of the heart, in 2 vols; but I quoted more than are there—the weight of what I said rested on a case that I had seen—my opinion was founded on experiments mainly, and on the best authorities—I do not dispute, in point of fact, that I went to support the theory of angina pectoris—I have not given evidence in other criminal cases; only before coroners' juries, not on trials for murder—I have given evidence eight or nine times before coroners; I cannot recall it at the moment; I have been neither on the part of prosecution or of the accused; they were cases where an accident had occurred, and I had seen the patient before or after death; there has been no prosecution—I have not been a scientific witness in any case except Palmer's; I was consulted on one criminal case, and gave an opinion, but was not called—on the 26th I got a large dog; I gave him 18 grains of arsenic in 16 days; I do not know how much came out, but a considerable quantity would be eliminated; the dog was kept tied up, or he would not have stayed; the arsenic was put in his food as long as he would take it; the fact is, he was made to take it, because if he did not he was

left without it; he took it very well—he took it in milk very frequently—the chlorate of potassa was made into a solution with the arsenic—he did not take the arsenic in milk, and the chlorate of potassa sometimes in milk and sometimes in something else—I mixed the two together first, in a solution, and it was put into milk sometimes, and sometimes it was mixed with chopped meat—I dissolved the chlorate of potassa by putting it into water, and to make sure of dissolution of the arsenious acid, I boiled it, and let it cool—I looked at the urine—the arsenic would go off by means of the chlorate of potassa—I did not examine the urine in either experiment, to ascertain the amount of arsenic eliminated—no part of my chemical analysis was quantitative—I did not once very nearly poison a patient myself with antimony—it was not a patient of mine, nor a friend's patient—it was many years ago—I think it was in 1848—I saw the case with a medical man—the patient did not die.

Q. I am alluding to a case in which you gave 15 minims to a stout, active, well built man, who asked you to prescribe, and to be careful (reading from the Lancet) "There was no mistake in the dose; the dose was taken, and from its result I lost caste with the patient for some time. I admit that the results were severe, and such as no medical man would expect from such a dose. There was no purging, but abdominal pain and griping." Is that your description? A. I beg pardon; you are referring to another case—I am not prepared at this moment to say how much actual antimony there would be in the sixteenth of a grain; it would be from the one-eighth to the one-sixteenth of a grain; from the one-twelfth to the one-sixteenth of tartar emetic—all these serious results were produced on a fine healthy subject—it surprised me exceedingly.

Q. I suppose after that you would not like to pledge yourself for the operation of antimony on the human subject; to give any opinion of the results to be produced? A. As a general thing I could—this was a stout active man; if it was a woman, who was not prepared to receive it, it would make no difference—frequently feeble persons bear it very well—sometimes it causes purging, and sometimes, in eases of antimonial poisoning, it causes costiveness—there are not sufficient cases to prove that it more frequently causes purging—it causes sickness and heat in the throat—it would depend entirely upon the general history of the case; but if immediately after taking medicine, heat is felt from the mouth, through the body, to the anus, through the whole intestinal canal, that would be in accordance with a large dose of copper—that would also be caused by other substances; but arsenic, immediately after taking, does not produce pain, nor does antimony immediately afterwards, not as it is taken—I do not think a sulphate of copper pill, with a quarter of a grain in it, would produce a burning sensation from the mouth to the anus—I have never prescribed it—any irritant poison given for a long time would produce that effect unquestionably—if a person had been kept under the influence of irritant poison two or three weeks, and a further dose of irritant poison was given, the effect would continue—if the irritant poison had been administered from time to time, in small doses, for three or four weeks, and a larger dose than usual was administered, it would produce purging, and it might produce a burning sensation through the whole intestinal canal—I would not say it would do that always—supposing a person to be suffering from violent irritation, however caused, of the intestines, there are medicines that could be properly given, that would produce such an effect—I believe the whole class of metallic medicines would produce that effect.

Q. You have already told me that the quarter of a grain of sulphate of copper pill would not? A. But I am assuming a healthy person—I did say that in a healthy person the effect would not be immediate, but would only be the result of a continuation; but that was with regard to arsenic and antimony—I agree that arsenic and antimony, given for a long time, would produce those symptoms to which I have referred—I would not say that the symptoms would not be brought on at once by arsenic or antimony administered for the first time—arsenic would produce it, especially as compared with antimony—I have never in my experience met with or heard of a case in which antimony and arsenic were used, each of them occasionally, on the human subject—the tests applied to the discovery of poison are not confined to cases where there has been only one poison used, but the majority of cases would be those in which only one poison was used—almost all the cases in which medical men have experience, are cases of one poison only—when I speak of dysentery, I do not speak of the Eastern form, not of tropical dysentery, but of the disease of this country—I have been speaking to you of what is known in medical science as acute dysentery—acute dysentery and Eastern dysentery are not necessarily terms used for the same disease—acute dysentery does not mean the dysentery of hot climates—there is a form of disease which in some districts differs from the dysentery of hot climates—I have never seen a body opened which died of any form of dysentery—the dysentery I speak of may occur in this country, either from a specific poison, or from disease of the intestines—I have never met with a form of dysentery which I supposed to be epidemic, or arising from the taking in of a poison—the form of dysentery which I should think a lady, with a liver like Miss Bankes, would be subject to, would be the form of sub acute dysentery; not dysentery arising from poison, but which is prolonged over a very considerable period—I do not mean chronic dysentery, but sub acute dysentery; something between acute and chronic, but too severe to be strictly chronic—that would not harden the coats of the stomach—it would produce a great deal of mischief in the bowels—it would not thicken them, but it would lead probably to a deposit of false membrane—it would not harden them, but a false membrane would—if there was very great congestion, the wall would be thicker.


Thursday, August 18th, 1859.

DR. BENJAMIN WARD RICHARDSON (cross-examination continued). If considerable rigidity of muscle is found upon a person after death, it indicates natural post mortem rigidity—I should not attribute it to any spasm during life, I should not think that—supposing the hands and the feet were inverted and rigid, it would be consistent with natural or other causes—it is not the result of spasm during life—spasm attends dysentery, and also cases of poison, slow or otherwise—I made antimonial experiments in 1856—this was not with a view of being a witness in relation to some antimony matters in Palmer's I trial—I was not to be a witness either in Cook's case or Palmer's wife's case—the appearance of the lady, in this case, indicated that she was a likely subject to dysentery—the liver was hard and large—I assume that it was indurated and speckled—a healthy liver ought not to be speckled—a liver in health is never speckled, the fat on the liver forms a basis of my opinion that there had been a chronic disease of the liver—I do not think I antimony would cause that—my experiments upon dogs teach me that it would not; not experiments on the human subject—I was an aceoucheur, but ceased to practice as such in 1854—I am of opinion that sickness, accompanied with dysenteric diarrhoea, in the early stage of pregnancy might

have been the cause of all the appearances that were exhibited in this case; sickness from pregnancy alone would not produce them—diarrhoea is sometimes an incident of and caused by pregnancy; it is not usual—the opposite effect, constipation, is not more usual—I connect the sickness in a pregnant woman with the diarrhoea, and the diarrhoea with the pregnancy, arising from sympathetic irritation excited by the pregnancy.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Did you give evidence in Palmer's case, at the request of Mr. Serjeant She? A. I did—I did not receive any remuneration for the evidence I gave; I refused it—the questions asked me on that occasion about angina pectoris were asked of me by the Attorney-General—I confined myself, at that trial, to a statement of the causes of angina pectoris, and the symptoms with which I was practically acquainted; I conscientiously and truly described those symptoms—I was once in practice as a general practitioner, and then I gave evidence before the Coroner, where I was called in by the Coroner to give evidence, as to the accident or cause of death—I had nothing further to do with the cases, directly or indirectly; I was summoned in all of them to give evidence—the burning sensation in the intestinal canal, and violent diarrhoea, and violent vomiting, are symptoms of irritant poison, but they are as well symptoms in cases of natural disease, such as violent dysentery—in cases of natural disease, where very great acidity is generated, that sensation of burning will be caused—if a dose of a quarter of a grain of sulphate of copper were administered to a patient it would not produce either violent vomiting, or violent purging, or burning sensation in the intestinal canal, but if the patient had been suffering from violent irritation of the intestines, arising either from natural or mechanical causes, the administration of sulphate of copper would have a tendency to increase that irritation—from my general knowledge, I know of cases of diarrhoea, vomiting, and burning sensation from pregnancy—I have known one case myself of diarrhoea and vomiting during pregnancy; I have not known any case, within my own experience, of diarrhoea, vomitings and burning sensation—I am acquainted, by my reading, with oases in which, in the early stage of pregnancy, a woman of from 40 to 45 years of age has suffered from burning sensation in the intestinal canal, and where there has been ulceration of the fauces and apthous spots on the tongue—it may occur during the early period; it may occur at any period—experiments on dogs and the lower animals have been made by the greatest toxicologists with reference to the effects of poison on the human frame; they are reported in all great works on toxicology; they form the great bulk of scientific knowledge in Europe upon the subject of poisons, and their operation on the human frame—I know of but one pure case recorded of slow antimonial poisoning; I know of but three in which the slow administration of antimony was said to have led to death—the materials for forming a judgment of the effects of slow antimonial poisoning upon the human system are very bare, as far as actual cases of poisoning human bodies has gone—I made experiments on animals in 1856; they had nothing to do with Palmer's case; there is not the slightest foundation for such a suggestion—after my cross-examination, and my attention having been called to all the points deemed important, I still adhere to my opinion that the deceased lady may have died from natural causes.

DR. JULLIAN EDWARD DISBROWE RODGERS . I was a professor of chemistry for 17 years, at the Old St. George's School of Medicine, which I resigned on my appointment to Known College—I am a registered Doctor of Medicine—I am not now properly engaged—I left the St. George's School about two years ago—I was examined as a witness on Palmer's trial—I am acquainted, by

my reading, with the effects of slow poisoning by arsenic upon the human body—I know a drug or chemical mineral called chlorate of potass—I am constantly called upon by Coroners to make chemical analyses of the contents of human bodies—I think I have the greater number of cases in London—chlorate of potass is in itself a perfectly innocent salt—I do not think that, supposing small doses of arsenic or of antimony were administered to the human subject, either in chlorate of potass, or chlorate of potass cotemporaneously administered, the action of the chlorate of potass would have the slightest effect in eliminating the poison from the system; if it did so, you would have no poison—if chlorate of potass was removing poison from the system as it was given, the poison would not have time to act as such; and consequently, it would be a kind of antidote; it would be administering poison with an antidote at the same time; that is, if it would eliminate it, but I do not think it would—I have made experiments—I have given chlorate of potass with both antimony, and antimony and arsenic, and arsenic alone, and I have found just the same amount of poison in the animals as though there had been no such mixture given as chlorate of potass—I believe that chlorate of potass is a perfectly harmless agent—it is largely prescribed by many practitioners, and used as a wash for sweetening the mouth—if arsenic or antimony were given in small doses to a human patient for a period extending over four or five weeks, I should, as a matter of chemical science, or as a matter of general science, medical or chemical, expect to find arsenic in the tissues, and antimony also, particularly in the liver; the liver is the great criterion—in a case of alleged arsenical or antimonial poisoning, the absence of the poison from the liver would cause me to doubt whether the allegation was correct—I should expect to find either arsenic or antimony under such circumstances in the kidneys and in the spleen as well; their absence would be a strong element in favour of that opinion—if I found poison in the blood, I should expect to find it in the tissues and everywhere; but if I found it in the liver, I should not necessarily expect to find it in sufficient quantities to determine its presence in the blood; it might be in the blood, but not in sufficient percentage, if I may so say—I do not believe it is possible to find traces of antimony in the blood without also finding it deposited in the liver—the blood in the heart must be regarded as a sample of the whole 28 lbs. or so that is circulating in the system: if you find it there in one small portion, you must find it wherever blood flows—in a case of alleged slow metallic poisoning, the absence of the poison from the tissues would raise the greatest doubt as to poison being the cause of death—my experience has been confined rather to chemical than medical researches—I have some medical knowledge, but I have not devoted myself to medical science or the pathology of diseases—I am a surgeon and apothecary—I have practised medicine—my specialty is toxicology and chemistry, not pathology—I am acquainted with the fact that the bismuth generally exhibited contains arsenic—I have in my pocket a quantity obtained from about six doses (producing some)—by another analysis I found upwards of half a grain in an ounce of bismuth—an ounce is 480 grains—I think Marsh's test for discovering arsenic in bismuth is not a correct one to have used, for I have failed to find it by that process, when I have found it by another of my own—I heard Dr. Taylor state that he used Marsh's test, and I would state, that in the way he performed the experiment there may have been arsenic there, and he not find it—the object of Marsh's test is to get stains of that character, by a flame on the porcelain—if you have a very minute quantity, you have a very slight stain; for instance, on this piece of porcelain (producing a piece), that was produced

by arsenic; but if the test had been made with a piece of glass of this description (exhibiting a piece of glass), this, not having a white ground, would not show the stain, which the white would—as Dr. Taylor made his experiment with a piece of glass, I say that arsenic might have been in the bismuth, and yet not be found by that experiment.

COURT. Q. Is half a grain the largest quantity you ever found in an ounce? A. I have never made the estimation before as to quantity, but I have had specimens that I have obtained such quantities from, that I should infer it would be larger—in that specimen the quantity I found was such as to make it improper to use bismuth as a medicine—I think that the state of bismuth in the medical market is not generally such that it is improper to use it as a medicine, only in some specimens—bismuth is frequently prescribed by physicians in cases where it would appear proper; and it has done injury instead of producing benefit; and I have very little doubt that that has been from arsenic there, and not from any fault in bismuth as a remedy.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Have you examined grey powder? A. No, but I am aware it is frequently impure; I know, as a matter of knowledge in my profession, that it frequently contains antimony—commercial mercury is used, and it is often impure; whatever would be in the mercury would be in the grey powder; I do not remember in what proportion, but I should think more than the arsenic I found in the bismuth—this I know more from what I have heard and ascertained, than from what I know from my own personal experiments—antimony is used in several medicines—if any traces of antimony were found in a body, the greatest caution should be used as regards attributing such traces to actual improper administration, owing to the circumstance that it is contained in a great many medicines that are innocently taken; in James's powder, for instance, and in a substitute for that, called antimonial powder; and then there is tartar emetic, and antimonial wine—in a case of actual slow arsenical poisoning I should expect to find the smaller intestines greatly injected and ulcerated in parts—I have not seen a case of slow arsenical poisoning or any slow poisoning; they are very rare—I have seen cases of rapid poisoning by large doses of arsenic, but not by antimony; four days is the longest time that I have personally known—from my knowledge of the effects of mineral poison, such as arsenic or antimony, upon the mucous membrane and the lining of the intestines, I should expect to find, in a case of slow arsenical poisoning, the stomach and the small intestines greatly injected and effused with blood, and ulcerated in parts; the absence of those appearances would make me hesitate in attributing the death to slow poisoning; I should expect to see the conjunctival membrance of the eye suffused and injected and red; that is considered almost a specific result of slow arsenical poisoning; my attention would be immediately directed to the lining membrane of the eye—I am aware that there is an arsenical eruption called eczema arsenicale; I should, from my reading, expect to find such eruption on the arms and shoulders in a case of slow arsenical poisoning—the lining membrane of the nostrils would be affected by arsenical poisoning—excoriation of the anus has also been observed, and all the orifices of the mucous tracks would be so—I should expect in a case of slow poisoning by antimony to observe as a symptom, whilst the poison was being administered over three or four weeks, a clammy perspiration of the body, a sort of death coldness; I may speak from my own experience there, for I have found antimony acting most injuriously upon persons—I should expect from the record of such things given by Dr. Taylor, and also from my experiments on animals, that in a case of small doses of antimony chronically administered, the liver would be softened—a great

bulk, by far the greater portion of toxicological knowledge, that is a knowledge of the effects of poisons on the human frame, is derived from experiments on the lower animals—the cases of poisoning of human beings where opportunities for observation have been offered are very rare—it is the practice of the greatest toxicologists, both here and on the Continent, to make these experiments continually; and they are recorded in the greatest works on medical science; many are referred to in Dr. Taylor's own book; they are in Christison, and in Orfila, the great French toxicologist.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. Is the St. George's School what is called the Grosvenor School? A. It is; it was the first school connected with St. George's—I appeared in Palmer's case, to prove that strychnia may be found in a body if once the patient has taken strychnia—I appeared for the defence; I gave evidence that no strychnia appeared; that it must be found if the party died of that poison; that is decidedly the case—I had practised on animals for the purpose of coming to a conclusion, not exactly for Palmer's ease; but Dr. Taylor had made a statement that it could not be detected, and I, being constantly consulted upon these matters, was anxious to determine whether that was the case or not; I have done so on this occasion; another gentleman from the Grosvenor School (Dr. Richardson) was also a witness then—if it is well ascertained that in an evacuation there is one-sixth of a grain of arsenic, I could form an opinion of how much arsenic had been in the body; if in an evacuation I separated the one-sixth of a grain of arsenic, I should be convinced that there was a large quantity remaining in the stomach somewhere or other.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. How long have you ceased to be connected with the Grosvenor School? A. About two years—the Grosvenor School has been established about thirty years; it is a laboratory where chemical experiments are constantly being made; the Governors of St. George's Hospital would not allow an anatomical school to be attached to it, and it was established, by Mr. Lane, some thirty years ago—it is a separate school of medicine, not connected with St. George's Hospital—if I did not find any arsenic in a body from which an evacuation containing one-sixth of a grain of arsenic came, it would lead me to doubt whether the experiment had been correct or not—I do not think it a wise thing to use a piece of untested copper to make an experiment with upon such an evacuation, nor a piece of re; I always used pure electrotyped copper for experiments—there is a means known to skilled persons who make experiments of this kind, by which the copper they use may be perfectly pure and free from doubt—when a man's life is to be brought into question, unless the copper be perfectly pure and free from doubt, it is a most dangerous experiment to make as regards the ascertaining the existence of poison; to use untested copper leads to error—at the trial of Palmer, and with reference to strychnia, I confined my evidence to the statement of what I believed to be a chemical fact, viz., that if strychnia had been administered while living, and had caused death, it ought to have been found in the body; that is still my opinion, and I am not singular in that opinion.

DR. JOHN LEWIS WILLIAM THUDICHUM . I am a Doctor of Medicine and Lecturer on Practical and Experimental Chemistry—I was a pupil of Professor Liebig—I also carried on chemical inquiries and investigations at the laboratory at Heidelberg, and received the great Prussian medal—I have heard the evidence in relation to the symptoms exhibited by Isabella Bankes, also the treatment and the post-mortem examination—in my judgment her death is compatible with natural causes—I have met with instances of pregnancy, with diarrhoea combined, though in early stages of pregnancy only; but I

know that such cases occur in all stages of pregnancy—in addition to the circumstance of pregnancy I should attribute the death of Isabella Bankes to diptheretic dysentery; I believe the term "diptheretic" dysentery is known everywhere; the name of diptehrites has been common these twenty years—taking the symptoms altogether, they are incompatible with slow arsenical poisoning; they are also incompatible with slow antimonial poisoning—in my judgment, the administration of chlorate of potass, either in slow arsenical or antimonial poisoning, would not modify the symptoms so as to make her death reconcilable with either—in cases of slow arsenical poisoning I should expect to find the stomach ulcerated—I quite concur in what Dr. Richardson and Dr. Rodgers have said upon the pathology that they would expect to find in the case of slow arsenical or antimonial poisoning—in either case I should expect to find the arsenic or the antimony, as the case might be, in the tissues after death.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. I want to understand the meaning of the terms diptheretic dysentery: we have heard a species of dysentery spoken of as prevalent in the East, is that the kind you mean? A. No; speak of dysentery occurring in Europe, and in this country—I do not speak of a form of dysentery originally arising from a bowel complaint and continuing until it becomes diptheretic; I speak of a specific form of dysentery called diptheretic dysentery,

COURT. Q. Have you ever seen it in this country? A. I have.

MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. Have you ever seen the body opened of a person who died of it? A. I have not—I have seen it in London—the case occurred in the New-road, near St. Pancras Church, in a private dwelling—it was when I was physician to the St. Pancras' Dispensary—it may be three years ago—I have also seen another case; it occurred in Bloomsbury—one case died—the body was opened in that case—I have only just recollected it—that was the case in Bloomsbury—I opened the body myself; nobody assisted me in the post mortem examination—that case occurred in Stratton-street, Bloomsbury—I found that there was a false membrane.

COURT. Q. Was that throughout the intestines? A. No; merely in the large intestines—that is why it is called diptheretic—there are several forms of dysentery, and that is one of them, well established in science—there is an account of it in some medical work—I am not aware whether it is mentioned in Dr. Watson's book, I have not read it—it is mentioned in Rokitansky's Morbid Anatomy, which is well known in this country—I do not know Cooper's Medical Dictionary, or Copland's Medical Dictionary—I have not read Dr. Hooper's Vade Mecum; I do not read such books; they are merely compilations.

Q. Can you mention any book in which one is likely to meet with it in the library of a medical gentleman with a reasonable library? A. I am sure that you would find it in Rokitansky's Morbid Anatomy, which would he found in the library of any gentleman of scientific acquirements; there is a translation of it published by a Society—diptheretic dysentery is mentioned in it—I pledge myself to that, that it is mentioned under that term in Rokitansky's Morbid Anatomy—in the cases I have alluded to I had observed shreddy matters of membrane pass during life, and I found a false membrane—I believe one of the cases lasted fifteen days, and the other very much longer; I dare say thirty-six or forty days—the one that died was somewhere about sixteen or seventeen days.

MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. Where are you lecturer on chemistry? A. At the Grosvenor-place School of Medicine.

MR. GIFFARD. Q. Are you a German by birth? A. I am; I study my profession in almost all languages—I have heard the description of the intestines in this case—a false membrane may be discharged and thrown off, or it may be made—it is not at all necessary to find it—it may be broken up and discharged—hearing that shreddy matters were found in the evacuations would confirm my view—I do not remember whether there were apthous spots in the mouth in the cases of dysentery that I attended—I made an analysis of grey powder—it consists of caustic, carbonate of lime, mercury partly oxydised, sinica, with phosphate of iron, arsenic, and antimony—I think there were ten materials in the grey powder that I analysed—there was more arsenic than antimony—I have not weighed it—I have also analysed bismuth—it was obtained from Hearon, McCulloch and Squires—there was both arsenic and antimony in it—I have not weighed it—there was quite enough to give a certain result—I can state positively there was both arsenic and antimony.

COURT. Q. Enough to be called a trace? A. More than a trace; enough for making several tests; enough to answer the test two or three times; there was quite enough to make an appreciable weight—in chemistry we never guess at quantities—I experimented with two drachms of bismuth in one instance, and I believe half an ounce in another—that would be 20 grains—I do not think I found a grain—I dare say there was half a grain; it is only estimation, from what I know of the bulk of these substances—I got the arsenic in the metallic form out of the bismuth—I cannot form any notion of the weight of it, because in all medico-legal analyses of any kind hitherto made, the total quantity of arsenic actually contained in the substance examined, has never been determined—I do not agree with Dr. Rodgers that the quantity of arsenic generally found in bismuth is not such as to make it improper to use it as a medicine; I think it is improper to use it as a medicine without purifying it.

MR. GIFFARD. Q. Is there a chemical reason for there being arsenic in bismuth, from the mode of its preparation? A. It is almost necessary, from the mode of its preparation, that bismuth should contain arsenic; that is to say, from that mode prescribed by the Pharmacopoeia.

MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. have not told us how much grey powder you analysed? A. I dare say, for the analysis, two drachms were taken.

COURT. Q. Do you know exactly how much? A. I do not, because I dissolved two ounces, and of that I took by measure about one-sixteenth part, or something of that kind; we do not always ascertain the quantity we are operating upon, not in qualitative analyses—the quantity is of importance, no doubt; but quantitative analyses are very laborious indeed—it could be done: I did not do it, because my occupation, and the time allowed, and all that, did not allow me to take the trouble—I dare say these experiments were made several weeks back.

MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. I suppose you were requested to make these analyses? A. I was; I do not know whether I was specially requested to make these analyses on the part of the prisoner—I was requested to make analyses, with a view of giving evidence for the prisoner; I have stated the result—I do not think I have any memorandum of the experiments—the grey powder I had was the ordinary grey powder which children take as medicine; they never take as much as five or six grains at a time; they take the one-hundredth part of a grain, or the twelfth of a grain, or half a, grain—the ordinary dose of grey powder I do not know, because I rarely prescribe it.

COURT. Q. Although you rarely do so, is it not one of the most common

remedies in the world? A. I regret to say it is—I know it is given in doses of from half a grain to three or four grains, to children.

MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. Then do you think that the arsenic in the grey powder poisoned Isabella Bankes? A. I never said anything of the kind—I do not think it poisoned her—I do not think it might have done so—it might have produced the apthous spots; I cannot say that it did; it is very possible, very likely—what are ordinarily called apthous spots on the tongue are not produced by arsenic—I say that the grey powder might produce the apthous spots in consequence of the action of the mercury—it would not arise, either from the antimony or the arsenic—grey powder is mercury rubbed down with chalk—I do not think that the arsenic in the bismuth had any operation upon Miss Bankes, but it had upon the analysis—I have already stated to what I attribute the symptoms in Miss Bankes a case; neither the grey powder or the bismuth had anything to do with her death.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Did you ever hear the absurd supposition that it had, until you heard it from my friend now? A. No; I never dreamt of so absurd a thing.

Q. Supposing bismuth to be taken which contains arsenic, and it is used, and in an evacuation traces of arsenic are found, such as the 100th part of a grain in two spoonfuls, as Dr. Taylor stated, might the fact of bismuth so containing arsenic reasonably and scientifically account for the traces in an evacuation? A. It might; if antimony was taken in a medicine, and a trace of antimony found in the intestines, that might reasonably and scientifically be accounted for by the presence of antimony in a medicine otherwise considered harmless—that is what I mean by saying that it might account for the analysis.

COURT. Q. All that would depend on the quantity, would it not? A. To a certain extent it would depend upon the quantity—if I could have ascertained it, I should have done so; but I have made more than 100 analyses in this case, and I really could not give the time to it, so as to make a quantitative analysis.

DR. FRANCIS CORNELIUS WEBB . I am a Doctor of Medicine of the University of Edinburgh, and a Licentiate of the Royal College of Surgeons, in London; I practice as a physician in London; I am Lecturer on Medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology at the Grosvenor School of Medicine, and am Physician to the Great Northern Hospital—I have bestowed great attention upon the medical evidence in this case, and to the whole of the facts relative to the cause of death, and I have read the depositions of all the witnesses, as well as heard what has been deposed to in Court—from all that I have heard, and from my experience as a medical man, I am of opinion that the deceased died from natural causes, that may be accounted for.

COURT. Q. You say that the symptoms, and so on, are to be accounted for by natural causes? A. Yes; and the post mortem appearances also.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Do you take everything into consideration? A. I do.

COURT. Q. The symptoms and the post mortem appearances all lead you to the conclusion that she might have have died of natural disease? A. Most decidedly.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. We have heard that this lady was in from the fifth to the seventh week of pregnancy; is that a fact which, in your opinion, ought to be taken into consideration in judging of the cause of her death? A. Most decidedly—if I had been called in to attend her, as a

married lady, and had been told she was subject to vomiting, I should, most decidedly have felt it my duty to ascertain whether she was pregnant or not.

COURT. Q. How would you have ascertained that? A. By a close examination of the symptoms; and by an examination of the mammae and the uterus—if I found vomiting and purging going on, I should not have considered the fact that the catamenae had appeared once, of any importance, because it will frequently appear once after pregnancy; that would not have prevented my examining into the existence of pregnancy.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. We heard that this lady suffered from nausea and sickness, and vomiting; are you acquainted with cases of very severe vomiting from early pregnancy? A. I am; in very severe cases of vomiting I know that the only way of stopping it, and saving the life of the mother, is to procure the abortion of the foetus—I am speaking of vomiting only—I know this from my study and reading—I do not know a case; they are certainly not cases of every day occurrence—the way in which pregnancy acts is by sympathetic irritation of the intestines—I am of opinion, founded on my practical experience and general knowledge, that severe vomiting, and severe diarrhoea, which would not yield to ordinary treatment, may arise from an early stage of pregnancy—if the pregnant woman, the subject of that severe vomiting and diarrhoea, was also subject to bilious irritation, that would increase the symptoms—in all cases of severe vomiting and diarrhoea, where great acidity is generated in the system, there in always a burning sensation in the intestinal canal, from whatever cause it may arise—I include the throat in what I speak of, and the whole intestinal canal; I have seen those symptoms in early pregnancy—if a patient who was suffering from severe dysentery and vomiting, and great consequent exhaustion, complained of the sensation of a ball in the throat, I should attribute it, if it was a female, to hysteria—I think there is a great distinction between what may be termed a ball in the throat, and the sensation of burning—great debility produces that sort of hysterical affection—thrush would be a popular word for apthous spots—such an appearance of the tongue might be presented during severe vomiting and diarrhoea, from whatever cause it might arise—I would say that appearance is observed in all cases of exhausting disease—I am aware that for the last few years it has been matter of observation in obstetric science, that that thrushy appearance of the tongue occurs—exhaustion was, no doubt, the immediate cause of this lady's death—I consider sulphate of copper, nitrate of silver, and acetate of lead, most incorrect medicines to prescribe in the case of early pregnancy—bismuth is perhaps an exception, if pure; if of an arsenical description, it would also be a most incorrect medicine to prescribe—I think the lead, silver, and copper most improper, and the bismuth, unless it was pure—I consider that such medicines would have more tendency to increase irritation of the intestines, if it existed, than to allay it—I am acquainted with a work by Dr. Hutchinson, of America, upon the diseases of pregnancy.

Q. Is the diagnosis of the body of Miss Bankes, taking the symptoms, the post mortem appearances, and the whole together, consistent in your judgment with diarrhoea and vomiting, arising from early pregnancy? A. I consider that Miss Bankes died of dysentery, made worse by the condition of early pregnancy—a burning sensation in the mouth is consequent upon dysentery, and the diarrhoea, and vomiting, of pregnancy—apthous, or thrushy spots, and ulceration of the fauces are also appearances that follow—all the symptoms that have been given in evidence, in relation to Miss.

Bankes, might arise from the vomiting and diarrhoea of pregnancy—I have read of cases of that kind which are fatal, and which sometimes baffle medical skill altogether—there is a disease known in this country called dysentery, which is fatal—I agree with Dr. Wilks, who was examined on the part of the prosecution, that cases of dysentery occur which it is impossible to refer to any particular cause—the two cases referred to by him in Guy's, which were styled dysentery, were in fact cases of idiopathic dysentery; a disease which is killing hundreds every year in this country.

COURT. Q. Does "idiopathic" mean that the disorder arises of its own accord? A. Yes; not from any poison or from any specific cause, as far as we know—I am aware it has been said there is a morbid poison arising in that case that produces it, but cholera here is idiopathic as much as any other disease.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. In a case of chronic dysentery which might last for weeks, would the symptoms be great weakness and emaciation? A. No doubt: a rawness and tenderness of the mouth and fauces would exist, with apthae and minute ulcers; that is often accompanied with great tenderness in the oesophagus, and a burning sensation along the whole of the intestinal canal.

COURT. Q. What would all this arise from? A. Dysentery.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. In a case of chronic dysentery would every bit of food taken produce a burning sensation in the stomach? A. Very probably, especially if the irritation of pregnancy was added; I am acquainted with a disease called coeco colitis; I look upon that to be dysentery, in fact inflammation of the large bowel—I heard Dr. Bowerbank speak of it as a natural disease; it is so—I have heard the stomach described as ulcerated, the mucous membrane obliterated and partly destroyed, coming away in shreds, and that blood was effused under the mucous membrane; that there were dark patchy spots and ulcers and an injection generally of the membrane—I agree with Dr. Wilkes that that might arise from dysentery; those are the appearances I should expect to find in dysentery—in cases of slow irritant poisoning, diarrhoea and vomiting with burning sensations of the intestinal canal, ulceration sometimes of the mouth, and a burning sensation in the throat, are symptoms which would unquestionably arise, they also arise from natural causes as well, most assuredly—irritation of the conjunctiva and injection of the lining membrane of the eye, and irritation of the skin accompanied by an eruption called eczema arsenicale, that has been frequently observed; I should expect in a case of slow arsenical poisoning to find the membrane of the nostril injected, reddened, and probably ulcerated along the edge of the alienasi and all the mucous orifices—there would be excoriation of the anus and of the vagina also—I have heard it stated that the deceased was said at one time to have had an affection of the womb—I have not seen a bottle of nitrate of silver produced.

DR. TAYLOR re-examined. A pint bottle, with some solution of nitrate of silver was found.

Dr. WEBB (continued). If there was a disease of the womb for which it was necessary to use an injection of nitrate of silver, that would probably indicate some ulceration of the cervex uteri; the neck of the womb—if there had been such a condition of the womb an appreciable time before pregnancy, I think it might add to the irritation of pregnancy—if I found a patient suffering from severe purging or diarrhoea, vomiting, burning

sensation of the throat and of the intestinal canal, the sensation of a ball in the throat, accompanied by ulcerous appearances in parts of the body, that would not, in my judgment, necessarily lead to the conclusion that she must be the subject of arsenical or irritant poisoning, and that alone; unless I found other symptoms, it would never enter my head—in the case of antimonial poisoning, I should expect to find a clamminess and cold perspiration of the skin; and, as far as any experiments that I have seen on animals go, I should expect to find a softening of the liver; but I cannot speak of the human subject—I think that a very large portion of the knowledge of the effects of poison on the human frame is derived from experiments on the lower animals—a large proportion of the use, the pathology of the parts of the body, is derived in the same way; every great fact in pathology is found out in the same way; the circulation of the blood and everything, and the use of certain nerves—Sir Charles Bell's division of the nerves has been very much confirmed, if not discovered, by experiments on animals—chlorate of potass is an innocent salt, and is used sometimes as a wash for the mouth; it would very probably be used advantageously in cases of foul breath—I am of opinion that it would not in any way affect the operation of arsenic or antimony if mingled with them—in cases of slow arsenical or antimonial poisoning, I should most decidedly expect, if death resulted, to find the poison in the tissues; as Dr. Taylor has said, the finding poison in the liver is the great criterion—as far as my reading enables me to judge, I should say that in cases of slow arsenical poisoning the small intestines are most likely to be affected, as far as their appearance after death is concerned—I have heard the appearance of the small intestines here, and I think their appearance and that of the stomach together are not compatible with arsenical poisoning—in cases of slow irritant poisoning, it is to the stomach and the small intestines that I should most immediately direct my attention, especially to the stomach—in cases of slow irritant poisoning, the inner coating of the stomach is very much inflamed from injection of the vessels; it is suffused with red patches of blood, and it would very probably be ulcerated; certainly inflamed—the duodenum is the upper part of the small intestines—if the coats of the duodenum were firm, and there was no ulceration, that is not an appearance which I should expect to find after slow arsenical or irritant poison; in antimonial poisoning, I should expect to find the lungs after death intensely congested and red—supposing a person had had small doses of antimonial poison administered to her, I should certainly not expect to find the lungs pale or perfectly healthy—supposing Mr. Palmer's account to be correct, that the liver was very large, very hard in the left lobe, that would most certainly be an indication of a long standing disease, and would be what I should expect to find where a person had been suffering for some considerable time from bilious irritation and chronic inflammation—it is as much the peculiar effect of arsenic in small doses to influence the stomach as I have described, as it is of mercury to produce salivation; arsenic acts on the stomach specifically as much as mercury acts on the salivatory glands, or cantharides on the bladder; I should say on the urinary organs; I speak of the kidneys and bladder together; and in whatever way introduced into the system—in cases of antimonial poisoning, I should expect to find the stomach reddened, congested probably, and a condition of apthous ulceration; that has been observed in the human subject in cases of poisoning by antimony—in every case of poisoning by arsenic in animals that I have met, witnessed, or been a party to, I have found the inner coats of the mucous membrane of the stomach

very much inflamed, very red and ulcerated—I should expect to find arsenic in the kidneys and the spleen from slow arsenical poisoning, as well as the liver; I should expect to find it in the liver first—I start with the liver as the great criterion, from the absence of these symptoms and appearances in Miss Bankes's case, I am fortified in my opinion that she died from natural causes—if I am testing a liquid for the presence of arsenic or any other irritant poison, in arriving at a perfectly accurate judgment as to the quantity, I ought to make what is called a quantitative analysis; that is done by actually weighing the whole that I find—any other mode of proceeding is likely to lead to the most erroneous results, most certainly.

Q. Dr. Taylor calculated that there was the 1/100th of a grain of arsenic in two spoonsful of liquid, and then he appears to have multiplied those two spoonfuls by the whole quantity of liquid, and arrived at the result that about one-sixth of a grain of arsenic was contained in the whole; would you consider that to be a safe or reliable mode in a case where the life of a human being is concerned? A. I consider it a mere guess, and of no importance whatever—I have made experiments on bismuth, and have nearly found a grain of arsenic in an ounce of it; that is between four and five tenths of a grain—I never found more than that, but I can swear it was a quantitative analysis—I have analysed qualitatively, and thought I found more, but I cannot swear to it; because, unless a quantitative analysis is made, no one can swear to a chemical quantity—the qualitative is to find the agent, the quantitative is to find the presence and exact measure; therefore, without a quantitative analysis, I should be very sorry to swear to the exact quantity—that applies to every chemical substance, to arsenic as much as antimony—I have not examined grey powder—I took part in the analysis for finding arsenic in the urine of a gentleman who had been treated with bismuth for some complaint, and a trace of arsenic was found in the urine—no quantitative analysis was made there; it was a very small quantity, but quite sufficient to be certain it was there.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. In the early part of your examination you expressed an opinion on the subject of inquiring into pregnancy; supposing you were called in to attend the wife of a medical man, and he assured you she was not pregnant, and her courses were in order; do you mean that you would consider further investigation necessary? A. If I found her suffering from vomiting and purging, which went on in spite of all my remedies, I should certainly—I am assuming dysentery coming on just at the same time as pregnancy, coming on with it probably, or soon after; coming on as other diseases would, with pregnancy; not directly caused by it, but pregnancy would make it more probable that dysentery would occur; as an independent disease, and then the two working together might produce results which would not be often attendant on such a disease—without pregnancy I should not have expected to find the vomiting so constant; vomiting is the only symptom—if you take the Registrar General's Reports, I think you will find that dysentery is a very common disease—in such a state of things the bowels would continue ulcerating, and would get worse and worse down to the death; the symptoms would become more aggravated, till exhaustion killed the patient; therefore I should not expect that any medicines given would check the disease—I should expect most frequently, I cannot say always, that when taking food or medicine the woman would vomit, and in such a state I think a quarter of a grain of sulphate of copper pill would produce the effect of irritation, and that it would increase the irritation—it might be very extensive throughout the whole of the canal, or not; such sensations

are very different in different individuals—diptheretic dysentery is a form of idiopathic dysentery; idiopathic dysentery applies to every case of dysentery which occurs without a particular poison of any kind, the Eastern form of dysentery, idiopathic, arising in India—there is a dysentery that arises from a natural poison, just the same as fever, and all those diseases arise—if I had been acquainted with all those symptoms I have heard described in Court to-day I should not have dreamt of poison.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. My friend asked you "Is dysentery common?" are you able to say how many cases of dysentery may have occurred in so many years? A. From 1848 to 1854, more than 15,000 persons died in England of dysentery; from 1850 to 1854, in London alone, dysentery killed more persons than pericarditis, or inflammation of the covering of the heart, thrush, gout, syphilis, insanity, quinsy, or remittent fever, respectively—the disease which I have so described in its numerical effects, is what I call idiopathic dysentery, and is perfectly well known in the medical world and to scientific men.

DR. GILBERT FINLAY GIRDWOOD . I am a Doctor of Medicine, I have had considerable experience in midwifery—I have delivered upwards of 3,000 women—I have occasionally met with cases of pregnancy combined with diarrhoea and vomiting; diarrhoea superadded to vomiting; and I have had cases in which pregnancy was combined with dysentery; on one occasion of a very severe character, but from which the patient recovered.

Q. In your judgment, if a person were pregnant, and suffering from dysenteric symptoms, such as you observed in that case, would it be proper to give mineral medicines? A. I should not give any in pregnancy, nor on any occasion whatever, unless I found it to be serviceable; not in any dysenteric case whatever, unless I made out the reason why I should give it—I would find out the immediate cause of the dysentery—in this country it generally proceeds from a disease, which has been very well expressed by a celebrated man, Dr. Copland, who has most admirably described the disease which is most common in this country—it commences in that portion of the intestine called the coecum, extending thence to the anus, inflammation of that portion of the intestine, ending in ulceration and death if it is not stopped—the best way to stop it is that which I adopted; the application of leeches to that portion of the coecum, which, if a careful practitioner exercises his fingers, he would be sure to find out—I have heard the symptoms which Isabella Bankes exhibited during life, the remedies, and the post mortem examination.

Q. In your judgment, was her death to be attributed to poison or to the effects of dysentery combined with pregnancy? A. I see the whole of the symptoms traceable to the dysentery, and to the consequent ulceration and exhaustion—that would certainly account for the appearance of the coecum—idiopathic dysentery would be a proper phrase to give it—that is a special disease originating in itself, one single malady, one single suffering—pregnancy and dysentery would quite account, in my judgment, for the diarrhea—I have had several cases of dysentery at the early stages of pregnancy, one of them very severe, in fact, contemporaneous with it, I would say, symptomatic of pregnancy—in many cases, instead of the usual change occurring at the period when women exhibit that change peculiar to them there has been some disease of diarrhoea in the early months of pregnancy; this would be much aggravated by a bilious temperament and any affection of the liver.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. Does dysentery usually commence with fever? A. The dysentery of all warm climates is always

accompanied with severe fever, but in this country idiopathic dysentery assumes a less severe form; it is generally what is called sub-acute, or chronic—the state of the coecum in this case in my view indicates a case of sub-acute dysentery, not of severe dysentery; of prolonged dysentery, but not severe—it does not necessarily follow that such a case would commence with febrile symptoms—there is not much fever accompanying dysentery in this country, which is prolonged beyond a few days—I make the distinction between the dysentery of this country and that of warm climates—occasionally there are cases of dysentery similar to that of warm climate, but they are not common; they depend upon a malaria—there was one at Clapham some years ago, which destroyed several boys—every year many persons die of dysentery, but it is the dysentery of this country.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Are the cases of endemic dysentery, which sometimes seize upon a whole neighbourhood, and carry off a portion of the inhabitants, clear and distinct from what you have described as sub-acute dysentery, known to this climate? A. You very seldom have this endemic dysentery in this country—all dysenteries are so for alike as to agree in genus and character—in forming my judgment in this case I have taken into account the dysentery which I know from my own experience to prevail in this country—the evacuations or motions in the early stage of pregnancy arising from dysentery, have become bloody—that is the character of dysentery—it is not dysentery unless the stools are bloody.

COURT. Q. How soon does that sanguineous appearance present itself? A. It may commence immediately, or it may not; that is, if it be the subacute dysentery, which is the result of neglected diarrhoea—it is a question of hours; or it may come on immediately after the exposure to the chance of dysentery—the disease commences after the exposure to malaria; I mean in acute dysentery—it comes on in a day or two in a case of acute dysentery—sub-acute dysentery is frequently the result of neglected diarrhoea, or chronic dysentery; chronic dysentery being one of the species of dysentery; you have acute, sub-acute, and chronic.

JAMES EDMUNDS . I am a surgeon, and general practitioner; a member of the College of Surgeons, in London, surgeon to the H division of police, and also to the Royal Maternity Charity—I am acquainted, as a matter of medical science, with the fact that in the early stage of pregnancy, vomiting and diarrhoea exist sometimes to a very severe extent; so much so, as sometimes almost to exhaust the patient, principally by the vomiting—diarrhoea is a much less frequent accompaniment; both resulting in sympathetic irritation of the stomach and bowels, being supplied with nervous energy of the same sort as the uterine—I have have had experience myself of one fatal case where pregnancy existed—this person was about forty years of age, perhaps a little more; she had been married ten or twelve years, she suffered from vomiting and purging, and severe burning pain in the abdomen, if the abdomen was touched it would give her great pain all up the right side, especially in the right flank; she was ill from four to six weeks; at any rate four weeks—she came to me occasionally four weeks before her death, and when she was unable to come out I visited her—in consequence of the extraordinary symptoms I observed in that case I made a post mortem examination of the body, and I believe that dysentery caused her death—I think the dysentery was complicated by vomiting, irritability of the stomach, attributable to pregnancy, and purging attributable to dysentery—purging is often a symptom at the early stage of pregnancy, and often a symptom of impending labour.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. What length of time did you say she had been pregnant? A. She miscarried at the seventh month, I think—I cannot speak to a week or so, but at any rate, it was about that time, during her illness, a week before her death.

COURT. Q. Then she was ill four weeks? A. Yes; she had gone on to about the sixth or seventh month.

MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. How long had you attended her before she died? A. I had attended her for more than a fortnight at her own house, some days three or four times a day—when the symptoms began she had been pregnant between five and six months—I treated her for dysentery—at first, as the vomiting was very severe, I gave her a cretaceous mixture; a preparation of chalk, opium, and prussic acid; at another time I gave her bismuth when that had failed to have any effect—at first the cretaceous mixture restrained the diarrhoea—that was when she came to my house—she was well for a few days—I think I gave her the bismuth when I was attending her; I also used sulphate of zinc, as an injection in the latter stage, when I felt sure there was ulceration of the large bowel at any rate—I administered it myself—I should use ten-grain doses of bismuth—I don't know the dose in this particular case, but that is what I should prescribe; five or tengrain doses—five to fifteen grains would be proper a dose—I did not use sulphate of copper, because of the vomiting, else it is a very proper remedy in dysentery, and recommended by the best authorities in the chronic stage of dysentery—the effect of the bismuth would be to relieve the vomiting—it did relieve it for a time, but not entirely; she never was free from vomiting; large quantities of blood came away from ulceration of the lining of the bowels—she resided at No. 6, Liverpool-buildings, Bishopsgate-street—this was prolonged dysentery, so called very properly by the last witness, where ulceration spreads and takes place, not in consequence of the original severity of the attack, but from the patient sinking and becoming exhausted—I examined the stomach and glands; the stomach was slightly injected, but not more than you find frequently in post mortem examinations, but in the liver, the bowels, and the coecum there was the most frightful ulceration; the whole lining membrane seemed as if it had been swept away; that is a strong indication of dysentery—in the large bowels, from the coecum to the rectum, there were ulcers on which you could lay a shilling, down to the rectum and including the rectum; not of equal extent all the way down, but nearly as bad, I think, in the rectum as in the coecum—I am speaking from memory, as I am here to day by mere accident, I was subpoenaed here yesterday in the other Court, in a case of stabbing—I felt it my duty to communicate what I have now stated on oath—the lining membrane of the coecum was almost swept away by the extensive ulceration—this case was not in the nature of an Eastern dysentery, which comes on much more rapidly, and kills more rapidly, you get suppuration of the whole track of the large bowel, and the patient is exhausted; it is a distinct feature—this is what is called prolonged dysentery, or sub-acute, which is a natural disease known to medical men in their practice; it is not often fatal—I never saw another fatal case, although I have, perhaps, seen fifty cases of dysentery—I am personally acquainted with the fact that diarrhoea, purging, and vomiting, and consequent exhaustion, exists in the early stages of pregnancy, but principally vomiting—I am acquainted with cases in which diarrhoea and vomiting have existed together—I gave bismuth; it had some effect in checking the vomiting; but ultimately I failed to check the disease by any remedy, and the patient threatened to sink from exhaustion, purging, and loss of blood;

I then gave large doses of ipecacuanha; gradually every medical aid failed to interrupt or stop the disease.

DR. WILLIAM TYLER SMITH . I am a physician-accoucheur—I have for more than fifteen years devoted myself to midwifery and the diseases of women and children—I am the author of a book called "The Manual of Obstetrics," and of several other works—I am a Member of the Royal College of Physicians, and a Doctor of Medicine of the University of London—I have been present during very little of the medical evidence in this case—excessive vomiting in the early part of pregnancy is often met with; sometimes from the very earliest period—I am acquainted with instances in which this excessive vomiting in pregnancy has caused death; cases which have yielded to no medical treatment and ended in death—where symptoms of vomiting and general intestinal disturbance occur at the beginning of pregnancy, it would be advisable to ascertain whether pregnancy does actually exist; if I were called in to a patient, a married woman, suffering from vomiting and intestinal disorder during the child-bearing period, I should certainly think of pregnancy amongst other causes, and should do my best to ascertain whether it existed or not—sometimes the periods go on after pregnancy has commenced; in some cases during the whole of pregnancy, but those are exceptional cases, they not unfrequently happen—excessive vomiting would be one of the marked signs of pregnancy, just as the cessation of the monthly periods would be another.

COURT. Q. You say "it not unfrequently happens;" do you mean that it happens to one woman in a hundred, or one in five hundred? A. It would be difficult to give any statistical idea, but one very often meets with cases in which patients are regular during the early months—it certainly happens as often as once in a hundred times—the cessation of the monthly periods is an ordinary normal natural symptom of pregnancy—women who have any uterine disorder are more likely to be unwell during pregnancy than other women—I have been consulted in at least four cases of vomiting during pregnancy which ended in death, and a considerable number of other cases in which vomiting was excessive, and in which there was danger.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. We have heard that this lady, Judging from the foetus, was from the fifth to the seventh week at the time of death; are you able to say whether an accurate judgment may be formed from the foetus as to the time, or might it be more than that? A. It would require considerable skill to say the exact age of a foetus—I have seen great mistakes made by persons who considered themselves skilled—if a person accustomed to examine dead bodies said, I found a uterus which appeared to have been impregnated to the extent of from the fifth to the seventh week, that would be valuable, and one might say it was a foetus probably from the fifth to the seventh week; but there are instances in which the foetus may die and remain in utero without development, and you may have the case of a foetus which has really been in utero three, four, or seven months, only presenting the size of seven weeks—sometimes no decomposition takes place—where women have been subject to bilious irritation and bilious attack; they are more affected by vomiting and intestinal irritation, including occasional purging, than others, during pregnancy—I have seen occasional purging as frequently as three or four times a day in connexion with vomiting—in the case of pregnant women, who have been suffering from excessive vomiting accompanied by occasional purging, there is sometimes observed an apthous or thrushy ulcerous state of the tongue and fauces; for the last three or four

years, since we have had diptheria and disorders of the throat in this country, many pregnant women, and women during their confinement, and during nursing, have been subject to an apthous state of the mouth—that has been observed more within the last few years than usual.

Q. Does the excessive vomiting in the early stage of pregnancy, accompanied by occasional purging, produce a burning sensation in the throat and along the intestinal canal? A. In those cases, heartburn is a very common symptom—it depends upon the secretion—if there is a great amount of acid in the stomach, the irruptations, the matters vomited, are more acid and burning than usual—the heartburn of pregnancy is a household term—a burning sensation along the intestinal canal, the throat, and so on, is often complained of in cases where nothing but ordinary pregnancy, attended by unusual vomiting, exists—the statement that the foetus was of about the age of seven weeks, makes no difference in the opinion I am expressing—the early part of pregnancy, the first three months, is the time specially marked by vomiting—that is inclusive of the whole period, from the beginning to the end of the three months—women who suffer from diseases of the os and cervex uteri, for which nitrate of silver is used as an injection, suffer more from inflammation in the stomach by the uterus than other persons; that, and the more frequent occurrence of the monthly periods in the early part of pregnancy, mark cases of disorder of the os and cervex uteri—a woman in the early stage of pregnancy, such as I have described, suffering from excessive vomiting, might also have purging and diarrhoea—the diarrhoea might degenerate into dysentery.

Q. Have you known cases yourself where there has been excessive vomiting and general intestinal disturbance in the early stages of pregnancy, in which it has been necessary, to save the life of the mother, to abort the foetus and procure a miscarriage? A. That is a recognised practice in the vomiting of pregnancy which threatens life—nature generally does it herself, and this practice has arisen from an imitation of nature—if by an effort of nature the child is not got rid of, then the medical man intervenes and produces abortion.

Q. Have you known in your own practice cases of excessive vomiting, accompanied by purging or diarrhoea, with a burning sensation, such as you have described, erroneously attributed to poison? A. I have known one, case in which there was a great amount of vomiting, and some amount of purging, in which the friends of the lady could not be brought to believe that her husband was not poisoning her, they taking their impressions from themselves, from their own notions—the symptoms that I have described might become so violent from the natural causes I have alluded to, as to be mistaken for a case of poisoning; I have known that happen, and I have known evacuations examined by a chemist under that impression—I mean that I have seen that case in my own practice—an effervescing draught, composed of hydrocyanic acid (prussic acid) is one of the most valuable remedies in the vomitings of pregnancy—persons in these cases die of starvation, as much as though they were deprived of food—in fact no food is kept on the stomach—where persons are suffering from excessive vomiting there is a perfect indisposition to take food; it would give them a of vomiting to speak of or smell food—a woman in that state rejects everything, a few minutes after it is taken—vomiting would come on even when they are not taking food—I have known this vomiting to cease a few days or a few hours before death; that was the case with Charlotte Bronte, the well-known authoress, who died from the vomiting of pregnancy; for

a short time before her death she was able to take food, and sickness ceased.

Q. In cases of death occasioned by the natural causes you have described, and which are within your particular knowledge, have you noticed a peculiar expression of the face? A. The expression is that of death from starvation—it is recognised that there is a peculiar expression of the face in such cases—Dr. Paul Dubois, the first obstetrician in France at the present time, observed twenty cases of death by vomiting caused by pregnancy, in thirteen years, and he marks as one. of the four or five distinct signs of danger, a peculiar expression of the face, "a painful expression of the face," and I know of no other man who has had equal experience in the same space of time.

Q. Supposing the symptoms of vomiting and occasional purging had begun at the time that conception or pregnancy had begun, and had continued for four or five weeks, accompanied by the burning sensation of the throat and the intestinal canal, and apthous irritation in the mouth, and a sensation sometimes of a ball in the throat, do you believe that all these symptoms might have arisen from what you have described? A. The ball in the throat I take to be an hysterical feeling; the other symptoms might; that is, if you consider morbid pregnancy a natural cause.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. Was not the discussion by Monsieur Dubois with a view to show that, not with standing all these symptoms, there was neither ulceration nor inflammation of the stomach and intestines? A. I believe not; I believe it had no reference to any ulceration of the intestines—if a pregnant woman has diarrhoea and dysentery, it would go on to sloughing, exactly as in natural dysentery or diarrhoea—if dysentery supervenes, there would be the dysenteric symptoms—I have seen cases in which death has occurred from vomiting, conjoined with purging, but I believe the vomiting to be the great cause of death in those cases—ordinarily, if dysentery be excessive, abortion is produced, or an irritation of the intestinal canal, the intestine is nearer the uterus than the stomach—dysentery kills by exhaustion.

MR. SERJEANT PARRY. Q. Supposing to a woman pregnant for the first time, say 40 years of age, or between 40 and 45, doses of irritant poison were administered, would you not expect then to procure abortion? A. I should think them more likely to procure abortion than idiopathic disease, disease arising by itself—we avoid, in the case of pregnant women, giving any medicine such as you have described, for fear of producing abortion; one would not salivate a person in the family-way—we avoid giving irritating medicines in those cases; we leave as much as we can to nature, but we would correct nature as far as possible.

JURY. Q. Could dysentery be kept up by the administration of medicine? is there anything that would contribute to that? A. If any irritating medicine were given, it would be kept up; any irritating medicine would tend to that—any medical or non-medical person could do that.

FREDERIC PEDLEY . I am a dentist—I reside in George-street, Hanover-square—I have attended Mr. Smethurst as a dentist—I recollect his consulting me about his teeth, about the middle of last February—he complained of foulness of breath—in the course of conversation I mentioned to him a mixture which he might use for foulness of breath—it was chlorate of potass—I do not dispense medicine—I am simply a dentist—my patients get their medicine else where.

Cross-examined by MR. SERJEANT BALLANTINE. Q. Where do you reside? A. At 12, George-street, Hanover-square.


Before Mr. Common Serjeant.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-786
VerdictGuilty > unknown

Related Material

786. WILLIAM BARNES (21) , Burglary in the dwelling-house of William Shakespeare, stealing 1 pair of boots and other articles.

MR. SLEIGH conducted the Prosecution.

WILLIAM SHAKESDPEARE . I reside at No. 9, Montague-place, Clapham-road; it is the duty of my servant to close the house at night, but I invariably look round the premises—on Saturday night, 5th March, I saw that the doors were all fast, and the windows shut, and everything secure; I went to bed about 12 o'clock, and on Sunday morning between 4 and 5 o'clock I was roused by the police-constable, and on coming downstairs I examined the doors and windows; I found an iron bar had been wrenched from the pantry window, and the window lifted up; the pantry door was cut through and a piece taken away; the door had been unlocked from inside, the drawers and cupboards opened, and two pairs of boots had been stolen; the door at the top of the kitchen stairs leading to the hall had been forced open. I missed some spoons from downstairs, and in the dining-room the tea-caddy had been forced open and the spoon taken from there; some napkin rings were taken away, and several boxes broken open—it was just becoming grey dawn; we could just see without a candle—these boots (looking at them) were worn by my son—I have not the slightest doubt about their being his.

Cross-examined by MR. RIBTON. Q. Is your son here? A. No; he is at school; here is a mark on these boots, "No. 483" inside—this mark was on the boots when we had them from the boot-maker, by which we know them—I had seen the boots, but had not seen the mark till they were brought to me by a person a few days afterwards—a young man brought them to me and offered them for sale—I discovered they were my property, and I questioned him, to know from whom he received them, and he said from Burton, and I employed a policeman to look after Burton—it was a young man of the name of Jones who brought them to me—he is not here—Burton was brought before a Magistrate and charged with having stolen property, and then he stated about the prisoner—this is the first time I have mentioned about the number—I identified the boots on a former occasion, and I should have identified them now without the number.

MR. SLEIGH. Q. Did you know of that number before the robbery? A. No; but I knew the boots as being my property the moment I saw them—I had had them in my hand and been looking at them before the robbery—they have been soled and heeled since the robbery—they were returned by the policeman, and the boy had worn them.

ALFRED HARRIS (Policeman, 420 P). I was on duty on Sunday morning, the 6th of March, in Clapham-road, near Mr. Shakespeare's house—I was passing his house at 20 minutes before 5 o'clock; I observed a light over the kitchen door, and coming towards the house I saw the figure of a man through a glass panel of the door which leads to the kitchen—he stood looking into a cellar, a kind of coal cellar, I believe—he stood between the kitchen and the door—I got over the area-gate—I saw the figure draw the top bolt of the door, and he stood and unlocked the door—he then stooped and drew back the bottom bolt: I got three yards from the door; he opened the door as soon as he saw me, and said, "All right, policeman"—I said, "I don't think it is exactly all right;" he then shut the door, turned the key, and made his escape through the kitchen; I sprang my rattle and ran down the Clapham-road; I knocked up Mr. Shakespeare—I went into the house through the front door, I found the back kitchen wide open—I am certain

the prisoner is the man I saw that morning—I saw him afterwards at Wandsworth.

Cross-examined. Q. At twenty minutes to five you saw a light and a figure? A. Yes—I first caught sight of the face of the figure about ten minutes to five—I was ten minutes observing the figure—I was looking at the face of the figure at the time he had the door open, somewhere about half a minute—I saw him again, I think, about 18th June—the figure was not at any time out in the area—the glass was water-waved glass that I saw him through—it was over the door that I saw the face for half a minute—I did not apprehend the prisoner—I don't know Jones, who produced these boots to Mr. Shakespeare—I saw these before at the Wandsworth police-court—when I saw the prisoner at the house, the sun had not risen; the stars were going in.

MR. SLEIGH. Q. When you were looking at his face, was there any ground glass between you? A. No.

ROBERT BURTON . I live in Hunt-street, Vauxhall-walk, and am a labourer—I was in employ at Price's Candle manufactory on 6th March—I had known the prisoner by living in the neighbourhood—I had no acquaintance with him; I knew him by sight—on 6th March he met me in the Vauxhall-road, and asked me if I would buy a pair of boots—I bought them—I could not swear that these are the boots—they have been mended since—I paid him 5s. for them—on the Tuesday or Wednesday I offered them for sale to a young man named Jones—I was taken into custody, examined, and discharged on the ground of my character—Jones had the boots, I believe—I did not sell them to him; they were taken away—I never had them afterwards.

Cross-examined. Q. Do you know Jones? A. Yes; I did not tell him that the boots belonged to my brother, to my recollection—I don't believe I did; I won't swear whether I did or not—he did not give me any money for them—I believe he took them to Mr. Shakespeare on the Wednesday—it was within two or three days—he offered them to him; and I was taken up for having them in my possession—I did not call any witnesses—I there stated that I had them from Barnes—I knew him by living near where I worked.

WILLIAM BLACKBURN (Policeman, V 257). On 9th March I took Burton in custody on a charge of stealing a pair of boots—I took him where he was employed, at Price's Candle factory—I got these boots from Mr. Shakespeare.

ISAAC SHEPHERD (Police-sergeant, L 49). I received information of this burglary on Saturday, 18th June—I was in Lambeth-road about six o'clock in the evening—I saw the prisoner pass by; I went after him—when I got within two or three yards of him he turned and saw me and ran—I followed him for about half a mile; he was leading a dog, he let go the dog and ran—I succeeded in apprehending him—he was very violent—I got assistance and captured him—he said, "What do you want me for?"—I said, "For burglary at Clapham"—he said, "That is not what you want me for, it is for something else"—I said, "Yes, I do"—he said, "Very well; you must prove it first; you can only give me three months"—I conveyed him to Clapham-station.

GUILTY .**— Confined Eighteen Months.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-787
VerdictGuilty > unknown; Guilty > unknown; Guilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment; Imprisonment; Imprisonment; Imprisonment > other institution

Related Material

787. JACOB BLAND (18), HENRY FLETCHER (17), and THOMAS HOWARD (15) , Burglary in the dwelling-house of William Jones, and stealing a syringe, value 8s. and 1 pair of shears, his property; Second Count, Breaking and entering a building within the curtilage of the dwelling-house.

MR. WAY conducted His Prosecution.

JAMES PARTRIDGE (Policeman, 429 P). On the morning of 30th June I was on duty at the back of Park-place, Camberwell, at a little after three o'clock—I saw the door of the prosecutor's house open, and the prisoners came out and threw away this hammer—I caught hold of Bland and held him; the other two slipped away and escaped across the fields—I had an opportunity of noticing Bland's countenance and the other two also—Bland broke from me; but Phillips stopped him before I lost sight of him—the other two got out of my sight; I saw them again next day—I found this hammer—I examined the premises; I picked up this syringe just inside the garden gate—a pane of glass had been broken in the conservatory, and the door was open—by breaking the glass, persons could put in their hand and open the door—you can get from the house to the conservatory without going into the air—the door comes out of the passage into the conservatory.

COURT. Q. The door to the house had not been opened? A. No; no one had got in the house at all.

WILLIAM PHILLIPS (Policeman, P 228). On the morning of 30th June I was coming out of Grove-park, Camberwell-grove, about half-past three o'clock—I saw Howard and Fletcher pass me, walking very fast—I heard some one cry, "Stop thief!"—I turned, but I lost sight of the prisoners; I then saw Bland running up Camberwell-grove—he went down a turning—I followed him, and said, "You had better come out, you can't get away"—he said, "I mean to have a try for it"—I ran into the shrubs, threw him on his back, and my brother officer came and took him—I went back to the Mews, into which the back gate opens—I saw my brother-constable pick up this hammer, and he said, "I saw three of them come out of the gate"—Bland said, "You did not see me come out; I was watching"—I picked up this handkerchief in the Mews, and I said to Bland, "Is this yours?—he said, "Yes," and he took it and put it on—I got on the top of the wall of No. 6 and found these shears on the wall—the lock of the garden-gate had been broken—I went in and found the glass of the conservatory had been broken, and the door was open—I saw Fletcher and Howard taken, and I identified them as the persons I had seen running in the morning—I am quite sure of it—Howard was brought out of a public-house by Sergeant Bell; and-Fletcher was standing in company with three or four others.

HANNAH DOWLING . I am servant to Mr. William Jones, No. 6, Park-place, Camberwell-grove—on the morning of 30th June I was roused by the police at a little before 4 o'clock—I went down stairs—I found a pane of glass had been broken in the conservatory in the night-time—if you wanted to get into the conservatory from the house you could do so without going out of doors—there are two doors leading from the hall to it—one is a glass door, the other wood—the glass in the conservatory was whole in the evening when I went to bed—any one by breaking the glass that I found broken could open the outer door and get into the conservatory—you could get into that from the outside without going into the house—this syringe and these shears are my master's property—they were in the conservatory the night before; the tools are kept there—I saw these when I fastened the place up—this syringe was hanging by a piece of string.

WILLIAM DYBALL (Policeman, P 138). On the morning of 30th June I saw Fletcher and Howard in the Trafalgar-road, coming in a direction from Peckham Rye—they were together at quarter past 4 o'clock in the morning—I am sure they are the persons—they were in a direction from the Camberwell-road.

Bland's Defence. I was going to get work, and the policeman caught me, and

said, "What are you doing here?" I said, "Nothing." If I had been trying to get in I should not have run there. They took me, and said that I got over the wall, and they brought these other two; I know nothing about them.

Fletcher's Defence. On the Thursday afternoon I was going home. I got to the corner, and was talking to a young man, and they came and took me. I am entirely innocent. I was not there in the morning. I know Bland, but I was not with him.

Howard's Defence. I am a poor hard-working boy; the officer says he saw me coming from the house, but I was not I had been asleep all night, and got up at half-past 4 o'clock; I was coming to Covent Garden market to get employ. I went to the bottom of London Bridge, and I received 6d. I went in a beer-shop to get a lunch, and the policeman came and said, "Benjamin, I want you"—I said, "My name is not Benjamin." He said, "You come with me." I asked him about the charge, and he said "Burglary." I said, "I know nothing about it; I am quite innocent."




On the



Confined Twelve Months.

Confined Six Months.

Confined Four Months, and Three Years in a Reformatory.

Before Mr. Baron Martin.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-788
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

788. WILLIAM DAVIS (17) and WILLIAM MASON (18) , Burglary in the dwelling-house of William Scott, stealing 2 pairs of trousers, his property; Second Count, receiving the same.

WILLIAM SCOTT . I live in New Church-street, Bermondsey—on the night of 2d August I got my house closed about 10 o'clock—I saw these trousers (produced) safe when I closed my house—I was called up about half-past 5 in the morning—I came down, and found two pair of trousers were gone, and a window, which had been shut, was open—this is one of the pair of trousers.

DAVID GREENHILL . I am son-in-law of Mr. Scott—I was at his house that night, and saw the articles safe.

MATTHEW JACKS . I am a labourer—I know the prisoners by sight—I saw them on Wednesday morning, 3d August—they came where I work between 7 and 8 o'clock; they asked me if I would buy these trousers—Davis said he had bought them, and wanted to sell them—I asked what they were, and he said corduroy; he shewed them to me; he wanted 3s. 6d. for them—I gave him three shillings—I gave him half-a-crown then, and was to give him 6d. more when I left work at night—I went and pawned them.

WILLIAM WEBB . I know the prisoners by sight—they have worked with me—I saw them on the morning of 3d August between 7 and 8 o'clock—these trousers were then lying on the wood at the wood wharf.

WILLIAM JOHN CAPON (Policeman, 43 M). I took Davis—I told him it was for breaking into a house, and stealing a pair of trousers; he said "All right"—on the way to the station on the following morning I saw Mason, and I apprehended him—he was very violent.

Davis's Defence. On the Wednesday morning a man came, and had two pair of trousers—I bought one pair and sold them again.


Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-789
VerdictGuilty > unknown

Related Material

789. MARY CHAMBERLAIN (40) , Unlawfully uttering counterfeit coin. MESSRS. BEST and POLAND conducted the Prosecution.

JOSEPH FRANCE . I am a butcher of 92, Bridge-road, Lambeth—on 15th

June, about seven o'clock, the prisoner came with a plate for 2 lbs. of cooked meat, and gave me a bad florin—I bent it in the detector, and told her it was bad—she said that she was not aware of it; she had taken it of a woman in the road close by, to whom she had sold something—I called in a policeman, and gave her in custody, with the florin.

STEPHEN PRESNELL (Policeman, 117 L). The prisoner was given into my custody, with a bad florin, by France—she was taken to the Lambeth-court, remanded for a week, and discharged by the Magistrate, there only being this one case against her.

JOHN DOUNCE . I keep the New Duke's Head, Peter-street, Westminster—I was at the Old Coach and Horses, Marchmont-street, kept by my father, helping to serve, and saw my mother serve the prisoner with a pot of beer, and she gave a bad two-shilling piece—my mother gave her 1s. 9d. change, and passed it to me—I bent it in the detector, and found it was bad—my mother told her she must give me the change back—she did so; and she gave her the florin, which she said she would take back to the woman who gave it to her—she left, and I followed her into the Queen's Head, Marchmont-street, and saw the barman serve her with a pot of beer—she tendered a two-shilling piece, and was given in custody.

HENRY LEESON . I am barman at the Queen's Head—on Saturday, 16th June, the prisoner came about 7, or shortly afterwards—Dounce came in—I served the prisoner with a pot of beer—she tendered a florin, which was slightly bent—I said, "This is a bad one"—she said, "I did not know it; a woman has just given it to me to fetch a pot of beer, and I will take it back to her"—I gave her into custody with the florin, which I marked.

JAMES ELLENS . (Policeman, 192 B). I went to the Queen's Head, and took the prisoner—Leeson gave me this florin.

WILLIAM WEBSTER . These florins are both bad.

Prisoner's Defence. I did not know that they were bad.

GUILTY .*— Confined Twelve Months.


Before Mr. Justice Willes.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-790
VerdictGuilty > unknown

Related Material

790. WILLIAM BRADD (19) , Stealing a watch, value 2l., the property of Frederick Wildsmith.

FREDERICK WILDSMITH . I am a beerseller, at Leytonstone, in Essex—on Monday morning, 1st August, I had a silver watch in my possession; it was in a box on my dressing table—I missed it the next evening—I gave information to the police—I saw my watch on Thursday morning, at Mr. Phillips' the pawnbroker's, at Stratford—I knew the prisoner—I left the watch on my dressing-table about 9 o'clock.

CLARA WILDSMITH . I am the sister of the last witness—I live with him at Leytonstone—on Tuesday, 2nd August, I saw the prisoner that morning at the bar; he was there about half an hour—I saw him go to the back two or three times—he went also into the taproom—there is a door in the tap-room leading upstairs into my brother's bedroom—the door of the room was open on that day.

Prisoner. Q. Did you see me go up stairs? A. No—you were in the taproom about twenty minutes.

GEORGE LEWIS . I am manager to Mr. Phillips, pawnbroker, at Stratford—on Tuesday afternoon, 2nd August, about 2 o'clock, the prisoner brought

this watch (produced)—I made an advance of 12s. upon it—he gave the name of William Thompson, and told me he lived at Stepney—I asked him where—he said, "In a street near the gas-work;" he did not exactly know the name, because he had only just come there—I asked him whether it was his property, and he said, Yes, it was.

Prisoner. Q. You never saw me come into your shop at all? A. Yes, I did—I gave the police a full description of your dress.

COURT. Q. Have you any doubt whatever that he is the man? A. No; I swear to him.

JOHN BAND . I am a shoemaker, living at Stratford—I know the prisoner by sight—he came to my shop on Tuesday, 2nd August, about three o'clock in the afternoon—he bought a pair of boots, and paid for them—he said his name was Thompson—I have seen the pair of boots since.

ISAAC GAT (Policeman, K 436). I received information, and took the prisoner into custody, in the taproom of the Red Lion public-house, at Leytonstone—I told him I should take him into custody for stealing a watch—he said he knew nothing about it.

MR. WILDSMITH (re-examined). This is my watch; it has been very much damaged.

Prisoner's Defence. I am not guilty. I never took the watch; I was not up the stairs.

ISAAC GAT (re-examined). I got these boots from the prisoner's feet—he sold the old ones to the shoemaker for a penny.

GUILTY .— Confined Two Months.


Before Mr. Baron Martin.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-791
VerdictGuilty > lesser offence
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude; Imprisonment; Imprisonment

Related Material

791. JAMES DUNN (20), PATRICK FARRELL (19), JOHN DUFFEY (30), and CHRISTOPHER FITZPATRICK (24) , Maliciously stabbing, cutting, and wounding Edward Lacon, James Claridge, and James Eberson, with intent to do grievous bodily harm.

MR. COOPER conducted the Prosecution.

EDWARD LACON . I live in Church-street, Greenwich—on Monday night, July 4th, about half-past 12 o'clock, I was going home—I saw the four prisoners standing over Timothy Collins, who was lying on the ground, and they were ill-using him—I asked them to stop doing so, and they immediately did so—I think the whole four of the prisoners both kicked and struck him—they then turned round on me, and threw me down on the ground—they said, "That is the way we do it in Ireland"—they tripped me up, and I received two or three kicks from them—I think it was Dunn and Fitzpatrick who kicked me when on the ground—at that time I had a stick; that was taken from Collins while on the ground—while I was on the ground the prisoners all ran away when I called "Police;" they ran down William-street—I followed them, and came up with them about the centre of King-street—they then turned on us with a stick, and Dunn took out his knife and made three or four strokes at me—I got a wound on my right hand; it was a deep cut—the cry of "Police" brought up two men, Jeffery and Evans—one of the prisoners struck Evans with a stick, and he fell to the ground by the blow; and one of them wounded Jeffery on the head with the same stick—on the way to the station Duffey pulled out another knife—my back was towards

him, and he made a rush at me, and made three or four strokes at me with the knife—he was taken by the policeman.

Dunn. We had had our bounty, and we went to see a man; we could not see him, and these men began to laugh at us.

Duffey. Q. Did you see a knife in my hand? A. You had a knife in your breast-pocket; I did not see it in your hand—it was a penknife; the same kind of knife as Dunn had.

Fitzpatrick. Q. Did you see a stick in my hand? A. Yes; that you took from Collins's hand—it was a bamboo cane—there were several persons came up when we called "Police."

COURT. Q. Were they drunk? A. I don't think they were—they might have been drinking, but they knew very well what they were about.

JAMES CLARIDGE (Policeman, R 157). On July 5th, about half-past 1 o'clock in the morning, I was on duty in Greenwich—I heard a cry, and went to King-street; and on arriving I saw Lacon, who gave me some instructions—I went up to Dunn—Lacon charged him with cutting and wounding him; his head was bleeding—I told Dunn he was my prisoner, and he made a thrust at me with this knife—I put up my hand to avoid the blow, and received a cut in my left hand—I saw the prisoners afterwards at the station; they all appeared to know perfectly well what they were doing,

Dunn. Q. A youth threw a stone, and cut me on the forehead; was I lying on the ground when you came up? A. No; you were not—you had a wound on your head before I came up.

EDWARD HAYWOOD (Policeman, R 354). I was on duty at a little before 1 o'clock in Trafalgar-road—I heard a cry of "Murder!" and ran to the spot—I found the prisoners there—there was a great struggling on both sides—two civilians had hold of Duffey—I was going to take hold of him, and I saw him make a thrust with something like a blade in his hand—he was going to make another one, and I struck him a blow directly—with very great trouble we. got the prisoners to the station.

TIMOTHY COLLINS . I was with Lacon that night, and was attacked by the prisoners.

Fitzpatrick. Q. Had you a stick in your hand? A. I was walking with a cane—Dunn threw me on the ground, and one of you took the cane while I was on the ground—I can swear you all kicked me.

The prisoners put in a written statement alleging that they were assaulted by the prosecutor and his friends, and were attacked and wounded by stones.

GUILTY of unlawfully wounding. Recommended to mercy by the Jury on account of the provocation.

DUNN.— Four Years' Penal Servitude.

DUFFEY.— Confined Eighteen months.



Confined Fifteen Months.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-792
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

792. JOSEPH CHADWICK (19), and GEORGE RIVETT (25) , Stealing a bag and 6s. of Stephen Draper, from his person.

MR. PLATT conducted the Prosecution.

STEPHEN DRAPER . I am a private in the Royal Artillery, at Woolwich—the two prisoners are also privates in the Artillery—on 1st July I was about with them till nearly 11 o'clock at night—I was at a public-house called the Three Daws; Sophia Harris was there with me; while I was there, I gave the prisoners a pot of beer; I paid for it with some money which I took out of my pocket—I had a bag which hung round my neck, between my flannel

and my skin; I had three 2s. pieces in that bag; the prisoners had seen me put money in that bag, and take it out—shortly afterwards I left the Three Daws—Sophia Harris lives nearly opposite—I went home with her to her room, leaving the two prisoners behind in the public-house—I had not been in Sophia Harris's room more than five minutes; I sat down on the bed; I heard a noise at the door; I got under the bed, and Harris said, "What do you want?"—the prisoners said, "Is not one of our men here?"—she said, "No"—they forced the door open, and came in; Chadwick got hold of my leg, and pulled me from under the bed into the middle of the room, and then Rivett and another man, who is not here, "tried to get me out of the door; I stuck fast at the door, and they could not get me further, and then Chadwick unbuttoned my jacket, and got hold of my bag and gave it a jerk; he broke the string, and he said, "Come on," and they all ran away together; I went to the police, and the prisoners were taken at the Coach and Horses half an hour afterwards—I had been having some beer, but I was sober; the prisoners were sober.

Chadwick. We had been drinking from 7 o'clock in the morning, and he showed 2s. 6d., and said that was all the money he had.

Rivett. Q. Do you recollect going into the Bricklayers' Arms? A. No, I do not; I did not say I had some money, but I did not know exactly how much I had; I did not say that a 2s. piece and a 6d. was all the money I had got—I saw Shepherd in the Shamrock; I did not go away with him; I did not say he had been my chum in the hospital, and go and pick him out.

COURT. Q. What time did you exercise that day? A. I was not on parade.

JURY. Q. When did you see this money last? A. Not an hour before. I went into the Daws.

SOPHIA HARRIS . I live at 4, High-street, Woolwich—on 1st July, I was in the Three Daws public-house with the prosecutor; the two prisoners were there, and another man—the prosecutor treated them with some beer—Chadwick had told me that the prosecutor had plenty of money, and if I did not pick him up, and give him half, he would punch my b—y nose—this happened at the Shamrock, before we went to the Three Daws; after partaking of the pot of beer, the prosecutor and I went to my lodging; it was then just upon 11 o'clock—the prosecutor took some money out of a bag at the Shamrock—I don't know whether the prisoners could see it—shortly after I got to my room with the prosecutor, the prisoners came to the door, and asked if I had one of their men in my place, I said, "No"—the prosecutor got under the bed, and the prisoners said if I did not open my door, they would break it open, and with that they broke it open, and the two prisoners and another marine came in—the other man got me by the throat, so that I could not scream—I saw Chadwick pull the prosecutor from under the bed, but I did not see him take the bag, because I was under the marine—I heard one say, "Come on"—they ran away, and left me on the ground.

Chadwick. Q. Did you ever see me before? A. Not till that night.

Rivett. Q. Did you see me that night? A. Yes; at the Shamrock—I was in the prosecutor's company, and you were drinking with him—it was very nearly 11 o'clock when we left the Shamrock.

COURT. Q. Are you sure these are the two men? A. Yes; I can swear to them.

JOHN LARKIN (Policeman, R 192). On 1st July, at half-past 11 o'clock at night, the prosecutor came and made some complaint; I went to the Coach and Horses, and found the two prisoners coming out at the door; the prosecutor pointed them out—I told Chadwick that he was given in my custody

for stealing a little bag containing 6s.—he said, "I know nothing about it, but I will go with you"—I told Rivett what the charge was, and he said he might as well go with me as any one else; he said he knew nothing about it, and he had not seen him.

Rivett. Q. Did I not say that I could prove that I had not been out of the Coach and Horses? A. No; you did not—there were not three women who said they believed you had nothing to do with it; there was a woman who came up on the part of the other man who was taken, but not about you—I did not refuse to go to the Coach and Horses.


15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-793
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty; Not Guilty > no evidence

Related Material

793. JOHN HENDERSON (30), JOHN BURNS (19), and GEORGE COLEMAN (21) , Stealing 1 watch, 1 chain, and 1 pair of spectacles, value 20l. of John Stokes Bastard, in his dwelling-house; to which

HENDERSON PLEADED GUILTY .— Confined Twelve Months.

MR. LANGFORD offered no evidence against BURNS and COLEMAN.


Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-794
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

794. JANE COKELY (62) , Feloniously taking away Charles Plater, aged 11 weeks, with intent to deprive the father of the possession of the child.

MR. ROBINSON conducted the Prosecution.

CHARLES PLATER . I am a labourer, of Adam-street, Rotherhithe—the prisoner came to me as a servant about 10th April—my wife was then ill, and died on 18th April—the prisoner remained in the house till 11th May, taking care of my house, and acting as a servant—I had four children altogether—I did not know that the prisoner was going to leave, but when I came home to dinner on 11th May she was gone, and the young baby also, which was 11 weeks old—I have been in search of her ever since till 14th July, when I found her in the Gray's Inn-road—my little girl, who was with me, recognised her in the crowd, and I took her by the shoulder, and asked where my child was—she said that she came as far Leadenhall-street the same night with the baby, and fell asleep, when she awoke she had not got the child—she had no business to take it into Leadenhall-street—I have never seen the child since.

Cross-examined by MR. SLEIGH. Q. Had you known her before she came to nurse your wife? A. No—she did that to my perfect satisfaction—she had occasion to go out sometimes—I do not know whether she had taken the baby out for an airing before—my eldest little girl is getting on for 11 years old—she is not here.

MR. ROBINSON. Q. How far is Rotherhithe from Leadenhall-street? A. About two miles from the bridge—the child had on the ordinary dress of a child 11 weeks old—I also missed a shirt from my house, a black frock belonging to my eldest girl, and two pillow-cases.

CHARLES PEMBRALL (Policeman, G 101). On 24th July I was on duty in Gray's Inn-lane, and Plater gave the prisoner into my custody for stealing his child—he said she came from Rotherhithe on 11th May, sat down in Leadenhall-street that night, and fell asleep, and when she woke the child was missing.

Cross-examined. Q. Did she say she had had a drop to drink? A. Yes.

SARAH DAVIS . I get my living by ironing, about three minutes' walk from where Plater lives—I know the prisoner by sight—I was going to work one morning after the child was missed, it was the end of June or the beginning of July, and saw the prisoner with a baby in her arms in

Tooley-street—I did not speak to her—I did know the child—it was in long clothes.

Cross-examined. Q. Did you know that the child was missing? A. Yes, two or three days afterwards; it was a little after 8 in the morning when I saw her in Tooley-street; I was on one side and she on the other I stood and looked at her across the street—I had not heard a word about the child being missing at this time; but I stopped and looked at her because I wondered where she was going to with the baby—I thought it was her daughter's child—I knew that her married, daughter had an infant child.

MR. ROBINSON. Q. Have you the least doubt she is the woman? A. I am quite sure.


15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-795
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty

Related Material

795. THOMAS BROWN (24) , Stealing 8 spoons, value 6l., of Susan Scott, in her dwelling-house; and afterwards feloniously breaking out of the same, to which he

PLEADED GUILTY .— Confined Twelve Months.

Before Mr. Common Serjeant.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-796
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty

Related Material

796. JOHN BARKER (23) , Embezzling the sum of 6s. 7 1/2 d., and 2s. 11d. of John Marchant, his master, to which he

PLEADED GUILTY .— Confined Six Months.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-797
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty

Related Material

797. JANE GOODINGS (19) , Stealing 1 vest, 2 handkerchiefs, and other articles, value 3l., of Ann Robinson, her mistress; to which she

PLEADED GUILTY .— Confined Nine Months.

There was another indictment against the prisoner.

Before Mr. Justice Willes.

15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-798
VerdictNot Guilty > no evidence

Related Material

798. BAZILL WOODGATE (33) , Feloniously killing and slaying James Stevens.

The witnesses did not appear.


15th August 1859
Reference Numbert18590815-799
VerdictGuilty > unknown

Related Material

799. EWEN McGOWER (29) , Feloniously killing and slaying Joseph Lancaster.

MR. COOPER conducted the Prosecution.

MARY ANN FREEMAN . I am a widow, and live in Richardson-buildings, Woolwich—on 13th July, in consequence of some information I received, I went to the dead-house in Woolwich, and saw the body of a man there whom I had known twenty years; he used to go by the name of "Shefford Tom;" he enlisted in the Royal Artillery as Joseph Lancaster; he is known by that name.

ELLEN DERBAM . I am single, and live at Woolwich—on this 12th July I was at the Three Marines public-house; I left a little after 12—I was drinking with the deceased, Joseph Lancaster—we left the house together, and walked on into High-street; I there bade him good-night—soon after that the prisoner passed me; I was too far off to hear whether he spoke to Lancaster—I then heard a noise, in consequence of that I went back—I heard the prisoner ask the deceased what he was making a noise about—the deceased said, "A slap on the nose if you like"—with that they both stripped, and began fighting—the deceased made the first attempt to strike the prisoner, but missed his blow; the prisoner then butted the deceased with his head, on the lower part of his stomach—he fell down on his back, and after he was down the prisoner kicked him, somewhere about the neck—after he was knocked down I did not see him move—I only saw the prisoner kick him once; after that he went away and left the deceased on the ground—

a great number of people and a policeman came up—that was all I saw; I saw the dead body of the man at 4 o'clock in the morning.