Old Bailey Proceedings.
29th December 1884
Reference Number: t18841229

ActionsCite this text | Print-friendly version | Report an error
Old Bailey Proceedings front matter.
29th December 1884
Reference Numberf18841229

Related Material



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

The following Surrey case was commenced at the last Session, on Monday, December 29th, 1884, and after proceeding for four days, owing to the illness of a Juror was adjourned to January 12th, 1885, the first day of the present Session.

Monday, December 29th, 1884.

Before Mr. Recorder.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-164
VerdictGuilty > unknown; Guilty > unknown; Not Guilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour; Imprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

164. FREDERICK POPE (45), HARRY HUGHLINGS (49), EDWARD ERRINGTON (40), JAMES PRYOR , and CALEB TITCOMB , were indicted for unlawfully conspiring to obtain money by false pretences from various persons, with intent to chest and defraud.

MESSRS. BESLEY, MONTAGU WILLIAMS, and GILL Prosecuted; MESSRS. WARBURTON and DILL appeared for Hughlings, MR. LYNN for Errington, and MR. DIGBY SEYMOUR, Q.C., with MR. STATHAM, for Titcomb.

SIDNEY CASBOURNE . I am a clerk in the office of the Registrar of Joint Stock Companies—I produce a file of papers in the matter of the International Fish Dinner Company; it was registered on 13th July, 1888—a Memorandum of Association was lodged—the subscribing shareholders are Edward Errington, of 2, Leete Street, S.W., described as a promoter of companies; G. L. Coates, 10, Basinghall Street, chartered accountant; Stanley Cheshire, 3, Adelphi Terrace, accountant; C. W. P. Overend, 2, King's Bench Walk, barrister; McKinlay, manufacturer; Wells, 5, Furnival's Inn, solicitor's clerk; and F. W. Henry, 5, Furnival's Inn, solicitor—the registered office of the Company is 7, Oxford Mansions, Regent Circus—this agreement was lodged between Stanley Cheshire and Edward Errington. (This was dated 21st July, 1883)—I also produce a file of papers in regard to the London Fish Dinner Company, registered 21st February, 1884, a memorandum of association with a list of subscribing shareholders, and an agreement between Halham and Errington dated 20th February, 1884—the registered office of the Company is 275, Strand—there is no list of share holders except the subscribers—I also produce a file of the House Property Distribution Society, Limited, and a memorandum of association registered on 27th February, 1884; the subscribing

shareholders are Hughlings, Mottram, Barton, Overend, Langley, Pryor, and Roantree; the registered office 26, King William Street Strand, Cheshire secretary—no list of shareholders was filed—I also produce a file of papers of the City and Suburban Bank, Limited, registered on 1st July, 1884—the subscribing shareholders are Overend, Errington, Cheshire, and others; the subscribing witness is Caleb Titcomb—no list of ordinary shareholders, and no registered office—Titcomb is described as manager of a public company.

Cross-examined by MR. SEYMOUR. That is the only occasion in which Titcomb's name appears.

Cross-examined by MR. DILL. It is customary to deposit such agreement at our office when it is desired to protect the shares which an fully or partly paid up.

Cross-examined by Pryor. The only place in which your name appears is in the House Property Distribution Company, for one share of 5s.

Cross-examined by Pope. I do not find your name in connection with any of the companies.

JAY LEATHER . I am a builder, of 240, Graham Road, Mare Street Hackney—I was employed to fit up the premises of the International Fish Dinner Company in Barbican—for that purpose I went to the office of the Company, 7, Oxford Mansions—I went with a person named Chudleigh—before going I had received a letter from Cheshire—I had a conversation afterwards with Cheshire and Errington—I went to Oxford Mansions in consequence of the letter; I was introduced to Errington as the promoter of the Company, and who was likely to withdraw as soon, as it was done—it was through him I got the job—I saw Cheshire with Errington at the office—the offices had not been fitted up in Oxford Mansions when I saw him; I spoke to Errington with regard to them, and gave an estimate—I agreed to do it for 6l. as near as I remember, there were extras done afterwards—I was to be paid directly the work was done—while doing this work at the office Errington spoke to me about Barbican; he asked me to give an estimate, and said if I would remunerate him he would get me the work—at that time I had not not seen Hughlings—I was introduced to him some time after I had fitted up the greater part of the Barbican place—I gave this estimate (produced) for fitting up the Barbican place, it comes to 86l. 17s.—that is signed "H. Hughlings, Manager and Secretary, International Fish Dinner Company"—I was given to understand Cheshire was only secretary for the time being, that Hughlings was to be secretary and I asked for his signature to be on it—after that I saw and was introduced to Hughlings—the estimate was given to me already signed—this also has Cheshire's signature on it, by my request—I was to be paid for the Barbican job by a bill for 44l. when part of the work was done, and I was to have a bill for the rest when the work was done—the bill for 44l. was at one month, and the bill for 42l. at two months, that was without extras—I commenced the work at Barbican—I saw Hughlings, Cheshire, and Pope there, and one of the witnesses acting as a clerk—I saw Pope more than once—I supposed he called as a friend—in doing the work I had to do more than was in the estimate—by Hughling's authority I supplied fish kettles and other things, he giving me to understand if there was extra work I might as well have it—on 26th August I got this letter from Errington. (Stating that he would be at Barbican on

Monday next)—I went there, and saw a body of gentlemen there, amongst them the same people that I had seen at Oxford Mansions—when the time elapsed that I was to have my first bill, I got a bill for 44l., which I passed through the London and County Bank—I could not get any money on it; they declined to discount it—I spoke to Errington about it—he referred me to Mr. Hughlings, he gave me to understand he was a man more likely than himself to introduce me to some one who would discount it—I saw Hughlings, and spoke to him about it; he gave me to understand he had spent so much money that his banking account would not allow him to do it, but he knew a friend that would—he took me to an office near the Horse Guards with a board outside, "Barnard and Company"—I went to the office on the top floor, and was introduced to Pryor as Barnard—Pryor said he would see what the bank would do, whether they would discount it for me—I was to call in a day or two—I then received from 14, Parliament Street this letter. (This stated that he (Pryor) had mentioned the bill to his client, who consented to do it, requesting the bill to be sent.) I had not left the bill—I went to Parliament Street and gave Pryor the bill, and he gave me this receipt for it, signed "Barnard and Co."—I next saw Pryor at his office; I went there with a view of getting the money—I saw the clerk first; I waited some time before I saw Pryor—he gave me a cheque, I believe, on that occasion of a man named Benham for 10l.—he gave me to understand as his reason for not giving me more, that his client had called and only left 10l.—he said I could have the balance during the week—I passed the cheque through the London and County Bank—I believe it was a cheque on the Grosvenor Bank—it came back marked "Refer to drawer"—when it came back I saw Hughlings, and by Errington's instructions he took me down to Parliament Street—Errington was present at Barbican when I spoke to Hughlings—when we got to Pryor's office Hughlings went in first and saw Pryor; a few minutes after I was called in, and Pryor said to Hughlings "You had better go round to the bank with him"—Hughlings went with me to the Grosvenor Bank—Hughlings there spoke to a gentleman who came out of the office—I was given to understand he was the manager—I don't identify him—he advised me and Hughlings to pass it through the bank again—I did, and it was paid—afterwards I got from Pryor money which with the 10. made up 24l.—he deducted 1l. for the introduction to Benham—the three 5l. cheques were on the Grosvenor Bank, drawn by Benham—I never got the balance for fitting up the Barbican premises—I sent in the bill for 54l.—I had one bill for 44l.—54l. is still owing on the assumption that I had been paid the 44l.—I had 24l. through Pryor, and two or three 6l. or 7l. cheques—54l. is what I say is still owing;—I took shares in the International—the understanding was if I got the job I should take 25 shares—I took two 5l. shares in consideration for the cash I got for the Oxford Mansions job—I gave notice to the Fish Company that they were not to meet the 44l. bill, as I had not received the money for it—afterwards a, writ was issued against me by Mr. Benham—I then went to see Pryor at his office; he was not there—I walked down, and found him coming out of the Grosvenor Bank—that was soon after the bill had become due; when they issued the writ—I told Pryor Benham had issued a writ against me, and I gave him to understand that I had not had the money, and I did not intend leaving him till I did have it—I followed him to two or three houses, and up to his office—I said "Well, you can't

get anything out of me"—he said "We mean to have the whole b——lot, meaning all I had got—they never gave me another bill—when the action was commenced against me I appeared to it, and then it was allowed to drop—I made application repeatedly for the balance of my money—Hughlings told me it had been paid—I used to go to the Barbican; on one occasion I found Pryor's clerk from Parliament Street in possession, doing the cooking—Cheshire was there at the same time—I looked round the place; the greater portion of the furniture and fittings had been removed—I asked Cheshire where Pryor was, and went to the stairs and saw him down in the kitchen—I don't know what he was doing—Cheshire said if I liked to pay the quarter's rent owing and 30l. to Pryor I should have possession of the place—he told me Errington had started another place, the London Fish Dinner Company—the greater part of the fittings I had put in were gone, as well as the furniture—I was given to understand by Errington that Benham had bought the whole lot for 10l.—during my conversation I gave them to understand that I had had enough of them, and I should not think of taking the place—I received this letter from Errington: "March 9th, 1884. If passing on Monday will you look me up?"—the Barbican place was not shut up then—the last time I had been there was when I saw Cheshire and Pryor's clerk there, with the fittings gone—the place was just open and that was all—I never saw Cheshire after I saw him at Barbican—when I got that letter I think I missed going, and he wrote me another—I saw him; he told me he was going to start the London Fish Dinner Company, and he wanted me to give a price for the fitting up—he wanted to do me a kindness in consideration of what I had lost at Barbican—he said Madam Potter intended to invest 700l. or 800l., and I need not be afraid of getting my money—he said it was entirely in his own hands, and he said "I have got none of that gang here now; Cheshire is not in it, nor Hughlings; I suppose you know where Pope is"—I said "No"—he said "That's where he is," and gave me his address at the House Distribution Society—I gave him a price for the job, and he gave me to understand that if I did the job he could put me into a good thing in the Isle of Wight Sanatorium—he asked me to be as lenient as possible, as he did not want to draw on Madam Potter till the thing was started; after that the money would be all right—on 13th March I received a letter from him asking for an estimate, and on 22nd March I had this. (Expressing surprise at not having heard.) I answered that on the 23rd—he asked me to make my own terms as to payment—the terms I made were if I began on the Monday I was to be paid 10l. on the Friday or Saturday, and the next week I was to have another door amounting to half, and I was to take bills for the rest—nothing was said about my taking shares—I did no work while these negotiations were going on—I received this letter on 30th March. (This was headed "London Fish Dinner Company, 275, Strand" and expressed approval of the witness's tender for fitting up the premises.) In consequence of that I went again to the premises in the Strand; Errington gave me to understand a party had just left who had given him more favourable terms than I had the price was much less, and he did not want any money till the job was completed—he said "I am very sorry, but we shan't be able to take your contract; I will do what I can for you at the Isle of Wight"—I made it my business to go there next morning to see if the work was started—I waited till I saw the man, spoke to him, and he in consequence took his

things away, and would have nothing to do with it—I had no shares in this Company—I went to the New Kent Road premises during the time I was in negotiation with Errington for the Strand job—Errington took me there; he was living there—he introduced me to a female as his wife, and a child living in the back of the premises; he offered me those premises—I spoke to Cheshire when I called, and saw him at Barbican as to the way they had served me, and Cheshire called Errington all the thieves and vagabonds he could lay his tongue to, and he said "Do you know he started another Company in the Strand?"—I said "Yes," and then he got on to the conversation respecting my taking the Barbican premises—I saw Errington after that, and told him what Cheshire had said—he said "Oh, is that the sort of man!" and then he brought up Pope, and asked me whether I knew that they had started another place, and he said Hughlings had gone in with them, and there was none of that gang or clique in with this lot—that was all I had to do with them—I had only subscribed for five shares, but they sought to make me answerable for 25—I was asked by Errington in a letter to attend a meeting of the Company as a favour—he did not tell me what he wanted me for.

Cross-examined by Pope. I never received any instructions from you for fitting up any of these premises—as far as I could judge you were there as a friend of the parties—I recognised you as being in with them, as you were all together, and you dining with them and going from one place to another with them—I saw you in Oxford Street on several occasions, and I took you as being connected with the Company—you never said anything to induce me to take any shares in any of the Companies or to supply any goods.

Cross-examined by MR. WARBURTON. The letter signed Fryor, Barnard, and Co. came by post the day after it was posted I suppose (It was dated the 4th Sept.)—I got it a day or two after I had been with Hughlings to the office in Parliament Street—Hughlings told me that Benham had sued the Company on the bill for 44l.; I don't know it to my own knowledge—I don't know of my own knowledge that the Sheriff issued an execution on the goods at Barbican and took them away—my claim for extras from the Barbican matter was nearly 100l.; I didn't get over 40l.—I don't know that another man was employed to finish what I had not done, I can swear that—Hughlings was the person who went with me to the Grosvenor Bank, it was not Pryor'e clerk—Hughlings never became answerable for any portion of the work; I was given to understand that he was acting as secretary—Errington was not always with him when I saw him; he was previous to the fitting up of the place, but not afterwards—Errington was the cook as soon as the place opened—Hughlings gave me to understand that he had done his best to get me the money—I did not pay for the five shares I took—I signed a paper to take up five, but in consideration of not getting my money I did not pay for them—I am quite certain I did not receive 60l.

Cross-examined by MR. DILL. I first saw Errington with reference to the Oxford Mansions—my estimate was for that, 6l. odd—I received a cheque for 7l. think for it afterwards; all I did there was paid for—I was introduced to Errington as a promoter of companies—he gave me to understand that his connection with the Company would cease directly it was floated—when I went to Barbican I saw a body of gentlemen; Cheshire was there, and Errington, and one or two of the directors, eight

or nine altogether—that was for the International Fish Dinner Company—Errington got me the 44l. bill in consideration of my giving him a certain sum of money—I don't think his name appears on the bill, it is backed by two of the directors.

Cross-examined by Pryor. I was first introduced to you a day or two after I had the bill, about the beginning of September—I commenced to work at Barbican on 4th August; I had done the work and subscribed for the five shares before the 4th September, before I knew you—I never spoke to you about any shares—you made no representation to me to induce me to take the shares or to give the Company credit—you occupied a front and back room at Parliament Street—I never had any chance of getting the clerk's name; I saw him plenty of times when I could not see you, and have taken him over to have a glass—I saw him at Barbican when I went there and saw Cheshire, but I never heard his name—I will swear it was not Barnard that I saw first—I was given to understand that Barnard was a short, dark man, and this man was a red curly-headed man—I saw him at Barbican doing the cooking—I left the bill with you, and your clerk gave it me back, and then upon the request in you letter I brought it to you again, and asked for a receipt for it, which you gave me—Hughlings took me to one of the directors of the International Fish Dinner Company at the Wool Exchange about the bill, but he wouldn't have anything to do with it—I asked a private friend at Hackney to discount it for me; he didn't do it—I am not aware that you took a copy of the bill to try and get it discounted—you had the bill itself for one or two days—I had a cheque of 10l. on account of the bill; it was Benham's cheque; I passed it through a banker's by a party of the name of Davis—I treated you as a man who could get the bill discounted for me—you deducted 1l. from it for doing so—I got the money for the cheque after it was passed through a second time—I could not say who it was I saw at the bank; I could not say it was Titcomb—after the 10l. cheque I got 25l., and the last 5l. you refused to let me have unless I gave you a sovereign, which I took out of my pocket—you didn't say "Here is 5l. from Benham, don't bother me any more, pay me my commission;" you said "Here is 5l., that is all I can do for you, I have had trouble enough with you"—it was through Errington's instructions that I called at Barbican when I saw Benham there—that was in Sept.—I called there once or twice while it was open when I was passing—I had no object in keeping away from the place from September to March—I took no trouble about it after I sent in my bill—it was not financial business that kept me away—I did liquidate; I put this debt in as money owing me when I scheduled my statement.

Cross-examined by MR. SEYMOUR. I do not recollect the date of Benham's dishonoured cheque—I have not seen it in those proceedings—I know it was signed "Benham" at the bottom—I do not know whether my name was mentioned in the body of the cheque as the payee—I never recollect seeing or speaking to Mr. Titcomb.

Re-examined. I called my creditors together after I had done these people's work, and offered a composition, which was not received, and the matter fell through—I was not made a bankrupt; I have gone on with my business just the same—Cheshire's and Hughlings's signatures were on the 44l. bill—I gave Errington 5l. for getting me the job and getting me the bill—it was a one month's bill.

CLARA SARAH POTTER . I am single—in September or October last year I was with Hughlings and Errington at 7, Oxford Mansions—Hughlings was described to me as the secretary of the International Fish Dinner Company, and Errington as the promoter of the Company—I saw Cheshire there afterwards—I was taken there to speak about the appointment as manageress for the New Kent Road branch—they said I should have to take shares to gain the appointment, both Hughlings and Errington said so—I said, "How many shall I have to take? I don't understand anything about companies; about five?"—they smiled and said, "Oh no, the waitresses would take five shares, and Mrs. Thomas, who was managing Barbican, had taken 100 or 150,"I don't know which—I said, "Then I will take a hundred"—I was to receive 40l. a year and apartments on the premises, two rooms on the first floor, and everything was to be found—I paid 47l. 10s. for the shares—I have an aunt; I did not know that she had taken shares—she knew about the appointment I had taken afterwards—I forget the date of my appointment, but it was the same day that I paid the money; I have the receipt—I paid the money at Oxford Mansions—this is my aunt's writing, and this is mine. (Referring to a book)—I signed this application for 100 shares about 19th November (produced)—I was in Oxford Mansions when I paid for the shares—Mr. Errington took the money, 77l. 10s., and paid it to Mr. Hughlings—I gave the receipt to Mr. Brown, the solicitor—I went to New Kent Road about a fortnight afterwards—it was a large place downstairs, occupied by Mr. Errington and his family—Mr. Welch, the builder, was putting in the fittings—a room was allotted to me to sleep in—I was there two or three weeks before it was opened, and Mr. Hughlings said that the gas could not be put on, as the gas company wanted too much deposit for the meter; he had given 5l., and they wanted more—in consequence of the delay I went to 7, Oxford Mansions, and saw Mr. Riddell, the chairman, and Messrs. Austin, Overend, McKinlay, Coates, Hughlings, Errington, and Cheshire, and asked how long it would be before I could enter on my duties—they said that they should be able to open in a few days, but it did not matter to me, because my salary had commenced and I was not losing anything—I bought things and furnished my room—two waitresses were engaged, but I had nothing to do with engaging them—I frequently spoke to Errington; he said that the place not being open had nothing to do with him, he could not help it; he was living in the house, but he was not supposed to be there—he said that they could not find the money to get the gas put on, and there was no money to start it with—in a few days I saw the chairman there, and I said that it was a very great shame—he said that he was very sorry, it was not his fault, but Mr. Riddell's—the first evening I was there Errington asked me to give him change for a cheque for 2l. 2s., as it was Saturday and the bank was closed—I saw it was one of the Company's cheques, and he said that I could have the money in the week—I gave him the two guineas, and never got them back—when I had been there a week Mr. Errington said that there had been a sale at the Barbican premises the day before, and everything was sold, and some of them were very well sold; he said that Mr. Pryor had taken it—I said "Had I known it I would have been there"—Errington said that the Sheriff was put in for rent, and of course he had the sale—I told the chairman in Errington's presence, as the engagement had fallen through, and I had taken shares on the faith of gaining the

appointment, I ought to have my money returned to me—he said of course I ought to have it, but it was impossible, there was no money to pay it with, and he did not know how the affairs were standing—I said that it was his place to know; he said they never could get the bank book—I told him they had meetings, and they ought to know how the affairs were going on—I went in one evening, and Mr. Austin, one of the directors, had been there and taken the linen away—Errington said that he did not know who had my money, he never had any of it, it was used amongst them, and went to pay for different things, and he said "You must ask Mr. Hughlings, he knows all about it, some of it went to pay expenses"—I said "I think you are all one as bad as the other"—he said "I know nothing about it"—I asked him about my aunt's money, who paid the same as I did, and said "You ought to have done some good with it, you ought to have opened this place"—he said "It went to pay for things at Barbican"—he used to say that he could not make Mr. Hughlings out—some of the cooking utensils were sent back, and Mr. Weekes took the tables away before Christmas, 1883—besides the 2l. 2s. I gave Hughlings money for his wife's sake when they were really wanting anything—some time afterwards Hughlings said that they were going to start another company, and asked me why I did not take the Kent Road place myself, it would be a very good thing if I did, and the builder asked me if I would take it off his hands and pay him for the fittings as I could—I refused—he said "The new Company will be very different from the last, we shall have no Hughlings, no Pope, no Cheshire, it will be a straightforward thing, and you had better take an appointment in it, and that will be the means of your getting some of your money back," and that they had taken premises in the Strand—I was introduced that time to Mr. Broad, a solicitor—he said that the best thing I could do was to wind the Company up—I said "I have nothing to do with it"—he said "You can do it because you are a shareholder and a creditor, if you go and see Mr. Broad we will see what we can do for you"—I went, and a liquidator was appointed—Errington went with me and acquiesced in the International being wound up—the new Company was started, and I said "That is why you wanted to wind up the old Company, you could not start a new Company till it was done"—the gas fittings were taken from the Kent Road to the Strand, which was not fitted up when I went there, they were making arrangements with different builders to take a contract—after I went there the first three transactions were with Major-General Wolfe, Mr. Traher, and Mr. Cordery—Mr. Errington or Mr. West gave me a cheque for 7l.; I would not change it myself, but said I would see if I could get change—I did not, and Mr. Errington sent some one to ask me to come back, and I gave the cheque back—he said "I would rather it should not go into any one's hands but hers"—275, Strand, was opened for business in April or May—I lent Mr. Errington 25l. for that, two 10l. notes and 5l.—he said that the secretary would pay me back 1l. a week from the takings of the business till it was paid—before the place was opened Errington gave me this bill (produced), and said that the money was on his own account, it had nothing to do with the Company—it is dated March 8th; that was about the time—he said that he had an account at the Birkbeck Bank—I never got the money back or any of the takings—after that I advanced 10l. to

the builder one Saturday for the Company, as he said he would not finish the alterations unless he had money—I got an acknowledgment for it, and afterwards gave 5l. to buy the linen, and various other sums—they had a Press dinner, which cost me a good deal—I said, "How am I to be paid back the money I paid for the builder?"—he said, "When the place opens you will take the money, and you will stop 1l. a day and pay yourself," but I had not the chance, Mr. Turtle, who was the travelling secretary for some time, came and took the money from me at 3 or 4 o'clock every afternoon, and there was never much to take, and Mr. Errington and Mr. West were always after me—the highest takings in one day were 99 at 6d. a dinner—little tickets were given to the waitresses—I gave money to the servants because the last fortnight I carried it on myself—I found the money for the fish and everything, but Mr. Turtle had nothing to do with it then; there was another secretary, Mr. Riddell—General Wolfe came there the first day it was open, and told me he was going away, but not for some days, and somebody would be appointed in his place, and Captain Traher said that he should soon be going—Pope, Cheshire, Errington, and a great many of them went backwards and forwards—I sent in my resignation; I was advised to do so, and they were very much annoyed with me—Mr. Errington said that I had done a very foolish thing, and they should not allow me to have anything more to do with the business—I said, "What have you to do with it?"—he said, "You can stay up in your room, and go in and out as you like"—I said, "I have given a month's notice, and shall not leave till I have my money"—he said, "I dare say we can find a lady who will pay you out and take so many shares"—I said, "That is just what I want"—Errington said to Hughlings and Cheshire, "I shall put you on the Board now and make you Directors, and you can give what orders you like"—I had tried to keep the takings a few days before that, but they said, "You must let Mr. West have the money to go to market with"—I said, "The Directors have told me not to give the money up to any one"—Errington and West were very much annoyed, and in the evening I went out, thinking they would have left the place when I returned, but they had not, and some friends of mine remained with me all night—I would not give up the takings—there was only 1l. or 2l.—just before quarter-day Mr. Errington begged me to take the business, as it was the best thing I could do; I was to pay 40l. or 50l. down, and take everything as it stood; I declined—Cheshire, Hughlings, Errington, and Riddell were there—they said the only thing they wanted would be a room on the premises fitted up as an office, and at the end of the year they would take it back—I said, "It is not yours to offer me, it belongs to the shareholders, I shall be had up for conspiracy if I do," and they said no more—the place was closed on a Friday evening—Errington said, "We are going to give you one more chance, will you take the place?"—I said, "No, I won't have anything to do with it"—next day the fish was sent for, and Errington walked in about 9.30 and closed the doors—I asked him why he did it—he said, "We are going to shut, we shall not open again, some one is coming to land some money on the things," and about an hour after 50 chairs were taken away—they had come from Hoffman's, near St. Paul's—I understand Mr. Riddell, the secretary, sent after them—I asked Errington why they were taken away—he said, "It is the only thing we can do to pay the

wages"—I saw Mr. Neighbour go upstairs and said, "Are you right in doing this?"—he said, "Yes, all right, we have had legal advice"—I remained three or four weeks after that, the landlord allowed me to stay—everything not belonging to me was taken to Marshall and James's sale-rooms, Chancery Lane—the place was only open five weeks, and on an average not more than 1l. or 2l. a day was taken—a few days before the place was closed, Titcomb and Barr called and had tea, and were talking with Errington and Hughlings—Pryor was not there then—I only saw him two or three times—Pryor came to me and asked how much he had to pay—I said, "Are you going to pay for the others?"—he said, "No, I shall pay for myself only"—I was not a shareholder, but I gave more money than if I had taken shares—I lost 119l., and my aunt took 100 shares—we never got the value of a sixpence—I never had a chance of paying myself back.

Cross-examined by Pope. You did not say or do anything to induce me to subscribe—you generally paid for your dinner, unless Errington asked you to dine with him.

Cross-examined by MR. WARBURTON. I paid 47l. 10s. for shares—Hughlings gave me no guarantee—Sarah and Clara are both my names—I may have given Sarah at one time and Clara at another—I believe the first day or two there were 90 dinners; they never reached 100.

Cross-examined by MR. DILL. I was introduced to Errington as the promoter of the Company—he said he had the management of it until it was opened—I don't know what they did with the money when shares were taken up—he told me he had to receive a good sum of money out of the shares after the place was started; the Company would have to pay him so much for what he had done, and then he would pay me back—the money not being paid to him he was short of cash, and I lent him 25l. to tide him over—it was a personal loan—Major-General Wolfe said that he was going to the Cape—he was chairman—I don't think that he knew anything of my claims on the Company, although I had received a document countersigned by him—I don't think that he knew that I was to lend the money—this letter produced is signed by General Wolfe, but I think my name was put in after he signed it—I don't know if it was ever intended to carry on business, but no business could pay with a secretary, and a manager, and all sorts of people to pay out of the takings—I believe I could have made it pay—General Wolfe was present at the opening dinner, but he was very much against it, and every one was against it except Errington; they could have opened the place with the money the dinner cost—General Wolfe lunched there one day before he went to the Cape, and he said if it was not going to be carried on as it ought he would not lend his name to it—he did not say he intended to resign in consequence of its not being carried on properly.

Cross-examined by Pryor. I was a shareholder in the first Company—I don't remember your name being in the prospectus—I know nothing of you in regard to the Company—I saw you there two or three times, and supposed you to be an ordinary customer, but you were on very friendly terms with them all.

Cross-examined by MR. SEYMOUR. I saw Titcomb two or three times; he had tea there I think with Barr, and they left together, and Errington told me he was going to make him a Director—when he had had his tea

he left with Barr like an ordinary customer, but he seemed to know them all, he was on friendly terms with them.

Re-examined. The money was to be advanced for Mr. Baldwin—General Wolfe never named the advance to me; he said "Are you going to take any shares?" I said "No, I think I have done enough"—I thought if he had known what I had done he would not have asked me to take shares—I paid the 15l. to West and Errington—I don't know whether Baldwin received it—I never saw General Wolfe at Barbican—my shares were in the International. (The undertaking authorising the witness to retain 1l. a day until the amount was repaid, was here put in.)

GEORGE IVE SPALDING . I am a publisher at 58, Crayford-Road, Holloway—at the end of August, 1883, a friend of mine, Mr. Selman, gave me a prospectus, and introduced me to Hughlings with a view to my taking shares in the International Fish Dinner Company—Hughlings said it promised to be a very good thing, and he would advise me to take a few shares according to how I felt disposed—I said I thought I would do so—Hughlings said it would probably pay 10 per cent, in January—I agreed to take 50 shares, and drew a cheque for 50 shares at the rate of 2s. 6d. a share—at a subsequent meeting Hughlings told me they were in want of another director, and that if I took 150 more shares I should be appointed, and that there was a fortnightly fee of two guineas for directors' meetings—in January I took the extra shares, about 275 altogether, 200 for myself and 75 for my brother, and paid altogether 105l.—after taking my first lot of shares I went to the Barbican—the business appeared to be going on in a very flourishing way as far as I could see; afterwards I went and found bills in the window stating that the fixtures were to be sold, and that the business was in liquidation—I saw Errington, Cheshire, McKinlay, and Hughlings at the Barbican—I don't remember Pryor or Pope there—after I saw the advertisement in the window I went to the Company's office, 7, Oxford Mansions, and met two other directors at a Board meeting—Riddell, Overend, and McKinlay were there—I forget the other names—I and my solicitor had an interview with Hughlings soon after the Barbican was closed—he wanted me to advance 200l. on debenture bonds to save the Company—my solicitor objected, and I did not—I attended no meeting as a director till after the Company had collapsed—that would be about 18th December—shortly before Hughlings was arrested I met him in the Strand with Mr. Titcomb, to whom he introduced me as the manager of the City and Suburban Bank—Hughlings pulled out a prospectus of the City and Suburban Bank, which he was about to float, with the address altered to 97, Leadenhall Street, and asked me if I would take some shares in it—I said I had had enough of shares. (The prospectus stated that the capital was 50,000l. in 50,000 shares of 1l. each, 5s. to be paid on application, 5s. on allotment, and the remainder 2s. 6d. a share on a call, there being no liability beyond the amount unpaid on a share, and that the directors were Captain Fish, Messrs. Pharsnage, Healey, and Andrew Heard; C. Titcomb being general manager and secretary.) I declined to have anything to do with it—I asked Hughlings what had become of the Fish Dinner Company—he said they were trying to put it straight—I asked him by what means—he shifted it off somehow, and said they were trying to tide it over, but gave me no satisfactory answer—I next saw him in custody.

Cross-examined by Pope. I never saw you.

Cross-examined by MR. WARBURTON. Hughlings asked me to take 200 debentures to save the Company; he made no secret of its state—I went once to the office at Oxford Mansions; I there saw letters, books, and all the usual things I should expect to see where a genuine business is being carried on—I saw people dining at the Barbican the three times I went, and once I dined there myself—it was open two or three months, I think—I think I gave Hughlings one cheque—I was led to suppose he had the orders of the directors in what he was negotiating with me.

Cross-examined by MR. DILL. Errington had nothing to do with my taking up these shares—I did not see him till I visited the Barbican.

Cross-examined by Pryor. Your name did not appear on the prospectus—I never saw you till at the Southwark Police-court—it was just before Christmas I went to the Barbican and saw the bills on the place—the things had been sold by the Sheriff—I saw a man in the place.

Cross-examined by MR. STATHAM. I never saw Titcomb on any occasion but that when I met him in the Strand with Hughling—I don't know if Titcomb was to give his services to the bank for a year for nothing—I believe the directors of the bank were different men from those on the International Fish Dinner Company.

Re-examined. I altered this "Pay to the London and Westminster Bank" into "Pay to you"—I suppose I paid that money—I paid 18l. 17s. 8d. payable at the City Bank, on 26th October on my application for 150 shares, and on the other side of this is the 9l. 7s. 6d. I paid for 75 for my brother on November 20th—I am put down as attending this meeting (Referring to the minute book) as a director, but I only came to that meeting, the only one I attended, after it was sitting, and then I said I had not come as a director—after I saw the bills in the Barbican I sent a letter that if I was elected as a director I should not act as such—I have only paid 105l. out of 140l.—I have lost that 105l.—I never knew of the existence of the London Fish Dinner Company until to-day; I saw no prospectus of it.

SAMUEL TUCKER . I am an architect and surveyor, of Argyle Street, Regent Street—I saw an advertisement in a paper with regard to the International Fish Dinner Company, and applied for 100 shares on 12th October—this is my application—after I had taken some shares Hughlings came to my office, and said they would probably want some surveys made for them if I would do them, and if I would take some more shares; that they were doing a good business at the Barbican—on one occasion, I won't say if on this, he said they proposed to pay an interim dividend—I never heard how much that was to be—I made one or two surveys for them—I looked at the Barbican after it was open—I parted with 95l. altogether on shares—I was not called on as a contributory to pay any more—I was let off 5 per cent, by paying for my shares in full—I should have done so in any case, I think—I lost the 95l.—I never sent in my claim for making the surveys, and have not been paid for them—I received letters from time to time from the Company. (Letters were here read acknowledging receipt of money from the witness.)

Cross-examined by Pope. I don't recollect having ever seen you before—I never had a letter from you.

Cross-examined by MR. WARBURTON. I should think I went two or three times to Barbican—I saw a number of people and a good flow of business there—I went to the office, it was fitted in the usual manner—I

don't know if there was much work going on—I went into the private room; I witnessed no sort of concealment there.

Cross-examined by MR. DILL. I only came into connection with Hughlings at the works in the Kent Road and Barbican, where I acted as surveyor—I never saw him till I had taken the shares.

Cross-examined by Pryor. I never heard your name, and don't think I ever saw you before.

Re-examined. I should say the advertisement I saw in the paper was the same as this prospectus, only condensed.

ROBERT FREWER . I am secretary to the Hospital Saturday Fund—I had a prospectus of the International Fish Dinner Company—before I applied for shares Hughlings called at my office, 5, Mitre-Court, Temple, and said he had called upon me as he understood I was likely to take a few shares in this Company, and he wished me to take sufficient, 200, I think, to qualify for a seat on the Board—he showed me several circulars relating to the proposed Company, and among others Mr. Coates certified that the Company had been in existence and working at Barbican for some time previously, and that a profit of not less than 7 per cent, had actually been made by the working—the figures on the circular show a profit—it was a printed statement by the auditor which Hughlings showed me—he spoke as if there was no doubt of there being a considerable profit later on—I might have seen this circular between the time of paying my first and second cheque—I wrote this first cheque (produced) on 28th September, at the same time as my application; it has come back through my bankers endorsed "International Fish Dinner Company, Cheshire Hon. Sec."—this (produced) is my second cheque—I believe Hughlings gave me back a receipt for 6l. 5s. at the same time that I wrote out the application, on 28th September. (This was a receipt for 6l. 5s., the deposit of 2s. 6d. a share on 50 shares of 10s. each of the International Fish Dinner Company, H. Hughlings, Secretary.)—this is a receipt on 13th October for my second cheque, for 12l. 5s., on 11th October, to the International Fish Dinner Company—I saw Hughlings several times—I won't be certain when I saw this circular—I refused to take the number of shares suggested, and only agreed to take the 50l.—I was in the habit then of dining at premises at Fleet Street which the Company proposed to take and open as a branch, and I saw Hughlings frequently at those premises—I paid the remainder subsequently to those two cheques with this cheque of 26th October, for 5l. 15s. 9d., and got a discount of 5 per cent and this receipt of 27th October. (The cheque was endorsed and the receipt signed by H. Hughlings.)—this letter of Hughlings shown to me about the time of my paying up in full induced me to pay in full—it is addressed to the manager of the place where I was dining, the Temple Cafe. (The letter stated that shareholders paying up in full would get 5 per cent. discount, and that an interim dividend would be paid as soon as possible.)—I got no money—the next I learned was an announcement I saw in Perry's List—I did not go to the Kent Road premises—a prospectus of the House Property Distribution Company was handed to me, I don't know by whom, probably by Mr. Hughlings—I returned it to whoever handed it to me, and I believe I made the remark in doing so that it looked like an evasion of the Lottery Act and very like a swindle—I took no shares in it—I was not invited to take shares in the London Fish Dinner Company, of 75, Strand.

Cross-examined by Pope. I never saw you in the matter at all.

Cross-examined by MR. WARBURTON. I am not sure to whom the cheques are endorsed; two of them were paid—they were all made payable to the International Fish Dinner Company—Mrs. Dutton did not change the cheque in my presence—I did not cash it, and knew nothing about its being cashed.

Cross-examined by Pryor. I never saw you in the matter, and had no communication with you that I am aware of.

Tuesday, December 30th.

SAMUEL TOOPE WEEKES . I am a builder, of 1, St. Joseph's Street West, Kensington Park—I fitted up the premises, 61, New Kent Road, for the International Fish Dinner Company—I was introduced to the Company by the architect, Mr. Tucker—I gave an estimate which was accepted by the Company, and I completed work to the amount of 146l. 3s.—I saw Hughlings, Errington, Pope, and Cheshire, the secretary, as the work went on—I received an order for some tables through the architect, after consultation with Errington—I spoke to Hughlings about the size and so on—I did not complete them—I partly made them on the premises—I have not charged them in my account—in consequence of the affair collapsing they were removed—that was work in addition to the certified work—I spoke and wrote to Hughlings about my money—he said, "It's all right, there's plenty of money in the bank, and if you get a certificate from the surveyor you shall have the money, the Board will pay you the money"—I attended before the Board with the certificate for the purpose of getting the money about 30th November; I did not succeed—Hughlings said before the directors that he thought I was not pushing the work on as fast as I ought, and tried to make that an excuse for not giving me a cheque—Hughlings and Pope told me that they expected Mr. Burdett-Coutts to pay a visit to the premises to see how nicely they were getting on, and he was likely to take up a large number of shares—I did not see him while I was there—I never received a farthing for the work I did—a proposition was made to me by Hughlings and Errington to do some work for them at Barbican, but I did not undertake it—Coates, the auditor, spoke to me about a bill of sale.

Cross-examined by Pope. The conversation about Mr. Burdett-Coutts coming took place at the New Kent Road, or at a public-house at the corner, I am not sure which—it was in consequence of what was said then that I endeavoured to push the work a little faster for the Company—I never received any instructions from you as to the work I was to do—I did not look upon you as an official of the Company.

Cross-examined by MR. WARBURTON. I understood Hughlings to be the secretary, and as such acting under the orders of the directors.

Cross-examined by MR. LYNN. I had no instructions from Errington, but from the architect—Coates told me that a bill of sale had been executed in his favour, as a protection to me really.

Cross-examined by Pryor. Before giving any credit I made inquiry—you made no representations to me by which I was induced to give credit—I never saw you to my knowledge till the sale at Barbican—the goods there were sold by public auction; I was told they were sold by the Sheriff.

Re-examined. I was complaining one day to Pope about the gas not

being laid on that I might work at night, and he showed me a cheque which he was then going to take to the gas company to have it laid on, but it never was laid on—I had nothing to do with the bill of sale.

THOMAS JAMES QUELCH . I live at 266, Walworth Road, and am a traveller in the fruit and potato trade—on 27th July, 1883, I saw Errington and Cheshire at Oxford Mansions upon my application to become manager of the International Fish Dinner Company—Errington asked me what my qualifications were—I told him, and he seemed satisfied; in fact, he told me that I was the right man in the right place, supposing my application was entertained—I had to see him again; I saw him on various occasions—I had to send in references, which were accepted, and I was then sent out to different tradesmen to get estimates for all necessaries for the conducting of a large business, and I was to endeavour to induce them to take shares; I had also to go and look after premises, and all matters of that description—I saw a large number of trades people in reference to these estimates; only one applied, Mr. Staines, a baker in Aldgate; the others did not; the potato people in particular were very reticent—I asked 3l. a week, but Errington said he thought that would be too much to commence with, and it was arranged that I was to have 30s. a week and so much for each branch that was opened, because I was to undertake the entire management of the affair—I never was manager, you may call it "messing about," that was all—I was at the unfortunate dinner when Mr. Errington got me kicked out—I was to take shares in order to qualify, 25 to begin with, but those I never took up because I did not find the money fortunately for paying the deposits, and another arrangement was entered into between myself, Errington, and Cheshire, by which I was to take 50 shares, which was to be deducted from my salary in the event of my remaining—I was paid 1l. 10s. for a week after the opening dinner—I put in a claim, which was admitted, for about 40l.—a bottle of champagne was the cause of my leaving—Errington offered me a half-sovereign or something to get a cheque changed; what it was or whose it was I do not know—I was to get it changed anywhere I could—I put it in my pocket, took a little stroll, and came back again—I was supposed to have friends in Bond Street who would probably change it—a great many people came to the place in answer to advertisements, females especially—I was at Barbican when what was called the Press dinner took place—the only party connected with the Press that I saw there was a party I have seen on a waggon on Clerkenwell Green.

Cross-examined by MR. LYNN. It was on the day of the allotment that I was asked to change the cheque—if you ask me what the 10l. was wanted for, I think it was to share among themselves, for they were all hard up.

WILLIAM ALDHOUSE . I am traveller to Wilhelm Strom, who is agent to the Sheffield Plate Manufacturing Company—in September, 1883, I sold plate to the amount of 28l. 5s. 1d. to the International Fish Dinner Company—I went to 7, Oxford Mansions about it, and there saw Hughlings—he told me to call at Barbican—I went there, and Errington and Hughlings selected the goods—I have never received any money—Errington afterwards gave me an order for plate amounting to 2l. 9s. 8d. for his private use—he promised to pay on the following Saturday—I

could not get my money; I took out a summons—he gave me this cheque for 1l., which was returned marked "Not sufficient."

Cross-examined by MR. WARBURRON. I saw no one but Hughlings and Errington.

MR. BESLEY put in a copy of the ledger account of the International Fish Dinner Company at the Holborn branch of the City Bank, commencing on 24th July, 1883, and ending 4th December, 1883, with a balance to credit of 1l. 1s. 11d., the total amount received from shareholders being 666l. 17s. 2d.

ROBERT ANDREW RIDDELL . I live at Paignton Lodge, Alexandra Road, St. John's Wood—early in July, 1883, Errington, who I had previously slightly known, called on me and called my attention to a projected company, the International Fish Dinner Company, Limited—he produced a prospectus with the names of Mr. Overend, Mr. McKinlay, and Mr. Chichester, who he said was the eldest son of Sir Arthur Chichester, of Yuleston, North Devon—I knew something of the Chichester family, and I think that operated with me as an inducement to join the directorate—he also told me that Mr. Overend was a barrister of the northern circuit, and Mr. McKinlay was a wealthy and respectable merchant in the City—on those representations I consented to become a director, but not till after some hesitation and long conversation with Errington, who explained to me the modus operandi of the intended Company—it was substantially the same as in the prospectus, but I told him I thought it promised too much, and was being carried out with a very limited capital—I paid 7s. 6d. a share upon twenty-five shares, I think—this is my application for twenty-five shares, dated July 19th—I afterwards had the allotment and paid the money—my first interview with Errington was on 10th July—I paid the money to the secretary, Cheshire, and he had orders to pay it in to the bank, whether he did so or not I do not know—this (produced) is the minute book of the Company—the 21st July was the first meeting I attended—Errington afterwards showed me a letter from Mr. Chichester, who was then in Ireland, saying he could not attend; the consequence was his name was struck off the prospectus—I also attended a meeting on 4th August, Errington and Cheshire were present and I was elected chairman of the Company—there is an entry "The Company's solicitor reported that the agreement between the Company and the founder had been duly deposited at Somerset House"—the "founder" was Errington—there is this further entry "A letter was read from Mr. Pope offering to underwrite a certain number of shares. Resolved, that Mr. Pope's proposition be accepted"—the solicitor was instructed to take the premises at Barbican on that day (4th August) at 130l. a year—Mr. McKinlay, Mr. Overend, and Cheshire were present at that meeting—on 4th September, the next meeting, I was present—Errington and the honorary secretary were there, and Hughlings's appointment as manager at 200l. per annum was confirmed—I do not know that Errington said he had appointed him; the entries are not always very correct, still I did not cavil with them, I signed them as correct as near be—Errington introduced Hughlings as a man quite competent to undertake the management, and after a long conversation with him he was appointed—the 11th September was the next meeting, and the statutory meeting of the Company was ordered for Tuesday, 2nd October—there is this entry: "The secretary reported the progress made at Barbican, and was instructed to have the premises opened, if possible,

for dinners on 3rd September"—the Press dinner for Saturday, 16th, was spoken of; I do not think there was any regular resolution passed with reference to it—I was present at the meeting on 17th September; the founder Errington, and Hughlings the secretary were there—the secretary reported that the premises were opened on the 13th, on which day 120 dinners were served, the following day 253—the inaugural dinner took place on Saturday the 15th, and proved a great success. (MR. BESLEY read from the minute book the minutes of other meetings, on 28th september, 4th October, 16th October, 29th October, 21st November, 3rd December, 10th December, and 15th December, showing the attendances of the directors, and the business done)—the 15th December was the last meeting, there were then present myself, Hughlings, Overend, Austin, and McKinlay—Mr. Hughlings reported that two of the largest shareholders, I presume Messrs. Spalding and Tucker, were willing to advance sufficient money to relieve the Company from its present difficulty—those two gentlemen were to be written to requesting their attendance at the next meeting—it was stated that the manager had made arrangements to keep the premises open, but the directors resolved that 67, Barbican, he closed until further orders—Hughlings was then the manager of those premises—I do not think he told us about letting in Pryor—I had asked in vain at a recent Board to see the pass-book of the Company, but it was kept from me by Hughlings—at one time he said it was at the bank, and had not been made up, at another time Cheshire had locked it up, and had left the office—there were all kinds of excuses; therefore I did not know what amount we had at the bank—it struck me that about 300l. had been paid in in December; there ought to have been a very good balance, otherwise we would never have entered into the agreements to take Fleet Street and other places—I don't think I ever saw the banking account since the end of September—the first thing at every Board meeting which the directors did was to see the financial position—that is what they ought to have done, and what I always insisted on doing, but what I call phantom excuses were made, and we could not see it—I know nothing about the 25l. bill; it was not given with the sanction of the Board—on 15th December, 1883, Messrs. Broad and Broad were appointed to nominate an accountant to investigate the affairs of the Company in conjunction with Mr. Coates—the first time I knew Pryor had got possession of the place was in December, 1883—we had given no authority to anybody to take possession—the lease was signed by us; no deposit was paid—I was told by Errington and Hughlings and Cheshire that the profits were about 15l. a week—I had only their word for it—that was over and above all expenses, except rent and taxes—we were continually asking Hughlings to give us some statement of accounts—I wanted to know what the actual takings were, and what the actual expenses were, and how they had been met, but I could never get any account whatever from Hughlings—there was a takings book; that is, Miss Gordon who took the money kept a book; all the money taken was paid to her—Thomas was the manager, but Miss Gordon sat in the box to take the money from those who entered—she was cashier—I think there were four waitresses besides—I never saw the cash-book—Hughlings never supplied me with the account—I never saw a letter of his setting out on one side the cash receipts and on the other side the expense of carrying on the trade at 67, Barbican—Errington told me he

could sell the business for 1,200l. if I chose—I think he told me that after the general meeting in October—the taking of the premises at 61, New Kent Road was suggested both by Hughlings and Errington—I forget what the rent was—I think Mr. Sorman had commenced an action against the Company at the time of the statutory meeting—Mr. Henry was the solicitor of the Company—he served the Company with two writs; one from Sorman, and the other from a Mrs. Vaughan, who had been engaged by Errington, but who had not been appointed—those two actions were brought by the solicitor to the Company himself, and we thought it such unprofessional conduct that we asked him to send in his resignation—Mr. Gibson succeeded him—Mr. Henry, the director, was brother to the solicitor—Mr. Henry stands very high in the City as an accountant, and he was very much dissatisfied with the way in which the books were kept—I remember the New Kent Road matter, and the bill of sale to Coates—I don't know by whom that was suggested; I suppose by Hughlings—he was present when it was discussed at the Board—I am unable to say what the suggestion was—I find this resolution on 24th November: "That Mr. Gibson be instructed to prepare a bill of sale on the plant at 61, New Kent Road"—it must have been to Coates; it does not say so here—I paid very little attention to the Kent Road affair—I always set my face against its being opened at all, but I was overruled—I did not think the situation an eligible one—I went to see the premises—I knew nothing at the time of an advance made by Coates in reference to the bill of sale—I was informed of it afterwards—I do not know what the 25l. bill was for; it was never ordered by the Board—I never saw Pryor with regard to a bill for 57l. 10s.—I never saw Pryor in my life till I saw him at Southwark Police-court—I don't know that I saw Errington about the bill, he had nothing to do with it; he told me that Pryor had been hawking the bill about at several public-houses, and that he said he had got Riddell's name to it now, and if he did not pay it he would make him a bankrupt—the Board had an intimation that eight or nine cheques had been issued by Hughlings without the knowledge of the Board to various persons, and that those cheques had been returned dishonoured—I was very much disgusted when I heard of it, and I proposed a resolution upon it on 24th November, 1883, which was carried—I spoke to Hughlings about it afterwards, and I think he said they were for pressing claims, or something of that sort—there were two directors on the Board who were friends of Errington's Mr. Overend and Mr. McKinlay, and they signed all those surreptitious cheques without the knowledge of the other directors—I remonstrated with Mr. Overend about it privately, and he said he was very sorry for it—I received this letter of 31st January, 1884, signed "W. Allen," and wrote this answer. (Inspector Marshall proved finding certain papers at Pryor's place, 14, Parliament Street, which he handed to Mr. Musket, clerk to Messrs. Wontner, and Mr. Musket proved that amongst them was Mr. Riddell's answer to the letter of 31st January, dated 1st February, 1884. Both letters were read.) When I wrote that letter I had no knowledge that Allen was connected with Barnard or Pryor—I thought him a perfect stranger—I instructed Mr. Gibson to see what he could do in the matter, to hear what Mr. Allen had to say—the threat of making me a bankrupt has not been carried out.

Cross-examined by Pope. A letter was read at one of the Board meetings containing an offer by you with reference to the placing of 250 shares in

the International Fish Dinner Company—we were informed by Hughlings, I think, that you had made that offer—I had never seen you at that time—I don't know whether you did place any shares—at the statutory meeting it was first proposed that the directors should be elected collectively; you proposed that they should be elected separately, which was carried—I presume you were the Mr. Pope who had the 25l. bill; it was given to you without the knowledge of the Board—I don't know what became of it, whether it was ever presented or not—I never knew you to have any official connection with the Company.

Cross-examined by MR. WARBURTON. I think I was in the chair at every meeting I attended; I don't think we held more than about two dozen meetings altogether—I have been director on several companies, perhaps eight or ten, and chairman on four, I think—I was a barrister, but I left the profession in 1838—I was a person of considerable means, but I am not now—I had 2,000l. a year—I am a man of some means still—some of our meetings were very long, some not; they were conducted very regularly when I was in the chair—I did not know Mr. Overend or Mr. McKinlay before—I am sorry to say that those two gentlemen gave Hughlings authority for these cheques—it is a question whether they had authority to sign them—I think I must take that view of it, if a case were very pressing—whether these were pressing cases is more than I can tell—it is the rule in most companies to authorise payment upon the signatures of two directors, countersigned by the secretary; but the secretary ought to report it to the Board at the next meeting—he did not do so—all the cheques that were returned dishonoured we knew nothing about—I have dined at the Barbican premises two or three times—I went once only before the premises were opened; afterwards I went there and took lunch; I did not pay for it—I saw a good many persons dining there, and a regular business carried on—I think 253 were dining there on the second day—I was told that the Sheriff seized some of the takings—the cheque-book was not at every Board meeting; I swear that—I never saw it at all except when I signed cheques in it; it may have been in Hughlings's pocket—I did not know that Mr. Henry's brother was suing the Company; he was employed as solicitor for persons, and issued writs against the Company for them, but he was not suing the Company on his own account—Hughlings appeared to me to do all he could to further the Company: I believe he was more at Barbican than at the office; I don't know what he did there—I signed a good many cheques at the Board—Cheshire was the first secretary; Hughlings was elected at the second meeting, on 4th September—he was introduced by Errington—I asked him if he had any credentials, he said he had, but they were not produced—I did not see them—I was not connected with the London Fish Dinner Company; the International was the only company in which I was connected with these people—I never drew a farthing at the meetings; I was not anxious to get money, I knew what the financial position of the Company was—we knew that the fish dinners at the Health Exhibition were a great success, and Errington said he thought it would be equally a success if it was established in London instead of Kensington, and I thought it would turn out well.

Cross-examined by MR. LYNN. Errington was present at a good number of the directors' meetings—he was not present when the bill of sale transition took place—he left the Company on the 17th November, and had

nothing further to do with it afterwards I believe—before taking shares in the Company I had a long conversation with Errington—I thought him a very respectable man; he appeared to me to be a thorough man of business—I saw the prospectus and knew that he would act as promoter of the Company by agreement—he superintended the fitting-up of the first dining-room-practically his connection with the Company ceased when business commenced—there was a general agreement between him and the Company, which was filed at Somerset House—I have a copy here—he was to have a percentage on the capital—his interests would be best served by the success of the Company, and not by its failure—certain moneys were due to him from time to time under that agreement—he received several cheques—I think he was rather overpaid than otherwise—he claimed 80l., at 1s. a share on 1,700 odd shares; he did not get it—I don't know how much he got altogether; I don't think he got 80l., because the agreement states that he should not be entitled to 1s. a share till the allotment money was paid—a good many of the applications were mere bogus ones; they were repudiated by the parties whose names were given—the banker's book will show you how many shares were actually paid up—before the meeting of the 21st the agreement was taken from the office, and when he sent in his account it was not satisfactory till the agreement was produced—we asked Errington to let us see it, and postponed the meeting till the next week—I knew that the agreement was filed at Somerset House, and we instructed Hughlings to get a certified copy—Mr. Henry, who had been solicitor to the Company, got it for us, and I handed it to Mr. Wontner—I became chairman of the directors of the Company—it is for the officers of the Company to see that the resolutions of the Board are carried out, the directors are not bound to see that for themselves—I never asked Errington to give me a statement of the financial position of the Company, it was not his business to do that—the first thing we did after the minutes were read was to ask the secretary to produce the pass-book—I never saw the cheques signed to Overend and McKinlay till the Official Liquidator showed me the book with the cheques pasted in—I did not see the payees' names, and if I had I should not have been a bit the wiser—I never heard that two directors called every morning to sign a cheque for Billingsgate for with, nor have I the slightest knowledge what the cheques were for—I never saw the cheque-book or the pass-book during the last three months—Mr. Gordon kept a book—I do not know what has become of it, it may be in the Official Liquidator's possession—for a very considerable time after I joined the Company I thought it was likely to succeed, there was nothing on the face of it which made success unlikely—I believed its objects to be legitimate and likely to be remunerative—the prospectus was printed the first time I saw it; three Directors' names were printed, and I was asked to be the fourth—I believe the auditor examined the accounts once or twice a week; that was his own suggestion—he had no authority to inquire how the money was appropriated, or to disallow any payment.

Cross-examined by Pryor. I was not influenced by you to take shares in the Company; I never saw you till I saw you at the police-court—the first intimation I had of proceedings was the Sheriff taking possession in November—Messrs. Broad and Broad were applied to to assist the Company financially—they were to be appointed solicitors on advancing 200l. to the Company, and a bill was drawn—the money was required

for the Fleet Street premises, and 50l. to pay for the lease to get in—the purchase money was 700l., but I had an interview with the actual lessees, Messrs. Evans and Dudley, of Basinghall Street, who offered me the premises for 200l., instead of 700l. which they wanted from the Company, but I declined—a Mr. Russell Crow was to discount a bill for 75l., but he returned it—I endorsed it, but never accepted it—I think Mr. Hughlings accepted it privately, not in the name of the Company—it was drawn to pay 50l. to the Fleet Street lessons—here are two minutes in the book respecting it; one is, "The secretary reported that he had put it into Mr. Crow's hands, and could not get it discounted, and he was ordered to keep it"—afterwards, when we found he had parted with it to Walford on 13th December, here is "Resolved that the bill for 57l. 10s. and the bill for 25l., given without the sanction of the Board, be both delivered up to the Board before the next meeting"—we paid the first quarter's rent in advance at Barbican, I believe—I think we took the premises on September 1st, and the Sheriff sold the property on December 13th—he was not in possession for rent, but to satisfy a debt—I will not pledge my oath that the landlord was not in possession too—I knew nothing of what was going on—we paid a half-quarter's rent in advance on 29th September, and 39l. 10s. may have been due—Mr. Errington explained an arrangement which he had entered into with a person named Walford—that is not entered in the minute book, you will find it in the agenda. (Reading it)—the bill has never been negotiated, nothing was ever paid. (The prisoner here called for the agreement, which Mr. Besley handed to him)—Mr. Hughlings had no authority to enter into such an agreement; all agreements must pass the Company and have the Company's seal—he should have called a special Board and laid the matter before the directors, but he did not do so till after he had entered into that stupid agreement—it was done in defiance of the express orders of the Board—I do not lay any blame upon you—my idea was to close the place in the winter and open it again in the spring—the landlord may have seized the things in consequence of our repudiation, but I was kept in ignorance of what was going on—I did not pay the quarter's rent due on December 25th; I suppose the landlord paid himself by distraining, but I know nothing about it—we ordered the premises to be closed on 18th December, and I fancied they were closed—I don't think we authorised a second cheque for the quarter's rent to the landlord—if the 57l. 10s. bill had been presented at the Company's bankers there were no funds to pay it; it was a mere expedient to raise money—we repudiated our responsibility with reference to the bill after Hughlings, had parted with it—I did not say at our last meeting that' the Company must indemnify me—you have the minute in evidence already to which you are referring—the landlord did not distrain for his rent till 6th January—a man was not in possession in Oxford Mansions, but I think we met in Fleet Street in order to meet Mr. Farmer, the solicitor, and other persons respecting the taking the premises.

Re-examined. I never saw this agreement till it was put before me by Pryor before the Magistate, nor did I see any copy before the Board—it is dated December 13th, and signed by Hughlings—we had at that time forbidden Hughlings to part with the 57l. 10s. bill—I am reading from a copy of the agenda which I think the Official Liquidator made from the book—I never authorised Hughlings to deposit by way of lien the bill

of exchange for 57l. 10s. as a condition of getting the directors' assent to that agreement—after that was stamped on the 22nd I got a letter signed "Allen," claiming from me the full amount of the bill—I then wrote to Mr. Allen—there were many prospectuses with different names on them; my name did not appear on the first or second—I think Hughlings printed several additions in the prospectus—Mr. Weekes produced the one handed to me subsequent to the other—it is alleged there that M. Francatelli is the chef, and he did act—he was introduced to the Board by Errington—he was to be paid—I was called to the Bar in, I think, 1831—none of the companies I have been in connection with, are in existence—in 1845, the year of the railway mania, I found my name put down to many companies which I knew nothing at all about—the Progressive Limited Company is in existence, and I have been a director of the Australasian Mines Investment Company since 1877—they used to pay a dividend—the Company was in a very bad state, and was remodelled, and I was one of the new directors; it is in a very prosperous state now—I never carried on any trading concern.

ROBERT GRANT LINDSAY . I lived at 40, Ashmore Road, Harrow Road—I live now at Fernhead Road—I was appointed as secretary to the International Fish Dinner Company at 7, Oxford Mansions at a salary of 30s. a week—Mr. Errington introduced me—I took 10 shares at his solicitation to qualify, he wanted me to take 50, and I paid a shilling a share on application—I have paid nothing more since—I attended regularly at Oxford Mansions—the furniture there was on the hire system—a great many people called at different times for money—I suppose they had supplied goods—Cheshire and Errington asked me one evening to advance 4l.; they wanted it particularly—all this time Cheshire was honorary secretary, and really secretary—I did so—Errington brought me back 3l. of it, and said he had been obliged to lend the other sovereign to a friend, and I must wait for it—Hughlings succeeded Cheshire as secretary about September or October—I ceased to be under-secretary very soon afterwards—while I was under-secretary Errington and Hughlings complained of my talking too much—they said I must keep my mouth shut, and never open it except by their permission; that especially came from Hughlings—I got blown up once for telling Mr. Riddell, the chairman, the name of the printer who had worked for us—I had been supposed to have opened my mouth to two people who came applying for shares at Oxford Mansions, and telling them something which perhaps prevented them from taking shares—every day people came who had been sent on to me from the Barbican for payment—I had not a penny to pay them with—I went to Barbican about 12 times, chiefly while it was being fitted up; before it was opened—I understood Mr. Errington was superintending there—I saw him there nearly every day—I saw Pope at the Barbican and at Oxford Mansions, where I understood he was furthering the interests of the Company by placing shares—I went to the office, 26, King William Street, Strand, at the beginning of this year to get money, which is still owing to me—I saw Pope and Cheshire there—Pope asked me one day if I could change a cheque on the Grosvenor Bank for 3l. 10s.—I said I could not cash it myself, but if it was a good cheque and would be promptly met, a tradesman near where I lived would cash it for me if I endorsed it—I went to a tradesman and got 2l., which I gave to Pope, and afterwards I got the balance, 30s.,

which I gave Pope—I put my name and full address on the cheque—it was returned dishonoured, and I had to pay it myself—it was signed "Frederick Pope"—I wrote to Pope about the cheque, and received this letter from him. (This was headed "The House Property Distribution Company, Limited, King William Street, Strand, May 29th, 1884," and stated that Pope could not understand why the cheque was returned, and that he would let the witness have the amount at once, but that he would not be in town tomrrow.) I went to King William Street next day and saw Pope; I told him it was a great inconvenience my not having the money—I got 30s. then; I have never received the balance—he gave me subsequently another cheque on the same bank for 3l.—my landlord passed it through the bank at my request; it was returned in the same way marked "Account overdrawn"—I returned both those cheques to Pope at his earnest request—he said he had got into a mess about those cheques, and wanted to get them back to compare with the counterfoils and the book—the second cheque was in June, about a week after 29th May—he subsequently gave me a cheque for 5l. 5s. of the House Distribution Society on the Grosvenor Bank—before presenting that cheque I received this letter. (This was dated 9th July, 1884, and requested him to hold the cheque till Friday, when he would have money, and stated if this were not done he should get into disgrace with his directors.) I returned that cheque to Pope—I only saw Titcomb at King William Street once; he was inside the office speaking to Pope and Cheshire as far as I recollect.

Cross-examined by Pope. You had no official connection with the International Fish Dinner Company—I saw from the minute book that you had offered to underwrite, I think, 150 or 200 shares—I don't believe you did place any shares—you gave me 30s. on the Saturday, and asked me to let the balance remain over—if the cheque I gave my landlord had been honoured I should have paid myself 2l. and given you 1l.—I only had 1l. on it, and when it came back overdrawn I had to pay it—I was obliged to treat the matter as a loan—I have had nothing of that on account—I believed you were an honest man, and that you would have repaid me—I don't think at the moment you intended to defraud me.

Cross-examined by MR. WARBURTON. I was assistant secretary from July to September—I believe I was there every day while I held the office—there was no work to do—I was in the back room nearly all the time, and the front room was shut up for fear of the man from whom the furniture was got, coming and seeing it—I don't think I was at the Barbican three times after it was opened, and then for only about a couple of hours a day.

Cross-examined by MR. DILL. Errington introduced me to the Company—I first knew him in 1868 or 1869 about—I have had several dealings with him, they have been satisfactory, he has always been an active, straightforward, honest man with me—I knew the firms he was connected with; they were of good standing as a rule—Cheshire kept the books of the International Fish Dinner Company; Errington had nothing to do with them to my knowledge—I do not think he had anything to do with the current means of the Company, I cannot say—Errington was not connected with the financial transaction between Pope and myself—I got my salary from the Company, and have no charge to make against anybody with respect to the firm—they have not attempted to defraud me at all—I know the books were overlooked by Mr. Waters—Errington did not

interfere with the working of the concern after allotment so far as my personal knowledge goes.

Cross-examined by MR. SEYMOUR. Titcomb's name was not on any dishonoured cheques—they are dated May—I do not know if Titcomb left the bank in March—I only met him accidentally.

Re-examined. (The entry of 31st July in the minute book appointing the witness at 30s. as secretary was read.) I remember the Press dinner on 13th September—I resigned on 24th September—I knew nothing of the matter after my resignation—besides myself at Oxford Mansions there was an office boy, and an old man, Collins, used to be a good deal there; they and I were paid.

FREDERICK WILLIAM HENRY . I am a solicitor, of 5, Furnival's Inn, and in acting for Mr. Soman, a printer at Norwich, I came across Errington in June, 1883—he brought the International Fish Dinner Company to my attention, and asked me if I would act as solicitor to the Company—I said I was willing to do so provided the directors were respectable people—he had no printed prospectus then—on the second or third interview afterwards he showed me a printed prospectus with Riddell's and Cheshire's and another name on it—I was satisfied on seeing those three names as to the respectability of the directors, and consented to be a director—I was requested to attend and attended regularly a great number of Board meetings from the time of my appointment—I knew nothing of Hughlings and Cheshire before that—at a subsequent meeting on 4th August, the one before that at which shares were allotted, I found Cheshire there, and afterwards Hughlings was introduced by Errington—I made an objection about them to Mr. Riddell—on 4th August Cheshire asked me for a loan, which I thought rather strange—my brother joined the Board as a director before the meeting on 4th August—ultimately I was instructed to bring an action for Mr. Soman against the Company in respect of work done for the Company—I did not act for Messrs. Vaughan—I took 25 shares—I was asked to do so by Errington—I parted with 3l. odd, the deposit money—I did the Company's legal business up to my dismissal on 22nd October—about a fortnight alter I sued the Company for Soman for 30l. odd—I sued them also myself for about 30l. for solicitor's charges—I made the outlay for the Company's registration and the stamp and everything—I lost some 70l. or 80l. by the Company—I have had no payment at all—to my knowledge there was no registration of members up to 22nd October—I and several others inquired about it on several occasions—I went to the Barbican once after it was opened—about the middle of November, after I was dismissed, I put in an execution in the judgment obtained by Soman—after everything was sold up there were several executions, the landlord distrained—there was a balance of 1l. 7s.—I got nothing.

Cross-examined by MR. WARBURTON. I do not know that I was dismissed for acting on both sides—I do not know whether I was acting for the Company at the time I was acting for Soman because they were employing another solicitor at that time—shortly after my writ was issued a special meeting of the directors was called by my brother with reference to the members' register—I attended that at my brother's request, and instead of going into the question for which the meeting was called my dismissal was given me, signed by the secretary—that was the 22nd October.

Cross-examined by MR. DILL. I registered the International Fish Dinner

Company—I saw the prospectus in manuscript—I saw nothing irregular or illegal about it, or I should not have registered it—a solicitor named Low acted for Errington—I registered the Company—instructed by Errington I acted for him in that—afterwards at a directors' meeting a resolution was passed that the registration costs were to be paid—at that time most decidedly the Company was perfectly regular and legal—I do not think Errington's work afterwards was calculated to render the Society a success—he no doubt worked to extend the share capital, but I cannot say whether he worked to bring it within the directors' control, I have no reason to say he did not—the Company was certainly a bond fide one.

Cross-examined by Pryor. I never saw or heard of you before seeing you at Southwark the other day.

Re-examined. When I say a bond fide society I mean that I considered the object of the company was bond fide, and if properly managed would have been a success—I don't think the expenses would have much to do with it—I think the directors were weak and were led by Mr. Hughlings and Mr. Cheshire.

JAMES GRAY . I keep the Clarence public-house, Aldersgate Street, not very far from 67, Barbican—I know Errington, Cheshire, and Hughlings—I changed a number of cheques for Errington and Hughlings and their messengers—I commenced doing so as soon as they commenced supplying dinners; it was after the Press dinner on 13th September—I cashed over 100, it might be 150, sometimes three or four or five in an hour—I have had a great number, sometimes five in a morning, returned unpaid by the bankers, marked "Refer to drawer"—I went many times to see Hughlings without finding him—I usually saw Errington at the Barbican—I asked for Hughlings; Errington asked what I wanted of him—I said I would rather speak to him myself—as time passed on I made Errington acquainted with the cheques being dishonoured—he thought it was a gross piece of business of Mr. Hughlings, and neglectful on his part, and that there was a solicitor in the City Bank, Holborn branch, who was trying to upset their business—Hughlings said so also, and that after a time things would work on and be more comfortable, and I should be paid—I had a number of cheques on Hughlings's private account at that bank; he had an account as well as the Company—I had 11 or 12 cheques at one time—I had about 10 (five of which had been returned dishonoured, and the rest I had not presented) for a month before they were taken up by Hughlings, altogether worth 17l. or 19l.—it was then I went round and saw Errington and Hughlings—Errington brought me this cheque (produced) a month after the date it bears—I did not notice the date at the time or I should not have cashed it—Errington came on the Saturday night and said "Will you cash this cheque for me?"—I said "No, 1 cannot; I have not more than sufficient money in the house to pay the servants' wages"—he said "Hughlings wants to go down to Brighton to-night to see his wife, and there is no money to go with"—I said "I cannot let you have the money"—he said "Will you let me have 1l. on account, and I will wait for the other till it has passed through the bank?" and he asked me at the same time to let him have a bottle of whisky—I gave him 1l. on account and he whisky—I posted the cheque to the bank with instructions to attend to it as early as possible—on the Tuesday Hughlings, Errington, and one or two others

came in—I said to Errington "I have heard nothing from the bank, and conclude the cheque is all right; I will pay you the balance, deducting the 4s. for the whisky"—he said "Don't do that, because I want the money very bad"—I said there was quite enough owing to me, and gave him the 26s., and in about half an hour the post brought the cheque back dishonoured—I never got my money back—many of the cheques were drawn to pay Billingsgate fish.

Cross-examined by MR. WARBURTON. Hughlings came to my house and took up all the cheques but one—I lost about 7l. altogether, that had something to do with Hughlings—he took up all the cheques but the one for 2l. 10s.

Cross-examined by MR. DILL. I received from 100 to 150 cheques, which were all paid but one ultimately—I think the names signed to that were Hughlings, Overend and McKinlay—none of them are before the Court—none of the cheques were signed by Errington; they were presented by him, and many of them were drawn in his name.

Cross-examined by Pryor. I did not find your name as drawer or endorser on any of these cheques—you made no representations to induce me to part with any money on these cheques.

WILLIAM SAMUEL BIRCH . I live at 6, Croxted Road, West Dulwich, and am one of the directors of the Grosvenor Bank—I was a director while Titcomb was manager—part of the business of the bank was to lend money—in November, 1883; Mr. Titcomb made a proposal for a loan of 200l. for the International Fish Dinner Company—he said that he believed it was a good business, and that they had got places fitted up well—it was not granted that night, and it was brought on again the next week—we meet once a week—on the said occasion the Chairman said that he had been into the place in Barbican, and it was fitted up with fittings of the commonest kind, and they were doing no business—he said "Good God! don't lend those people any money, they are doing no business there"—the proposal was declined.

JOSEPH GIBSON . I am a solicitor, of 76, Cheapside—in November, 1883, Hughlings and Errington called on me—Errington said he was secretary of the International Fish Dinner Company, and Hughlings said that he was the promoter, and that Mr. Henry, the solicitor of the Company, was suing the Company for his costs, and he asked me to attend a Board meeting to protect his interests and the shareholders', and ultimately to be appointed solicitor in the room of Mr. Henry—I acted as solicitor after Mr. Henry's dismissal—I obtained judgment, but the Company did not pay, as there were no funds—I perused the draft agreement for the premises in Fleet Street; the matter fell through as the Company could not raise 50l.; a deposit had to be paid—I was not a shareholder—I was not consulted about Pryor taking possession of the Barbican premises—the letter dated, 26, King William Street, Strand, addressed to me, was written in my office—this stated: "Dear Sir,—Would you like to be solicitor to a new Bank, prospectus enclosed. I know all about it, and also the manager, and I think it will suit you. I think it will be successful. Yours truly, H. Hughlings. "That was enclosed in one of the prospectuses of the City and Suburban Bank—I did not see Hughlings about it—Titcomb called on me after, and asked if I had heard of the new bank; Mr. Overend had mentioned it to me—I said "Yes, I have heard of the new bank from Hughlings and Overend"—

Titcomb said he had been manager of the Grosvenor Bank and was going to start a bank in Leadenhall Street on the same lines, and asked if I would be the solicitor and take shares, and I consented—I was to take 100 shares, but I only took ten—they were to show me that 3,000 had been taken, and then I was to take 100, but they did not do so—Hughlings said that 3,000 or 4,000 shares had been taken; he told me a great many more had been taken than Titcomb told me, he only said 300 or 400—I paid 2l. 10s. deposit on my ten shares—I have my receipt and my letter of allotment—I Knew the bank had opened for business, but I never attended there except at the meeting three or four weeks after, when it was resolved to wind it up—I then ascertained for the first time that the bank had issued cheque books—neither of the defendants were there.

Cross-examined by MR. WARBURTON. Hughlings appeared to be pushing the International Company, and working hard.

Cross-examined by Pryor. You did not induce me to give credit to any of these companies—I never saw you till you were at the police-court—I am told the Company was in difficulties in October, they were being sued—my clients advised me that the Sheriff was in possession—that was a bond fide execution, not a sham sale; it was for printing supplied—I heard the Sheriff was in possession for the landlord also—a representation was made which induced me to peruse the agreements for the premises in Fleet Street and Curtain Road—I had received them from the vendor's solicitor—the solicitor for the prosecution has the whole of the papers.

Cross-examined by MR. SEYMOUR. I have been in the profession two or three years—the prospectus Hughlings left was printed, and I read it—I think the names of the Board were blank—I think Mr. Crowe, a chartered accountant, was auditor—I thought the Company had prospects of success, especially after the explanation Titcomb gave of what he had done in other banks—he said he had a large experience in the Grosvenor Bank, and it was successful—he did not say why he was leaving; he did not say he was leaving in consequence of the Bank deciding that the loan business would not be carried on—he told me he was going to be content with trusting to its future, and he would not for 12 months draw any salary—the directors' names were afterwards filled in, and in my opinion they were names of respectable and responsible men, and I have had no reason to alter that opinion—I don't know Mr. W. T. Morphew, of King Street, Covent Garden, but I know the business he carried on, and I believe him to be a substantial tradesman—I don't know Captain Fish, of Tinley Hall—I believe Mr. R. P. Fashionage, of 5, East India Avenue, to be respectable, and Mr. Ely and Mr. Andrews—I saw Titcomb two or three times, but I never met him at the Bank—the Bank collapsed as soon as the charge was made against Titcomb; if it had not been for that I believe the Company would have been safely launched—I did not give notice to the shareholders of the winding-up of the Suburban Bank, but I advised it should be done; it died in its infancy.

Re-examined. A charge was made against Mr. Titcomb with regard to the International Fish Company, and it was thought it could not be carried on if it was associated with his name—there were proceedings at Westminster and Southwark—I never saw the minute book—I do not know whether the other directors paid anything for their shares, or whether they were given to them—I did not know how many share—

holders there were till afterwards, when I saw the list, and I think some of the defendants' names were among them—this (produced) is not the list shown to me; in that shown to me the names were repeated twice, so that if a man subscribed for 40 shares he appeared to have subscribed for 80—Titcomb said he was to subscribe for 100 shares—the last thing I did for the International was giving a bill of sale to Mr. Coates—the International owes me 50l. or 60l.; the City and Suburban owes me nothing except my shares.

JOHN JENKINS . I am a silversmith, of 22, Bedford Street, Strand—I let the first floor back to Titcomb as an office on 7th April, and he gave it up on July 9th—he paid me the quarter's rent before he left—his name is still on the door—Pope succeeded him, and occupied the office only about three weeks before he was arrested—a great many people came there to see Titcomb, but I don't know their names—Errington and Hughlings a few days afterwards came to take the same office, and Pope came the day after—I went to Pope's office, 26, King William Street, Strand, and found put up "To let agency"—he had left his address with my boy—I saw there Pope, Errington, and Hughlings, but I did not know their names then—they followed me back and wanted to take the office which I had to let—I am not sure whether they gave the name of Liddle and Co. as reference, or whether they were going to trade in that name—I asked Titcomb which he considered the better tenant, Pope or Hughlings—he gave me no answer for some time, but afterwards said that he considered Pope the better tenant, but Pope's money transactions with him were far from satisfactory, and he had owed him 2l. for some considerable time, and he could not get it—I wrote this letter to Titcomb (Found at 57, Leadenhall Street. Applying to Pope and Co. for 6l. 5s. office rent.) The letter was returned, but Titcomb afterwards paid me 6l. 10s.

Cross-examined by Pope. The police returned me one key of the place.

Cross-examined by MR. SEYMOUR. Titcomb told me in July that he had rather not be a reference for Mr. Pope at all, that he could not answer satisfactorily for him, and if I made an agreement with him, to get the rent in advance—he wrote me a letter explaining that my not getting the money was an accident, and I got the money from him. (Two prospectuses of the International Fish Dinner Company were here put in and read, in the second of which the name of Mons. Francatelli, chef to H.R.H. the Prince of Wales, was inserted.)

Wednesday, December 31st, 1884.

GEORGE LOWRY . I am an auctioneer and estate agent—I act for Mr. Ashton, the owner of the premises, 67, Barbican—I let those premises to the International Fish Dinner Company under this agreement on 21st August, 1883; the person I saw in the matter was Cheshire; he signed the agreement—there was no power to underlet or dispose of the premises—it was expressly stated that he should not underlet—I had a half quarter's rent in advance—on 7th January Pryor came to me for the purpose of paying the quarter's rent—I had not known him before in the matter to my knowledge—I did not know what he had to do with it—he wanted the receipt in his own name, which I would not give him—that was the only time I saw him, and that was the last time I got any rent—I heard nothing more about the matter till the business had stopped—I do not know at all how Pryor got into possession of the premises, he had

no right there—I found him in possession—we got possession from the liquidator by paying him 10l.

Cross-examined by Pryor. You did not pay me 64l. rent—the first quarter became due on 29th September—it was payable in advance from August—the whole quarter's rent ought to have been paid in advance on Michaelmas Day—I believe the Sheriff was then in possession, and I think he did realise and hand us some rent—what date it was I cannot recollect—I made a distraint on 3rd January, but I did not go in because the Sheriff had sold—this receipt for 32l. is in my handwriting—I received that from you—as far as I recollect the Sheriff paid us the September rent—after possession was handed to us by the Official Liquidator, the goods that were left were put in the street—I cannot tell you the date, it was after Lady Day—you did not tender us any rent in respect of the rent from Lady Day—I believe we received 60l. from you between the 16th September and 2nd January—I am not sure of the date when the Sheriff paid—I think we distrained for the rent in advance on one occasion—the Sheriff paid us on the first occasion—I imagine that he sold the goods by which that quarter was paid—I think it was somewhere about the beginning of April or May that we paid the liquidator the 10l.

THOMAS PRICE GOWER . I am an accountant, of Liverpool Street—I was appointed Official Liquidator through Messrs. Broad and Broad, the solicitors, on Miss Potter's part to wind up the International Fish Dinner Company—I took possession of the Company's books about the 18th January, 1884—I have the details of the claims sent in as to the shares—I found 1l. 1s. 11d. at the Holborn branch of the City Bank, that was all the cash I found—I have the materials from which I made out this statement—there were 305 10s. shares fully paid up, 765 7s. 6d. shares, 25 5s. shares, 150 2s. 6d. shares—110 persons appear to be holders of shares, and appear in the books, and the total number of shares they held amounted to 1,905; 660 of these nothing was paid upon—390 of the shares appear to be allotted to waitresses, journeymen, and other servants—there are bankrupt holders of 15 shares, and 168 shares in respect of which the application is insufficient—I should not know how to recover it—there are at least 60 shares upon which there are counter claims—Cheshire holds 25 shares, Pope 10, Errington 25, Hughlings 200 upon which nothing has been paid, in addition to 62 upon which 7s. 6d. is credited—Mr. Riddell, the chairman, is one of the 5s. shareholders, I think—I believe he has some claim with regard to some money lent in advance, but that has not been proved to me—the Messrs. Falding hold between them 275 shares, and it is alleged that both of these gentlemen are under age—the claims against the Company formally made to me amount to 675l.; there are other claims of which I find evidence—the amount received upon all the shares is 468l. in rough figures—the only asset paid to me is 10l. by the landlord of the Barbican premises; there are no means of getting assets unless I ultimately succeed in getting something from the shareholders—I made inquiry about the Barbican premises; I heard that Pryor was in possession, and I applied to him by letter to know upon what grounds—this is the letter (produced)—there is a letter before that—this of the 27th February was no doubt the first—he didn't call in answer to that letter, and on 2nd May. I wrote another letter, but in the meantime I had been applied to by

the landlord's agent to know if I would surrender the premises; that was after the 25th March—it was after that that Pryor came to me, and in general terms he claimed the premises—on 2nd May I wrote this letter; I got no answer, and I don't think I have ever heard from Pryor from that day to this—I received this letter in answer to mine, stating that he held the premises under an agreement by Hughlings on behalf of the Company—my impression is that after that Pryor saw me, and we had some conversation about it, but I adhered to my view of the matter, and he left—I think eight or ten days elapsed before the surrender was made—he had ample opportunity to take away any property of his—I sent a clerk with the keys, and I was told that the surrender was completed—there are some small books of takings here in reference to the Barbican business—I have not attempted to make up an account of the receipts—I believe the cash book shows the takings; it seems to have been kept anyhow—from September 13th to the end of the month the takings are 4l. or 5l. a day; the total amount for the whole of October appears to be something under 200l.—for the first fourteen days in November it appears to be 60l. or 70l., from 1l. to 2l. or 3l. a day—I found in the allotment book certain cheques of the first cheque-book supplied to the Company pasted in, and some of the second cheque-book, I think seven, they are all "to bearer" except one, which is to Errington's order—"bearer" is printed and has been changed to "order"—the cheques are for from 2l. to 4l. each—there is 5l. 10s. for buying fish, 4l. 16s. for wages, 4l. 13s. for advertisements, and other sums—I had the Chief Clerk's authority to surrender the Barbican premises—I went down to 61, New Kent Road, very shortly after my appointment—I found Errington living there; he asked to be allowed to stay there a little while—there were some gas fittings and a few other things there—I told him I should want to sell them—I went there some time afterwards; the gas fittings had then been removed—I got no assets from that place at all.

Cross-examined by MR. DILL. I have been carefully through the books—there are various payments for grocery and fish and things of that sort; I don't think there has been any claim on the Company for them—some part of Hughlings's salary is entered as being paid—he makes a claim of about 90l—he paid gradually for some shares; he didn't pay for them when he took them—I see he is credited with 7s. 6d. a share on 32 shares—my impression is that Hughlings told me part of his salary was paid, and he claimed for the rest, for which he had some unpaid cheques—I don't know who kept the books—I had no knowledge of the Company before it went into liquidation—the books were not very well kept—I have been liquidator to companies before this, and I think I understand the business—I have the details of Hughlings's claim here; I don't find that he claims for several unpaid cheques which he took up for the Company with his own money—he says in the claim that he claims 16l. 10s. for cheques, but there is no date.

Cross-examined by MR. LYNN. When I went to the Oxford Mansions I met Errington there, he assisted me in obtaining possession of the books and documents referring to the Company; he placed no obstacles in my way; many of them were under lock and key—they were moved from the office and placed in a cupboard belonging to the landlord—I can't tell

you how many dishonoured cheques were in the hands of Hughlings; I presume some were.

Cross-examined by Pryor. I don't think I found you were associated with shares or anything before the 13th of December; the Company ceased to have any operation the day I was appointed liquidator—I had no authority from the Chief Clerk, I did not want it; but I got his sanction for my surrendering the premises—I think Mr. Wells, a solicitor, called on me on behalf of the landlord, but afterwards the matters passed into the hands of Messrs. Norman, and the surrender was completed to them—if I were to sue the people and get in all that was due, it would amount to 500l.—notices were sent to the chairman and everybody: he has not paid—my impression is that I found the keys amongst the papers, or Messrs. Lowry handed them to me—I gave you distinct notice on the 2nd of May that I intended to complete the surrender.

Cross-examined by MR. SEYMOUR. I don't think the respectability of a banker is an important feature in a prospectus, it is not utterly indifferent, I don't think it is of any value, it is the practice of a banker to let any client put their name on a prospectus—I don't mean that a bank like the City Bank would open an account with anybody without inquiry; that is a good bank, one of the best.

MR. BESLEY put in under the Bankers Act an account of the London and South Western Bank with the London Fish Dinner Company, together with the certificate of incorporation, and the affidavit of Mr. Tower with respect to the banking account of that Company, which commenced on April 12th, 1884, and closed on 9th July, with 9s. 3d. to the credit of the Company.

HENRY BALDWIN . I am a builder of 21, Birdhurst Road, East Road, Wandsworth—about nine months ago, Pope, Errington and Hughlings came to me and told me to come and see them at 9, Laurence Pountney Lane, and asked me to do some repairs there; I gave an estimate—Errington told me they were very short of money at the time, if I liked to fit up this place they had a better job coming on in the Strand—I gave a tender for this one of 7l. 15s., it was accepted, and I did the work; I was not paid—they gave me a bill—a friend of mine lent me a few pounds upon it, it was not met—Errington's and Pope's names were on it—I saw them about it, they said they were very sorry, but the job that was coming on in the Strand they thought would make it up, if I would let this stand over for a time, and plenty of gentlemen they said had plenty of money—they told me of several names, one was Dr. Mark, and the other was Captain Traher, and another was General Wolfe; I saw one of these gentlemen this morning—I fitted up counters at 275, Strand, put in a dinner lift, and did other work; there was a balance due to me of 32l. 15s.—I took five shares in the London Fish Dinner Company, which was deducted from my account—a six weeks' bill was given to me for the balance, 27l. 15s., that was not met—I had received 10l. of the original amount of 15l.—Errington gave me a cheque for 2l. 10s. on the Grosvenor Bank, and next morning he said "You had better let me We that cheque back, and I will put the account right before the day is out"—I gave it him back—I never got the money, nor the sums of money which he borrowed of me—after the bill was dishonoured I went to 275, Strand, and there were men removing the goods; Errington was superentending the removal, and the last secretary, Mr. Riddell; I didn't see Hughlings there, but I met him just opposite the sale rooms—I went to

Errington and asked him what I was to do for my money, and he referred me to a solicitor, Mr. Daisy, who lived just opposite—I also said to Hughlings "How am I to go on about this money? it is a cruel thing"—he said "You will be paid directly after the things are sold, you will perhaps get 5s. in the pound"—I followed the goods to the auctioneers in Chancery Lane—I never got a penny.

Cross-examined by Pope. You were with the others at the office in Laurence Pountney Lane when I was asked about the estimate, and you said "What do you think it will run to?" and I said "About 7l. or 7l. 10s."—I didn't know you before; I saw quite enough of you then—I saw you at the office plenty of times afterwards—I think I saw you about a fortnight or three weeks afterwards, you asked me to go and have a glass of grog with you—I applied to you for payment of the bill; I stopped you in the street, and you gave me your address to come to Charing Cross, to come to see you—the bill was then in my friend's hands, and I have had to pay him—you never told me that you had nothing to do with the office—you told me you were willing to pay your share as the others did—I saw you there as often as anybody else; you were there when they talked to me about the Strand business, and kept nodding your head and saying "It will be all right, you will get your money"—you said "This will be a good thing, and I would advise you to do it as cheap as you can"—I can't call to mind the dates, but I frequently saw you in and out of the premises in the Strand while I was doing the work—I can't tell you when I began the work, but I finished it six weeks before the bill was due—you didn't ask me to take any shares in the Company; I think Errington mentioned that to me—I didn't see you the day the goods were removed—I didn't see you as a director in the first onset; I believe you came in afterwards.

Cross-examined by MR. WARBURTON. Hughlings and Errington were the two I saw when they were taking away the furniture—Hughlings was in and out there every day, five or six times a day—I went there two or three times after the place was open—I saw some people dining there; I never dined there myself.

Cross-examined by MR. LYNN. I became connected with the London Fish Dinner Company about nine or ten months ago, as a shareholder—I was a subscribing shareholder, and was one of the signatories to obtain the registration—they said they wanted one to make up enough, and said there would be no liability on my shoulders—I didn't know any of the directors till they came there and saw me; they were all perfect strangers to me—I never attended but one meeting upstairs, and that was after the best part of the work was done; they said they wanted one to make up the number—I know a man named Horton, I believe he is a friend of Errington's; I have known him some years—he introduced me to the job in Laurence Pountney Lane—Errington did not tell me that as he introduced me he would have nothing more to do with the work—I don't know that Horton had been convicted; I heard once that he was in trouble, but I don't know what he got or anything about it—I didn't think there was any risk in undertaking the work, or I should not have done it—they told me they would give me half as I went on, and half when the work was done—I knew nothing of the London Fish Diner Company when I began the work, not till I undertook the Strand job—Errington agreed to pay me 15l. in two payments; I got 7l. 10s. and a cheque for 2l., 10s.—I didn't receive anything from Miss Potter or West

—my friend who had advanced me money on the bill I believe has got it now—I believe there was a name on it besides Errington and Pope; I don't think Hughlings's name was on it—I believe Wells's name was on it—I got 3l. at Carris from Captain Traher—I believe General Wolfe was the only gentleman on the job—Captain Traher did not give me the 3l., he gave me a bill, and a man at the public-house gave me the money—I think Captain Traher's name was on the bill; I am not sure whether it was Dr. Marks or what the other was.

Cross-examined by Pryor. I don't know you at all; I think I have seen you about once or twice—you never spoke to me or made any representation to induce me to take shares.

JAMES MCCULLOCH . I am a house decorator, of 1, Nutfield-Road, Lordship Lane, East Dulwich—I was engaged to fit up 175, Strand, for the London Fish Dinner Company—I received a letter from Errington, went there, and saw him and six other gentlemen—I gave Errington an estimate, and subsequently supplied goods to the amount of 45l.—I asked him in the second week for money on account; he said that they had 600l. in the bank, but he could not get any because the printer was dilatory in printing the cheque-books, and it was the last job he would do for him—I said that I would take the men away if I did not get any money on Friday—he said "For God's sake don't do that, you will only strangle the goose that lays the golden eggs; the only thing I can do is to get you a bill"—I said "My men cannot be paid by bills, and I shall not accept a bill," but I afterwards took one dated May 14th, 1884, at fourteen days after date, for 10l., which Mr. Sealer discounted for me—It was not met, but the job was done—I have not been paid anything—Errington asked me if I would do the grill—I said that it was not in my line, and recommended Mr. Sealer—all I received was 1l. from Mr. Baldwin—Errington asked me to take shares; he said that it would be good for the cause as I was doing the work—I paid 2s. deposit on them—I afterwards received a demand for the balance—I said that I should not think of paying it—he said he did not expect I should—I paid 1s. on each.

Cross-examined by Pryor. You made no representation to induce me to take the shares—I do not know you.

ROBERT SCALER . I am an ironmonger, of High Street, Borough—in April last Mr. McCulloch introduced me to do some work at 275, Strand—I went there, and Mr. Errington said that they wanted a grill made to fry fish and steaks and chops for the Company, which was to give sixpenny fish dinners principally—I thought it was a sort to philanthropic matter, and in consequence gave a low estimate, 12l. 12s.—on May 2nd I got this letter from Errington. (Requesting him to proceed with the grill immediately.) He said that I should be paid cash on its completion, and I put it up at once—I applied to Errington first the day after the Press dinner—he said that they were in a muddle through the dinner the day before, and he could not pay the money that day; would I call the following day—I did so, and he said that I could not have a cheque that day as they were having a cheque-book made for the Company, but I need not be afraid, as there was from 400l. to 600l. standing to their credit at the bank, and he expected the cheque-book every minute—I applied a third time, and he took me out of the office and produced two bills of exchange, amounting together to 50l. or 60l., and wanted me to

take my debt out of them and give him the balance—Errington was the drawer and General Wolfe the acceptor, and they were endorsed by two or three more—I told him I would make inquiries through my bankers about General Wolfe; Errington said he was as good as the Bank of England—I saw the bank manager—I afterwards told Errington that my bankers' statement was very unsatisfactory with regard to General Wolfe, and he left the office disappointed—when he showed me the bills I said "I think I have seen you somewhere before"—he said "Possibly you have; I have been in London a great many years"—I said "I think I have seen you in Mr. Batchelor's office in Upper Thames Street"—he said that he was there, and knew him very well—I said "He is as big a thief as I know"—he said "He is a bad fellow; he victimised me to the amount of 10l."I think he said—that shook my confidence—I got no money on account of my claim—I had got the bill from McCulloch before that, and gave him part cash and part goods for it, and when it was due it was not paid.

Cross-examined by MR. DILL. A number of persons were there, but I did not know who were directors—I think it was eighteen months before that I saw Errington—I asked to whom I was to look for payment, and was told to the Company—I was introduced to General Wolfe as one of the directors of the Company.

FREDERICK BAYS . My firm are printers and stationers, at 51, Seven Sisters Road, Hollo way—in January, 1884, I came in contact with connot Wells, and Co. with Errington, and received an order for printing prospectuses and memoranda of association of the London Fish Dinner Company—I also received an order for a copying press and letter book; they were to be delivered at 53, Laurence Pountney Lane—after I saw Wells on that occasion he disappeared, and I communicated with Errington on the matter—we printed a number of documents for the Company—I received these letters from Errington. (These were orders for 1,000 prospectuses, a die stamp, wrappers, &c., and requesting them to take shares.)—we did the work but did not take the shares—this (produced) is the prospectus we printed—we were to be paid upon allotment—we applied to Errineton and wrote to him several times pressing for payment, and eventually got this bill, dated April 19th, for 18l. 15s., drawn by Errington and accepted by General Wolfe—that is a trifle over the amount of our account—we kept it some time and then paid it to a whole-sale house; it came back dishonoured and I took it up—I was to hand Errington 3l. if I got the bill, and I unfortunately parted with my 3l.—Errington introduced me to Mr. Titcomb, and also sent me to the International House Property—on the day after Bank-holiday I got this letter from Errington. (Asking him to meet him at the Fleet Street end of Chancery Lane, to consult him as to an order for the City and Suburban Bank)—that was the first I heard of the City and Suburban Bank—I saw no one about the House Property, all the orders came by post—this (produced) is the prospectus I printed—on the 14th June I got this letter (Ordering 500 prospectuses of the House Property Distribution Society), and on June 19th, this letter (Ordering 500 more, and another 500 the next week), and on the 20th June this: "Please do not proceed with printing further prospectuses till you hear from us again"—on the 2nd July I received this letter (Signed "Frederick Pope," promising to get a cheque signed by Friday; ordering 12 prospectuses, and requesting that the type might be kept up.)

—there was an alteration in the prospectus, changing the secretary—I then received these letters from Pope, from the "To Let Agency" and "The House Distribution Society" ordering proofs, also this post card of June 26th: "Please strike off 500 prospectuses, and put Sidney F. Cheshire instead of John Sormani as secretary"—these are my accounts (Found at King William Street), they are all my partner's writing or mine—I was never paid a farthing, and never got the 3l. back—Errington introduced me to Titcomb at 22, Bedford Street—he said that Mr. Titcomb was going to open a bank, and I was to give estimates for forms of all descriptions—Errington gave me the order for the prospectuses when I saw him in Chancery Lane, before I saw Mr. Titcomb—I executed part of the work in this estimate of June 11th, amounting to about 35l.—I printed cheque books, paying-in slips, and other things—Titcomb never paid me—I wrote to him, and he wrote back saying that the order was not completed and nothing was due—I saw him, and asked him to let me have something on account; he said that he could not—I never got any money, either from the Fish Company, the House Distribution Company, or the Suburban Bank—this is the last letter I got from Errington. (Dated June 17th, requesting a cheque for 3l. at a loan, till Friday, and promising him a large order for printing.)—he has scratched out "House Distribution Company," and written in "275, Strand"—I did not lend him my cheque—about a week before Titcomb was charged at Westminster I asked his opinion about Errington, and said that I thought he had treated me very shabbily—he opened a drawer and showed me a returned cheque of Errington's, and said "That will speak for itself," or words to that effect—he also said that he expected he should have to pay Errington's share in the City and Suburban Bank; that was only 1l. I think, simply to form the Company: he was one of the signatories before going to allotment—I called on Titcomb three or four times at the bank, but was not able to get any money—I saw Hughlings and Errington at the bank—I do not know Pope—I went to the office of the House Distribution Society once or twice, and saw Cheshire—I went to 275, Strand, and saw Hughlings—at Bedford Street I saw Titcomb, Hughlings and Mr. Barwell. (INSPECTOR MARSHALL here identified some of the letters from the House Distribution Society, signed "Sormani," as Pope's writing.)

Cross-examined by Errington. I did not receive instructions from you with regard to the Fish Dinner Company or the City and Suburban Bank that I am aware of, my instructions were all contained in the letters which have been read.

Cross-examined by MR. DILL. The Fish Dinner Company accepted General Wolfe's bill, but it was given to me with the understanding that it was Mr. Errington's private money, as he said the Company would not be able to pay me yet, and he was doing me a favour by paying me out of his own pocket—I received a letter from Errington making an appointment to meet Dr. Mark, and he tried to get two guineas out of me to get it cashed—I was to hold Errington responsible for the Fish Dinner Company, but with respect to the House Property he said I was not to let them get too deep in my debt, but they were right for 7l. or 8l.

Cross-examined by Pryor. I do not know you.

Cross-examined by MR. SEYMOUR. I first saw Errington with reference to the City and Suburban about July, a day or two before Titcomb showed me the cheque—I did not know Mr. Barwell till Errington introduced

him—he has employed me since—I should say that he is a person of undoubted respectability—he is financial manager to the London and South-Western Bank, and I am doing work for him now—he was assisting Titcomb, and I concluded bringing in the strength of his connection—I got the two orders together from Mr. Titcomb and Mr. Barwell; they were both sitting at the table and consulted together, and Mr. Titcomb said "Not so many of that"—he objected to having a large amount at a time, and said that he would have the things from time to time as they were wanted—I think the arrangement was that I was to be paid on allotment, but I cannot say exactly who said so—there was no allotment; the bank dropped on Mr. Titcomb being arrested—I sent invoices to Leadenhall Street, but never sent my whole account, my statement, because the order was incomplete—I only delivered about 30 prospectuses as there were alterations from time to time—when I saw Titcomb in Leadenhall Street he said that when the order was complete he would endeavour to get me a cheque on account, and before it was complete he was arrested—when Errington showed me the dishonoured cheque I had asked him if Titcomb was a person who I could trust financially—he said that he was very sorry he was mixed up with him, but he did not know the state of his finances at the time—I do not know whether there was or was not a general allotment.

Re-examined. I printed these cheques and forms (produced), but I did not supply the stamps—the printing has not been paid for—I was having a glass of wine with Errington in the Strand about June or July; Hughlings came in, and Errington introduced me—I was a very few minutes in his company—I also saw Hughlings at Leadenhall Street at Titcomb's office, waiting to see him—Titcomb asked if I knew him; I said that I could not call his face to mind—he told me to go out and look at him, and I returned and told him I did not think much of him from what I had heard from Errington, and I told Titcomb that Errington said he was engaged in some company, and used to draw a large amount of cash every week—I then left.

By MR. SEYMOUR. I sent in these cheque-books while Titcomb was there—he was arrested on August 1st—I should say it was before that—they had been there a day or two when I called on Mr. Titcomb, and he complained of the colour of the binding—I saw them in his office—I do not know how many had been used; the parcel had been opened, but no cheques had been taken out to my knowledge.

FREDERICK JAMESON . I am one of the firm of Moss and Co., auctioneers, 77, Chancery Lane—on 3rd July we had a sale, of which this is the catalogue (produced)—a number of articles are marked in it from 275, Strand, where I believe the Fish Dinner Company was carried on—they were taken by Mr. Liddell's direction—my carman Nicholls fetched them away—I paid the proceeds of the sale to Mr. Nazar, of Chancery Lane.

JAMES SPREADBURY . I am a fitter employed by Taylor and Bradford, floor-cloth manufacturers, of the Strand, who fitted up the premises in the Strand for the Fish Company—their bill was 18l. 15s., but I did not see it—this is Mr. Taylor's signature to it.

WILLIAM CHAMBERLAIN . I took Hughlings in Gray's Inn Chambers, and delivered the papers I found there to Mr. Musket.

HERBERT GEORGE MUSKET . Among the papers found by Chamberlain

was this receipt from Taylor and Bradford for their bill. (This was a bill for l. 17s. 7d. in part payment of account, signed by Errington, dated April 9th, 1884, at three months. Amount carried out 18l. 16s.)

JAMES SPREADBURY (continued). The total amount was 21l.—the bill was presented and came back marked "No account"—the matter was then put into the hands of Dodd and Longstaff, and this note was written by their direction. (Applying for payment of the account.)—no money was ever paid.

THOMAS MILLS . I keep the Glass House, Brewer Street, Golden Square; I have known Errington about two years—about the end of last year or the beginning of this he introduced me to Dr. Mark and Captain Traher as directors of the Fish Dinner Company, and the three asked me to introduce them to my bankers, the London and South-Western Bank, Regent Street branch—he brought a man named Fuller to me—I cashed this cheque for 2l. on the Grosvenor Bank at Mr. Knowles's request. (Payable to B. Fuller, and signed "Frederick Pope.")—it was returned dishonoured—I summoned Fuller at the County Court about six weeks ago, and he paid the amount—I think Dr. Mark and Captain Traher chose the wines for the Fish Dinner Company—Errington introduced them—they required a particular brand of champagne, I do not remember the name of it—I had not got it and I ordered it at 9, Water Lane, and supplied it to the amount of 17l. 2s.—I have never been paid—I got this bill for 18l. 15s. (Drawn by Errington and accepted by Traher.)—I never got anything for it—I received this prospectus (produced) from the customer who supplied the wine—I received a 30l. bill from Errington—he said that Captain Traher and Dr. Mark were very hard up, and I gave Errington 1l. on it—I also received this 12l. bill from Captain Traher; I gave him 12l. for it, and have never been paid—I received this cheque for 5l. from Errington on the Birkbeck Bank, and gave him 5l. for it, less 7s. for two bottles of whisky which I sent for—I never paid it in, as a note came asking me to hold it over for a couple of days—I did not see Errington till two months afterwards, when I told him I had been very badly treated, and I wanted my money—he said he would see that all the things were paid—I received this cheque for 2l. 10s. from Errington or one of his clerks. (Dated January 5th, 1884; drawn to self, G. Wells.)—I parted with 29l. 5s. altogether, in cheques, bills, and goods.

Cross-examined by Pope. I had no transactions with you direct—Knowles was my partner—I have never had any representations from you with regard to the other transactions.

Cross-examined by MR. DILL. The 30l. bill for Traher and Mark was a purely private transaction between ourselves—Errington had been doing a little business with me, such as buying wines—I don't know whether he went to Brighton on my account—I know Traher and Mark went, and I paid for it.

ANNETTA NORGARD . I live at 46, Palace Street, Buckingham Gate—I was employed as one of the waitresses at the London Fish Dinner Company, 275, Strand—Errington engaged me—I was to take shares—I took five shares, and paid 5s. and got this receipt—I had 7s. a week and board and lodging, he told us we were to have a uniform—I went there—there were no apartments for us—I got no dress, I was never paid any wages except that Miss Potter used to give us a shilling when we wanted money—the last day I was there I got 10s.—there were three others there besides

myself who were paid the same as I was—Hughlings used to come there to dinner—I have seen Pryor and Pope there—a box was kept on the table for gratuities to the servants; it used to be opened in the evening by Mr. Riddell—I don't know who got the money, we used to have about 4d. between us of an evening—the place was closed after I had been there about two or three months—I asked Mr. Riddell, when I had been there a week, how I was to get my money, and he said he had not any—we were referred to Mr. Nazer for our wages—I only got 10s.

Cross-examined by MR. WARBURTON. I am not positive whether I had been there two or three months—I was to have been paid by the week—I made no complaint when I was not paid the first week, they promised to pay the following Tuesday—we had a shilling or so then, and then other shillings, and once a sixpence—the business was looking up and I thought I should be paid when it did—the customers did not increase.

Cross-examined by Pryor. You came in in the afternoon and had tea there, you did not pay—you came into the public dining-room.

MARGARET HILL . I am a widow—I undertook to pay a rental for a counter at the London Fish Dinner Company's premises, 275, Strand, a shop just opposite Smith and Son's newspaper place; about 14 or 16 feet frontage, and running back into Booksellers' Row—my stall was in the lobby leading to the dining rooms—I had a knife machine, which Dr. Mark in connection with the Company agreed to buy; I was not paid for it—when I went to the Strand I saw Errington, Turtle, the travelling inspector, Wolfe, and Traher—the knife machine was taken to the premises; I was to have 3l. for it—the last I saw of it was Mr. Jameson knocking it down at the auction—I cautioned him not to sell it, but he did—they made me take five shares for 5s.—in consequence of their not paying for the machine I did not pay any rent—I saw Hughlings, one of the directors—I was present at a meeting when Traher and Wolfe were turned out, and Cheshire and Hughlings appointed as directors—Pope was chairman at that meeting.

Cross-examined by MR. DILL. I saw Errington every day of the week—I always understood he was the promoter of the Company.

JAMES WEST . I am a cheesemonger, of 35, Vauxhall Bridge Road—I was manager of the London Fish Dinner Company, 275, Strand, to which I was introduced by Errington—before that I had supplied fish to the International Fish Dinner Company, who owed me 32l.—they paid me off 10l. by cheque, and I accepted 7l. in discharge of the 22l. when I was appointed manager to the London Fish Dinner Company—I gave the 7l. cheque to Mills, the cashier, who cashed it for me—I took 25 shares in the London Fish Dinner Company, for which I paid 25s.—Errington asked me to take them—I began my duties as manager early in the spring, February or March, and remained there till the close—I was at the meeting towards the end when Hughlings and Cheshire were appointed directors in the place of Traher and Wolfe—Mr. Pope was voted by the majority of shareholders into the chair at the statutory meeting—I believe Errington registered the Company and provided the funds for registration—I bought fish for him on some occasions while the Company was going on—I found the money on one or two occasions, and never received it back, on account of Miss Potter—I was there three or four months—about 28l. was due to me for wages—the business was carried on from the Press dinner to 3rd July, when Mr.

Jameson sold—I brought an action, obtained judgment, but found the goods had been removed the day before I endeavoured to take possession.

Cross-examined by Pope. I was connected with the London Fish Dinner Company from the start, and knew all the officers in connection with it—you had no official connection whatever with the Company, and had nothing to do with its promotion or formation—you had nothing to do with my taking the shares—you were at the Press dinner—there was a good deal of champagne going about—you did not subscribe for five shares then—I heard you had taken five shares; I don't know if you paid 5l. for them—at the meeting at which you presided it was the wish of the shareholders that you should take the chair—I think you conducted the business of the meeting with impartiality.

Cross-examined by MR. WARBURTON. Hughlings joined the Company about a fortnight before the close—he gave no orders—the majority of the orders were given through me.

Cross-examined by MR. DILL. I had previously been connected with the International Fish Dinner Company—I thought the business would succeed, or I should not have occupied the post of general manager and taken 25 shares—I was cognisant of how matters were being carried on while I was manager—the daily takings went into Miss Potter's hands—I never knew of a farthing going into Errington's hands to the best of my belief—I found the greater part of the money myself—Miss Potter found me 10s. or 15s. to go to market with, and I found the rest myself—I had a small amount from time to time—on one or two occasions Errington might have found a little amount, but never a large amount—I remember the work Baldwin did to the place—once or twice I lent him money myself—I paid him 12l. 10s. which I got from Miss Potter—I don't think Errington ever touched the money—I was not in Court when the question was put to Baldwin.

Cross-examined by Pryor. I was not induced to take any shares or give any credit through your representations—I saw you at no meeting of shareholders—I first saw you, I believe, when you came in and had dinner at the Fish Company and paid for it—I know nothing more about you—I saw you there once or twice.

Re-examined. Miss Potter paid me 15s. or 1l. at a time, to buy fish—purchases were made daily—when Miss Potter did not give me money I found it myself once or twice, and Errington gave me a little once or twice; about a couple of sovereigns—I think one morning we found 4l. between us—I never counted the takings myself—I don't know what takings were paid into the banking account—I was there when Miss Potter refused to allow the takings to be taken away, and Errington stayed there all night—I wanted to lay hold of the money myself, and Errington backed me up—I had lent the money on that morning, and Miss Potter had said if I advanced it she would refund it in the evening, and she would not give it up.

WILLIAM HENRY TRAHER . I live at Seymour Street, Bryanston Square, and have had no commercial experience—I joined the Fish Dinner Company as a director—Mr. Lanskell, of 7, Old Broad Street, introduced me, through Messrs. Scott and Wyatt, to Errington—I saw Errington; he wished me to be a director, mentioning General Wolfe's name, whom I had known—he made no disclosure to me about the International

Fish Dinner Company—I joined in ignorance of that Company—I attended Board meetings for four or five weeks—I was present at the first meeting on 23rd April, 1884—Edward Errington was then allotted 280 shares in respect of the agreement between him and the Company, and a cheque for 10l. was signed and handed to Errington by the chairman—then I think there were estimates for floor-cloth and stoves, the appointment of Miss Potter, and the voting of 300l. a year to the directors—I had 3l. myself, and was more than that out of pocket—at the next meeting, on 13th May, the prospectus was revised, and after other things the Press dinner fixed for Monday, 21st May; that was the real beginning of business—I had left long before Jameson came in on 3rd July—Errington managed everything, I think—on 14th May an account was presented for brokerage on 389 shares by Mr. Errington—Errington represented that 420 had been applied for—I believed that that was sufficient to cover all liabilities and leave a margin—I was not aware that there were only 3l. or 4l. in the bank when the cheque for 10l. was passed—I did not see the bankers' pass-book till some time after—on 14th May they reported Miss Morgan's, Miss Robinson's, and Mr. Vale's applications for shares—I found the secretary had put an advertisement in the Daily Telegraph for a director, in consequence of the retirement of Major-General Wolfe, who went to Basutoland as second in command—I objected to the Press dinner, and did not go to it—on 23rd May there was a notification of the transfer of Wolfe's shares to me temporarily—a number of cheques were signed then—Errington told us the allotment letters would bring sufficient funds to cover them—I was present at the statutory meeting on 29th May—Pope was voted into the chair—I knew nothing of him before; I had only seen him twice at the London Fish Dinner Company, where he came, I think, to see Mr. Errington—at the statutory meeting Hughlings, Philips, Scott, Cheshire, and Mark were proposed as directors—I retired at that statutory meeting, and have had nothing to do with the management of the affairs of the Company since—I do not know Cheshire—I have seen Hughlings once or twice at the Fish Dinner Company in the Strand—I signed this application for 25 shares—I afterwards got the letter of allotment—I paid no cash—I gave a short bill for 18l. for shares for friends at 15s. a share at the instigation of Errington—before the bill became due I said I thought the bill was not legitimately obtained, and I thought I should fight it—I have had no action brought against me in respect of the bill—I said to Errington I thought we had all been done by him, and I should fight it out—I then knew what sum had been paid into the bankers, and I was surprised it was not larger—I said to him that business could not be conducted on that principle, that the servants were the first consideration to be paid, that they had not been paid, and that there was sufficient money taken at the time to pay the servants at the place of business—I think Errington said there was nothing to pay anybody with, or something to that effect—Errington said he thought we should want money to finance the Company, and he knew a gentleman, Mr. Titcomb, the manager of the Grosvenor Bank, and that he would probably advance sufficient funds, and that we should make Titcomb a director—I objected to Mr. Titcomb on the ground of a trial then going on about a bill of sale and the Grosvenor Bank—that conversation was before General Wolfe's resignation, to the best of my belief—on one occasion I signed a

cheque for 7l. for Turtle for money out of pocket; I also signed a cheque for fish—Errington told me to hold the cheques over as they could not go to the office till there was sufficient money in the bank to meet them.

Cross-examined by Pope. I cannot say you were officially connected with the London Fish Dinner Company; you were chairman of the shareholders' meeting—I should think Mr. Baldwin is wrong if he says you gave authority for fitting up the place, I think you had no authority—think you made some objection to presiding, and that it was the unanimous wish of the shareholders that you should preside—you conducted the meeting with impartiality—the directors' office then expired by law, I wished not to be re-elected and was not—you simply put the resolution to the meeting as proposed.

Cross-examined by MR. WARBURTON. I had been director of one Company before: my experience was nil or next door to it—I think the books would show the meeting was carried on in a regular way—I was connected with the Company about five weeks, from April 23rd to June 3rd—I had heard of fish dinners at the Fisheries Exhibition being a success and thought that probably this Company would be—I have had some means and am a person of credit—I objected to the Press dinner because I thought it a waste of money which would be better spent on the Company—the object of the dinner was to raise shares, I was told—it would have advertised the Company if the Press had been invited, but I believe only three Press men were there—General Wolfe approved of the dinner and I believe took the chair—I hinted it to several Pressmen and they declined to meet the men who were asked.

Cross-examined by MR. DILL. There was an agreement between Errington and the Company—I did not inspect it—I paid nothing for the shares I took, I gave a bill—I do not charge them with defrauding me—the bill has never been presented—I gave one other bill for 30l.—I received no notice in respect to that—I had several conversations with West with reference to Errington's dealing with money—I supposed it was the secretary's or manager's duty to take money off the establishment—I did not hear West's evidence—I cannot give any individual cases in which Errington dealt with the takings—he took possession of everything in the place, and had general supervision—West was a paid manager as Errington's deputy—I cannot say that Errington appropriated any money in the establishment—I received 4l. from the Company—I paid nothing.

Cross-examined by Pryor. I think I only saw you once—you did not induce me to take any shares through your representations, you never represented the Company as sound, to me—I never saw you at any meeting of the Company.

Re-examined. It was said Turtle was to have 80l. a year, the directors 300l. a year, Mr. Riddell 320l., auditor 80l., Miss Potter 40l., West 104l., and the rent of the premises 185l.—the directors only received a guinea each time, and if the shares had been taken up properly there would have been plenty of money to pay everybody, and probably leave returns—at the Fisheries Exhibition there were no directors nor rent to pay.

ERNEST WALLACE . I am a solicitor—I was introduced to the London Fish Dinner Company by Errington—I registered the Company and paid the registration fee—I did work for the Company amounting to about

60l., and sent in my bill in May—Errington made a statement to me with reference to the state of the Company—I resigned as solicitor to the Company on the 10th June, because the old directors had resigned, and there appeared to be new directors of whom I knew nothing whatever—I saw Pope and Hughlings at one meeting—that had something to do with my resignation—I have never been paid.

Cross-examined by Pope. It was the statutory shareholders' meeting I saw you at, you presided over that with impartiality so far as I could judge.

Cross-examined by MR. DILL. I was introduced by Mr. Fayne, a public accountant, a man in a medium position, to Errington, and by Errington to the Company—there was nothing irregular or extraordinary on the face of it that I could detect—there was nothing improper or extortionate in the agreement between Errington and the Company—I knew Errington do nothing inconsistent with the work of a professional company promoter—I was at the Press dinner—I did not hear General Wolfe make any reference to Errington.

Cross-examined by MR. WARBURTON. There were no Press representatives at the dinner to my knowledge.

Cross-examined by Pryor. I knew nothing of you till I saw your name in the police reports—I never heard of you before that.

Cross-examined by MR. STATHAM. I have had some experience of companies—my bill ran up to over 50l.—I was 7l. or 8l. out of pocket—I believed in the bona fides of the Company and in its success.

Re-examined. Mr. Fayne, the auditor, was to have 50l. a year—I knew nothing about the International Fish Dinner Company.

WILLIAM NAZER . I am a solicitor, of 38, Chancery Lane—in May last year Pope asked me to become solicitor to the House Property Distribution Company—I did not agree to do so, I said I would consider it—I went twice to see the standing Counsel to the Company, but could not see him—I had met Pope at the opening dinner of the London Fish Dinner Company—I was subsequently told by a client that my name appeared on the prospectus of the House Property Distribution Company—I had given no permission—I spoke to Cheshire about it—I wrote these letters. (Mr. Musket produced two letters found by Chamberlain at King William Street; one of these was to Cheshire, and requested that his name might be withdrawn as solicitor from the Company. A letter from the witness to Errington was also read, thanking him for his offer to place his name on the list of directors and qualify him.) I think that last letter had reference to Tilbury and Company, a Company being formed by Henderson and Company, Gray's Inn Chambers; I wrote it because Errington left a message for me offering to put me on the directorate and qualify me—I think it was that Company—I was employed to wind up the London Fish Dinner Company on 16th June—I did not do so, but I did what would virtually wind it up—Crowe was to be the liquidator—this is the account of the sale of the property in the Strand by the auctioneer—8l. 9s. 4d. was the balance handed over to me after deducting the expenses from 19l. 14s. 4d., the actual proceeds—I handed over to Mr. Riddell 5l. 5s. after deducting my expenses—I acted as intermediary between the landlord of the Strand premises and the Company, who owed a quarter's rent—the landlord gave a guinea to give up the key—that was a long while before I took my name off the House Property Company.

Cross-examined by Pope. I do not know that my clerk returned you the prospectus with my name in pencil; I cannot say he did not—I do not know when the warrants in this case were issued—if they are dated August 8th that would be twelve days before the letter was written.

Cross-examined by MR. DILL. Errington introduced me to Pope with the object of becoming solicitor to the Company—I had known Errington some time—the object of his introduction was mentioned at the time—after the introduction I did not know Errington to have any connection of any kind with the House Property Distribution Company—I entered an appearance with respect to the writ issued by Miss Potter against the Company—I have not got the writ—I handed no money from the sale to Mr. Errington.

Cross-examined by MR. SEYMOUR. I have been a solicitor for eleven years—I only skimmed through the prospectus; I did not understand the scheme, and wanted an interview with Counsel before I gave my consent—I could not see the Counsel—Mr. Crowe was not appointed liquidator of the London Fish Dinner Company, he was only suggested as such—I know Crowe, I should say most decidedly he was a gentleman of undoubted respectability; he was auditor of the House Property Company—I know nothing of James Fairbairn, estate agent—I have seen the name on a brass plate for years—I have no doubt he is connected with a firm of respectable agents in London.

Re-examined. I know nothing of the Lombard Deposit Bank—I know Mr. Crowe is a chartered accountant—the first time I saw Mr. Crowe was when I called on him when he was suggested as liquidator of the London Fish Dinner Company—I have since seen him several times; sometimes we have not talked about business at all—all I know of him is from June—I don't know of his business capacity—I know nothing of his having anything to do with Pryor—I don't know Fairbairn from Adam.

EDWARD DUNCAN FREDERICK RYMER . I am a solicitor practising at Westminster—Pope brought me this letter signed "Titcomb, manager of the Grosvenor Bank." (This was to introduce Pope, and offering the witness the appointment of solicitor to the House Property Company.) Pope said Mr. Titcomb was going to be one of the leading directors of the Company, and hoped I would accept the position; that it would be a very nice little Company—I told him I should take time to consider the matter—I saw him two or three times, and eventually consented—I saw no one else besides Pope—I paid for registering the Company, and also for the stamp—my out-of-pocket expenses amounted to about 5l. 10s., I think—Pope said he had had the printing expenses, and he hoped I would not object temporarily to pay the fees; he would give me his personal guarantee that the money should be paid to me—I knew nothing about it except that letter of the 10th—I relied on Titcomb's recommendation—we had a conversation about the nature of the business of the House Property Distribution Society, and I told him it could not be worked on the lines he proposed—he said "Why?" and that he wished to have a solicitor's advice before he went into it—it was proposed to do the distribution by ballot, and I said it would be an infringement of the Lottery Act to do so—I only attended one Board meeting, on 19th March I think—I can't say if Hughlings was there; Pope, Cheshire, and Overend were there, and the gentleman to be the auditor, and Mr. Venn, a

notary, I think—I think a letter came from Pope asking me to take shares—I received these letters at different dates, and sent replies to them. (A letter of 25th February from Pope to the witness, stating that the arrangement of his being made solicitor would be confirmed on his taking shares, and that he would be paid out of the Company's funds; and of 26th February presuming that he had registered the Company.) I wrote and said I had registered it—on 29th February Pope wrote to me about taking shares—I replied on 3rd March that I did not think I ought to take shares till the preliminary expenses had been repaid. (A letter of 7th March from Pope was read, saying they had more than enough to cover the costs.) I had suggested I might get a client of mine, Mr. Schoot, to come on the Board; he did not join—on 9th April a short agreement was drawn up between the Company and Sormani, offering to appoint him secretary at 120l. a year—I don't think I saw the prisoners between the meetings I attended—this agreement of 17th April for the new secretary seems in my clerk's handwriting—on 30th April I applied for 5l. 13s. for stamps—I severed my connection with the Company by letter early in April, and resigned on 19th April—I got none of the out-of-pocket money nor my costs—I left my resignation at Pope's; he found me and asked me to explain my reason—I declined to give it—I had heard certain things which caused me to become suspicious—it was entirely through Titcomb's letter that I acted at all—after his letter I called twice at the Grosvenor Bank to see him, but not finding him in I relied on his letter—I did not see Titcomb at all.

Cross-examined by Pope. When the scheme was told me I said the Company could not be worked in that way—I did not see any objection to distributing houses as profit—it was understood special articles should be drawn up—the action of Gauntlett v. the Grosvenor Bank went against the Bank; they were the bankers for the Company—there were articles in the leading papers commenting adversely on the Bank; that would not tend to enhance the prospects of the Company.

Cross-examined by MR. WARBURTON. The only meeting I attended was on the 19th, when the special articles were discussed—I don't know if anything was done—as solicitor I should attend meetings—I went to no meetings after I had expressed my opinion—I have been solicitor to two Starr-Bowkett Building Societies—they take subscriptions from members and commence to pay back money on obtaining a ballot—in the House Property Distribution Company the 5s. was to be the only subscription, and it could not be worked—the special articles have never been drawn up—I thought the prospectus I saw was illegal.

Cross-examined by MR. SEYMOUR. I had known Titcomb before as manager of the Grosvenor Bank—I think a mutual friend had made an intimation that he might throw business in my way, and he afterwards wrote asking if I should like to become solicitor to this Company—I had no further interview with him.

WILLIAM RUSSELL CROWE . I am an accountant, of 30, Budge Row—I took shares in the International Fish Dinner Company—the first person I saw connected with it was Cheshire—I never saw Errington or Hughlings before I attended the dinner—I received this letter. (From Hughlings, requesting a loan of 57l. 10s. for a month, and offering a bill signed by two of the directors, and another forwarding a copy of a resolution, "That the acceptance of the Company be given to Mr. R. Crowe" signed by Cheshire), also

this letter. (Inspector Marshall stated this to be in Pope's writing; it was signed by "H. Hughlings, Secretary" and it authorised the witness to retain money until by 57l. 10s. had been paid, and stated, "The total amount you are authorised to collect is not less than 200l.")—I did not entertain the loan, and returned the bill—I paid 1s. 17s. 6d. on my shares—Pope and Errington came to see me with a view to my becoming liquidator of the London Fish Dinner Company—Mr. Noyes and Mr. Errington came to see me afterwards, and I obtained certificates of fitness and handed them to them, but I had no shares except in the Fish Dinner Company—I do not know Mr. Barnard Allen—I think Cheshire saw me first in reference to the House Distribution Company—I wrote this letter (produced) to Pope on March 12, 1884, so no doubt I had seen him about it before that—they asked me to become auditor and to obtain other directors if I could—they said they had got Mr. Titcomb and Mr. Overend, and I went down immediately to see Mr. Titcomb, to see if it was the fact—he said that he was willing, and had arranged to become a director—we had a discussion about it, and I said that I did not know whether it was an infringement of the Lottery Act or not; he said that he would see that the money was taken care of—I attended the statutory meeting by request—Mr. Titcomb was there, and Messrs. Cheshire, Pope, Hughlings, Pryor, Hollis, and some others—I applied for five shares, and sent a cheque for 5l. to the Grosvenor Bank; but a few days afterwards I wrote to cancel my application, and requested the money to be returned, but I did not get it back—I received this note. (Dated July 3rd, from F. Pope to the witness, enclosing three bills of the House Property Distribution Society for 40l., and 100l., and 75l., upon which he requested a loan of 7l.)—I lent him either 5l. or 6l.—I did that to get the bills into my possession more than anything else—Pope owes me about 100l. altogether—in addition to that he gave me his own promissory note for 7l.—these 350l. worth of bills are all drawn by Pope—I never got my 7l.—it was agreed at the statutory meeting that 400l. or 500l. worth of bills which had been accepted by the Company in Pope's favour should be lodged with Mr. Titcomb to hold—I do not recollect them being handed to Titcomb, but at all events he had them, or some of them; I could not understand how they got into Pope's possession again, but when he required the loan of me I said "I will only lend you the money on one condition, that you put those bills into my hands"—about the time the City and Suburban Bank started, Titcomb and Mr. Barr called, and Titcomb said that he was establishing a bank which had a fair chance of succors, and asked if I would become the auditor and take 20 shares—he said that his connection from the bank would follow him—I attended a meeting of the signatories at Bedford Street, Covent Garden, and saw there Errington, Cheshire, and Overend—I applied for the shares, but withdrew my application a few days afterwards—I did not part with any money—I do not think Hughlings was there—I do not know Pugh or Fish—Passledge was there—I have known Cheshire many years; I do not know where he is, I have not seen him since some time before these proceedings were taken—I was a clerk with him—I have lost 5l. by the House Distribution Company, 5l. by the bank, and 1l. I paid to the International Fish Dinner Company, the rest was private money which I lent—I left the promissory notes at the police-court; they are my property.

Cross-examined by Pope. You did nothing to induce me to take shares

in the International Fish Dinner Company, it was Cheshire who induced me to subscribe—the cheque was on the Bank of England—I had a receipt for the 5l. from the Grosvenor Bank, but it was not sent till I wrote to withdraw my application for shares—that was after an action had been brought against the Grosvenor Bank—that induced me to cancel my application—Cheshire was a clerk in the Metropolitan Bank—one of the judgments against you is 10 years old—you were a director of the Mutual Bank—I do not know whether you lost 500l., but you appeared to have money at that time.

Cross-examined by MR. DILL. I never paid any money on account to Hughlings individually.

Cross-examined by MR. SEYMOUR. It was understood that Titcomb would not be a director without taking care that the money received should be returned to him; we both agreed to that—I think I saw him twice at the House Distribution Company—I do not know that he resigned his connection with that Company—I do not know when the money was drawn out—I know nothing about the cheques, or when they were paid, or how the money was drawn out—I never saw Barr before.

Re-examined. The bank where I lost money was the Mutual, a little bank in Lombard Street, started many years ago by me—I have not kept up an acquaintance with Pope—I have not seen him for many years—he was in that bank in 1876, I think—none of the other defendants were in it—I had nothing to do with the Lombard Bank officially—I think I have met Mr. Allen—I had a few shares in the Lombard Bank; I forget how many—I was not a director, or anything of that kind.

Thursday, January 1st, 1885.

ERNEST WHISKARD . I am the manager of the Long Acre Branch of the Capital and Counties Bank—I gave no authority to justify our being printed on this prospectus as bankers to the House Property Distribution Company—I did not know of its being so printed till 12 months afterwards—I know Cheshire, and I know the name of the accountant—I should have taken no account from them.

Cross-examined by Pope. I think three gentlemen called on me; I cannot say who they were—I gave one of them a form—I did not then entertain the question of taking the account—I did not refuse in plain words to take the account then, but if you had come again I should certainly have refused—I went away soon afterwards, and never heard of it again—I never received that form.

Cross-examined by MR. SEYMOUR. I went away on leave soon after the gentlemen called and never saw the form again—the gentlemen called on me somewhere about the 1st July—a cashier would probably receive the form if it was returned—I believe it was returned, because they say it is—it was an ordinary form of directors applying to open an account at the bank—no answer was sent to the form—I did not see Titcomb's name on it—I have never seen this prospectus of the House Property Distribution Company before.

Cross-examined by Pryor. I did not know your name in connection with this Company—I knew your name in connection with the Lombard Bank—you never asked me to open an account—your name does not appear on the prospectus.

Re-examined. I was a clerk in the same bank as Cheshire 16 years ago

—my knowledge of him ceases eight years ago when I left the bank—it it was from his reputation I would not have opened the account—I have known Russell Crowe in one bank—they never came back, and never showed me a prospectus they were advertising us; I should have objected if they had.

GEORGE FREDERICK MILNE . I live at Blackheath—I saw an advertisement for a secretary in March last, and in consequence of my replying to that I saw Pope at his office, 26, King William Street, City—he appointed for me to come there, he told me that the secretary-ship was for the House Property Distribution Society, and in the course of the conversation he showed me one of the prospectuses—we talked over the matter, and he said I should hear from him again—it was stated in the advertisement that the terms were 120l. a year, and I was to pay 50l. deposit—that was referred to in my conversation with Pope—I offered to give him security for the money, and ultimately it was settled that I should give him security, and when I entered on my duties I was to pay him 50l. by instalments—I paid him 5l. deposit about two months afterwards, I heard from him very often after this—he first told me that he had accepted me as secretary in April, I think—I paid the deposit on 19th April—he told me then that was to settle the position—I was asked to make a deposit by Pope, and having parted with the money I made this bill (produced)—it is signed by myself and my mother, my mother signed it because my security was not sufficient—Mr. Pope and Mr. Cheshire said so—I saw both Pope and Cheshire—that was to be paid by instalments—this was April 22nd, a day or two after I paid my deposit—after I had given the joint promissory note I did not get into any work at all—I went to the office about half a dozen times, there was work doing there, I saw different persons coming in and out—I don't know Mr. Sormani—I believed that the Society was open both when I parted with my 5l. and also when I parted with my bill—not getting into the work I wrote this letter on 17th July (Asking for a definite date for commencement of his duties)—I also wrote this letter subsequently (Begging for a definite date on which to commence his duties)—Mr. Russell Crowe got possession of my promissory note, and it was never returned to me, nor the 5l.—I got no money.

Cross-examined by Pope. I had previously been assistant secretary to a building society—I approved of the object of this House Company and I was willing to accept the office of secretary—I was quite aware that it was a young company just started—the 5l. was simply a deposit to secure the appointment and was to be returned if I did not have it—the balance of the 50l. was secured by this promissory note payable to Cheshire and to be paid by monthly instalments—it was not to be paid if I did not get my salary, and I have not been called upon to pay anything in respect of it—you told me that the action brought against the Grosvenor Bank had very much damaged the interests of the Company and that that had retarded the progress of the Company, and that that was your reason for not asking me to commence my duties in March last—you told me you were anxious not to burden the Company with the expenses of a secretary till they were able to bear it, and it was arranged that I should commence in August, but this prosecution prevented my doing so.

Cross-examined by Pryor. You did not make any representation to me to induce me to part with my money—I do not know you, I never saw you before you were in the dock.

Re-examined. When I parted with my 5l. I did not know the secretary-ship was filled.

JOHN BENNETT . I am the representative of Mr. James Willing, advertising agent, 125, Strand—we inserted advertisements for the "To Let Agency," of 47, King William Street—the business was carried on by Pope and Cheshire, I believe—the advertisements which we inserted between March and May last year amounted to 42l. 7s. 10d.—we were never paid any part of that—we took proceedings through our solicitor, Mr. Harrison, and recovered judgment, but we were never paid—this is one of the advertisements that we inserted ("A house may be obtained on payment of 5s. Apply to the House Property Distribution, 26, King William Street, Strand.")

Re-examined by Pope. I received these orders in writing, I believe, and I think they were signed by Pope and Cheshire; your name is on them, I believe—we were paid one small account, 3l. 19s., the March account—I don't think you told me that in consequence of the proceedings against the Grosvenor Bank the Company had been much damaged; you did not explain to me that in consequence of that action you could not get the money for the advertisements; you asked us to wait for some time—I fancy you said that you had some money in the bank, but did not wish to draw on it, as you had sufficient to make an appropriation to buy a house, and if you drew any money from it, it would spoil the case—I could not speak to the exact words—the result was that an action was brought against you and Cheshire—I don't know that any arrangement was made with Mr. Harrison to settle it—the action was brought at the end of June or the beginning of July. (A letter found at 26, King William Street was read, from Mr. Harrison, a solicitor, to Pope and Cheshire, dated 24th June, 1884, stating that he had that day signed judgment against them for 44l. 19s. 4d. for debt and costs. Also a letter from Pope, stating that the office was the property of the Company, and that if Mr. Harrison's client would wait a few days, a satisfactory offer would be made.)

EDWARD THOMAS PEARSON . I live at Chester House, Romford Road, Manor Park, Essex—I had some conversation with Pope with reference to the House Property Distribution Society, and he made a statement to me to the effect that he had arranged to purchase nine houses, I think in Brockley Road, Manor Park—I am a barrister's clerk, but I have another business of my own—Pope proposed to me that I should become an agent to that Company, and I then received this letter of July 19th. (This stated that at a Board meeting on Thursday last, the 17th, the directors had appointed him an agent at 5 per cent, commission, and any reasonable expenses. Signed, Sidney Cheshire, secretary pro tem.) I will not swear whether I saw Pope after that letter—I got some prospectuses and a receipt book, and orders to collect sums of 5s.—I received instructions to arrange a meeting, and I did so—the meeting was for the purpose of balloting for two houses; it was to have been on the 11th August, but it was afterwards postponed—I got some bills for posting like this. (This stated that a ballot would take place in presence of a notary public, etc. Application for shares to be made to the secretary or Mr. Pearson.) No ballot took place—I took the precaution to have the agreement stamped—Mr. Venn was the notary public, and the Capital and Counties the bankers—this letter found at 21, King William Street, dated 22nd August, I wrote

to Pope, expressing my surprise that I had not been paid the small expenses I had incurred, as promised by Cheshire—I was never paid my expenses, or anything else—my expenses were only 28s.

Crow-examined by Pope. I did not apply to you personally for the money—I presume that it was in consequence of this prosecution that no ballot took place.

HENRY ROANTREE . I live at 36, Clifton Street, Albert Road—I became acquainted with Cheshire about three years ago, and Pope about two years ago—I knew of an office at 26, King William Street, being used for a "To Let Agency"—about February last I arranged with Cheshire to have the use of part of that house—I saw Pope afterwards, before I began to use the office—I did use it for the purpose of my business as a house and estate agent—I was to give one-third of my commission for the use of the office—this is my signature to the House Property Distribution articles—I subscribed for one share—I signed it on tie 21st February, 1884—I did not pay anything for the share, Cheshire gave it me, and he handed me a certificate for it—I continued to use the office till about April—I was present at some of the meetings of the Company; I saw there Titcomb, Pryor, Hughlings, and Rymer, and Mr. Crowe the accountant, and Cheshire the secretary—the Grosvenor Bank was the bank of the Society—I lent money both to Pope and Cheshire, from 1s. up to 2l. or 3l. or 5l.s. Pope owed me altogether about 11l. 15s., and Cheshire about 13l., but it was much more than that—Cheshire gave me a cheque for 5l. 10s. on the Grosvenor Bank to get cashed; I passed it to Mr. Green, who brought it back dishonoured—I spoke to Pope about it, and he said "Pay it in again and it will be all right; I have arranged matters with Mr. Titcomb"—it was a cheque by Pope on his own private account—I did pay it in again, and it was then paid—I spoke to Pope again, and he said "You can make it all right with Mr. Green and I will pay you"—I may very likely have had a cheque of Pope's for 5l. on his private account payable to me about the 6th February, but I never paid it to any one to get the cash for it—I may have paid it into the Grosvenor Bank and it came back, they have all come back—Pope gave me a cheque for 7l. to pay away to a Mr. Moore for money owing to him; that cheque was returned on the 12th June—I got a cheque for 4l. to reduce the debt owing to me—I paid it away, it came back, I had to make it good—I took some shares in the London Fish Dinner Company; Cheshire introduced me to that Company—I did not pay anything in respect of those shares, Cheshire said he would pay them because he was owing me money—at one time I lived in the same house with Cheshire at Fenwick Grove for five or six months in the spring of 1884—I did not see anything of Cheshire at his residence after the August bank-holiday—I have been in the same place since then, but did not see Cheshire; I did not know where he was—I have never heard anything of him since, except in this case—this is the receipt that was given to me for my one share in the House Property Company.

Cross-examined by Pope. I gave the proceeds of the 5l. 10s. cheque to Cheshire—it was the balance of the 11l. 15s. that you owed me—the cheque of the 6th February was paid; that did not form part of the the 11l., it was for what I paid to Mr. Moore, and items that I had paid; you owed me that in addition, for cash I kept advancing and paying away—Mr. Moore is a bookmaker, the debt was to bet a horse-race

—I gave you a pound and a half-sovereign at a time for the 7l. 10s. cheque—a Mr. Hookey had carried on the business of "To let Agency" before Cheshire, and Cheshire purchased the fittings of him.

Cross-examined by Pryor. I saw you at the statutory meeting—I think I saw you at two previous meetings, on the 13th and 14th March—I might have seen you three or four times since the statutory meeting—I did not attend any meeting after the statutory meeting that I know of—I think I attended four or five meetings—I was not a director by my own consent, I don't know whether I was one, if my name is here I was a director—I gave up as a signatory on the 14th March—I only took one share to oblige Cheshire—I don't know how many you held, it is down as 20—I was not induced by you to take any shares—you and I resigned at the statutory meeting.

Cross-examined by MR. SEYMOUR. There were six or seven present at the statutory meeting, there might have been more, eight or nine, not twelve or thirteen—I don't know Mr. Venn—Mr. Overend was there, and Mr. Hollis, Cheshire, and others—the first time the 5l. 10s. cheque was returned it was endorsed "Refer to drawer; I could not say in whose handwriting—I have never seen Mr. Titcomb's signature—he was manager of the Grosvenor Bank at that time—Pope explained that the reason the cheque was returned was that he had not been able to make a satisfactory arrangement with Titcomb.

Re-examined. The minute-book is in Cheshire's handwriting. (MR. SEYMOUR referred to an entry in the minute-booth of 16th April, when a letter was read from Titcomb resigning his position as a director, which was accepted.)

HERBERT GEORGE MUSKETT (Re-examined). Among the books and papers found at King William Street was the pass-book of Frederick Grove, Esq.—the account was opened on 13th January, 1884, by 15l. being paid in—among other payments to that account was 47l. 10s. on March 12th, and the last payment in was 3l. 10s. on 17th March—the last draft was on March 17th, by which the account was overdrawn 2l. 6s. 8d.,—on 18th March 5l. was paid out, increasing the overdraft to 7l. 6s. 8d., and on the 21st there was a new cheque-book, 2s., making 7l. 8s. 8d. overdrawn—I also produce a pass-book found at King William Street, of the House Property Distribution Company, Limited—that begins on 28th February, 1884, by the payment in of 1l. 15s. cash—there are six payments in, February 29th 5l., March 12th 5s., March 14th 15s., March 17th 10l., and May 8th 3l. 10s.—I found five cheques in the pocket of the pass-book, four of which are debited against the account—the dates are April 1, 2, 5, and 9, amounting to 17l. 10s.—here is also "April 1st, cheque 2s. 1d." and May 9th a cheque for 3l. 10s. for advertisements—I have not got that cheque—there is no balance—I find among the cheques in the pocket one with "Refer to drawer" on it—that is for 3l. 10s., dated April 8th—all the five cheques are signed by Hughlings and Pope, and countersigned by Cheshire as secretary—I also found at King William Street the paying-in slips of the House Property Company, showing that the 3l. 10s. was made up of small sums, probably shareholders' money—there are seven different names.

Cross-examined by Pope. The cheque which is marked, was afterwards presented at the bank and paid; it is dated 12th April, and on 9th May here is 3l. 10s. debited.

Cross-examined by MR. SEYMOUR. Titcomb had resigned at the Grosvenor Bank on March 31st.

FRANK CLIFFORD . I keep the Prince of Wales, Albert Street, Eaton Square—on 7th April a man named Wheeler came and gave me this cheque. (This was on the Grosvenor Bank, for 4l. 15s. "Pay commission or bearer.—Frederick Pope.") I gave Wheeler part of the money that evening and the rest next day—I paid it into my bank, and it came back marked "Refer to drawer."

Cross-examined by Pope. It was on the evening of the Oxford and Cambridge boat race—I called on you once and did not see you.

ALBERT PRICE . I keep the Block House Tavern, Knightsbridge—on 5th April my wife showed me this cheque—I found 1l. had been given on it—I saw Weaver the next morning and gave him the balance, 2l. 5s. (This was dated April 3rd, 1884, on the Grosvenor Bank, for 3l. 5s. Payable to Weaver or order. Signed, Frederick Pope.) I paid it in to my account, and it came back marked "Refer to drawer"—I went afterwards to 26, King William Street, Strand, and saw Cheshire—while I was talking to him Pope came in, and Cheshire said "Here is Mr. Pope; he can answer for himself; this gentleman has come regarding one of your cheques"—I did not let it go out of my hand—Pope said "Yes, that is one of mine"—I said "What are you going to do about it; are you going to pay me?"—he said "I must have time to consult my solicitor about this; I have had no value for the cheque; Weaver stole it from me, and I don't know but what I shall lock him up"—I said "You are the drawer, and you have no account at the bank"—he said "I know I am answerable; how long will you give me before you take proceedings?"—I gave him till the next morning—next morning his card came up, with a request to know if I would take a sovereign, and the balance in a month's time—I sent a message, "Yes," but did not see him—he went to bring the sovereign, and I never saw him again till I saw him in the dock.

WILLIAM WEAVER . I am a clerk, living at Knightsbridge—at the end of March I made the acquaintance of Pope, Cheshire, and Roantree; they had offices at 26, King William Street, Strand, with "To Let Agency" over the fascia—I was getting my living by selling cigars on commission—Horton introduced me, and I sold Pope two boxes of cigars for 23s.; when I called for the money Pope wrote this cheque, 43277 for 3l. 5s., in my presence—I got it cashed at Price's, Knightsbridge, and gave Pope the whole amount, but before I did that I was paid for my cigars—I afterwards got this cheque, 43280, from Pope for 4l. 15s.—he made it out "Pay commission"—I got the money from Mr. Clifford, and gave it to Pope, not knowing that the former cheque had been dishonoured—I found out after that both cheques were returned, and that Pope had been to see Mr. Price and offered to settle it—I was arrested on a warrant in August for cashing the cheques—I was charged at Westminster Police-court, remanded in custody for several days, and then discharged, and gave evidence that I received the cheques in the way I have described—I don't know where Horton is.

Cross-examined by Pope. I did not ask you to lend me some money, nor was that the reason you gave me the cheques—I was not to get the second cheque cashed for the purpose of meeting the first—I did not go to Croydon Races—I was not there with Horton on that Friday; I may have gone to Victoria Station, I passed it many times a day—if Horton says that I was at Croydon Races with him on that Friday it is untrue—

when that cheque was cashed I was living at No. 21 in the same street as I am now living in at No. 31, I am not aware that a summons was issued against me—I should have been found there if wanted—I did not go to Price or Clifford afterwards; I did not like to face it—I saw you once or twice after, in the Strand and King William Street—I never came to the office—you said the cheques would be met—I swear I gave you the whole of the money; I deducted nothing.

WILLIAM LAKE . I am an oilman, of 103, Stamford Street—on 17th July, Golding, who I knew as a customer, brought me this cheque and asked me to cash it. (Dated 17th July, on the Grosvenor Bank, for 3l. 5s., signed, "Frederick Pope.") He endorsed it at my request—I gave him 25s., and promised him the balance next morning, but he did not come for its—he gave me a false address, but the police took him in custody—I sent it to my bankers; it was returned next day, and I never got the money.

THOMAS ASHBURY DEWSBURY . I keep the Equestrian Tavern, Black-friars Road—I received this cheque from my wife, paid it to my bank, and it was returned marked "N. S." (This was dated "15th July, 1884, Grosvenor Bank, 44865, House Property Society, Limited. Pay cash or bearer 5l. 5s. Hugllings, Frederick Pope." Endorsed "Frederick Pope, 56, King William street, Jabez Pillinger.") I parted with my 5l. believing it to be a good and valid order, and that there were assets to meet it—I afterwards saw Pillinger, who showed me this paper and these two letters (produced)—I have seen Pope in the house with Pillinger—I never got my 5l.

Cross-examined by Pope. I gave the money to Pillinger—I should think he is worth 5l.; I have applied to him for it—he lived in Blackfriars Road then.

MARY ANN DEWSBURY . I am the wife of the last witness—Pillinger and two other men, one of whom is in the dock, brought me this cheque for 5l.—I handed it back, and next day Mrs. Pillinger brought it endorsed by Pope and Pillinger, and I gave her the money.

SARAH PILLINGER . I am the wife of John Pillinger—we lived in the Blackfriars-Road, but my address now is 2, Lambeth Road, Southwark—Golding introduced Pope to me, who gave me this cheque, and I lent him 1l. on it that evening before my husband endorsed it—Mrs. Dewsbury had asked my husband to endorse it previously—Pope said that he wanted to get away to the West End—next day I took the cheque to Mrs. Dewsbury, and she cashed it for me—when I came out Pope and Golding were waiting at my street door, and he held his hand out for the money—I said, "You can't take it here, you must come downstairs and see it counted; it is all in silver, and nearly half in sixpences; how about my sovereign?"—he said, "Take it," and I took 1l. in sixpences—Pope said that as the cheque was drawn for petty cash there were the names of two directors only instead of three—he promised to come next day at 12 o'clock and pay the money, but he did not; he sent a note by Cheshire—he wanted to sell our house for us, and said that he had a client with 200l. ready.

Cross-examined by Pope. Golding introduced me to you for the purpose of selling our house—you said that you had advertised it and had the receipt in your pocket; I do not remember seeing it—I am not aware that anybody came.

JAMES WILSON GOLDING . I am a commission agent, of 82, Wickersley Road, Lavender Hill—I know Pope, Hughlings, and Errington, and have seen them at 26, King William Street, where the House Distribution Society was carried on—I first knew the Fish Dinner Company at Oxford Mansions; I never went there—I lost sight of them, and next time I found them they were at 276, Strand—Errington was promoting that company, and the others were connected with him—Pope gave me a cheque and asked me to cash it for him, as he was rather short of money that night, and the cheque would be duly honoured the following day—I gave him 25s. on account, and he never called for the balance—I was told that he got the cheque back and tore it up—I was apprehended, and charged at Kennington Road Police-station—I was taken to Stone's End Police-court and remanded on my own recognisances—the charge was withdrawn—Errington said that Pope was a shareholder in the Grosvenor Bank, and could put a lot of business into my hands—he said he could overdraw his account to the amount of 75l. by arrangement with Mr. Titcomb, the manager—I do not remember receiving a cheque from Pope for 5l.—I received one for 2l.; I got that cashed for him, and he brought the 2l. the following day and got the cheque back—Errington said that he could get me advertisements for several papers if I could put them in for him, to advertise the Fish Dinner Company—he said he was doing the same thing with Willing's—he said that Pope or Hughlings was promoting the House Distribution Society, and I think Cheshire, and the Grosvenor Bank, with which Titcomb was connected, was backing it up, and that Titcomb was taking an, office over the City and Suburban Bank, which he was going to open for lending money, and there was a lot of advertising to do, and he would put it all into my hands, that they should be advertising the bank largely, and would pay cash with all their advertisement orders—just before the August Bank Holiday Pope said, "I am going to withdraw my account from the Grosvenor Bank and transfer it to the City and Suburban" showing me at the same time half a dozen cheque-books, which he was taking to Somerset House to get stamped for the City and Suburban Bank, which Titcomb was going to open, and he said, "My cheques will be duly honoured because I have taken shares in the bank"—Pope said that he had one or two bills which they were going to discount at the Grosvenor Bank for him, and any cheques which he could not exactly meet at the present time would be met out of that—I introduced Pope to Pillinger—I was at the Equestrian Tavern when the cheque produced by Dewsbury was cashed—Mrs. Dewsbury refused to cash it that night, but she cashed it the next day—I received instructions from Errington to advertise for the Fish Dinner Company, the House Distribution Company, and the Empire House and Land Company, Gray's Inn Chambers, where Errington had an office as Henderson and Co.—I have been there, and besides Errington I have seen Hughlings there—several newspapers would not accept the advertisements unless I paid cash for them, but where they did accept them they were not paid for to my knowledge.

Cross-examined by Pope. I got the cheque on the day it is dated—I endorsed it in the name of Wilson, that is my name partly—I gave you an I O U, but that was on a different occasion.

Cross-examined by MR. LYNN. Errington's instructions to me as to the

advertisements appeared straightforward and honest in respect to the Fish Company.

Re-examined. I am talking about the Fish Company at 7, Oxford Mansions—that is where I first knew Errington—I had no knowledge of the Company except that they asked me to advertise for them.

Cross-examined by MR. SEYMOUR. I never saw Mr. Titcomb before I saw him here.

HENRY MARSHALL . I am a police inspector of the Criminal Investigation Department—I knew Pope in 1880—I was present during many days' investigation into a matter of dishonoured cheques in which Pope was concerned—two persons named Pugh, father and son, were mixed up with it, but the father absconded and only the son was present—there were two others, Delmar and Cullner—there were 16 or 17 remands extending over 20 days—Pryor was present from seven to nine days, and on the final day of the investigation—I did not see Pope for some time after that, but I heard of him, I did not hear of him again in this country till April last—Price and Clifford both complained to me about 14th or 15th April about two cheques for 4l. 15s. and 3l. 15s. which were shown to me—I recognised Pope's writing, they were on the Grosvenor Bank—I went there and saw Mr. Penfold, and on 18th April I applied for a warrant, and by the Magistrate's order went on the same day and saw Titcomb at 22, Bedford Street—he occupied a back room there as an office, with his name on the door—he did not know me before, nor I him—I asked him whether his name was Titcomb—he said "Yes"—I said "I am Inspector Marshall, and to-day I have applied at the Westminster Police-court with two persons who have been defrauded, for a warrant against Pope and Weaver; I was directed by the Magistrate to enquire at the Grosvenor Bank as to Pope's account there; I did so, and Mr. Penfold attended at the police-court and deposed as to his account, but he produced a bill drawn by Pope to the Grosvenor Bank, and Penfold is unable to detail the particulars of how it came there; it is said that you accepted it when you were manager, and the Magistrate desires you to attend as well"—he said "I will come, I know Pope very well, but I am not satisfied with some of his dealings, I should like to go to the Grosvenor Bank first"—I said "Yes, I will drive you there"—when he said he was not satisfied he took up a letter which was in course of preparation and said "I was just writing this to resign my position of director of the House Property Distribution Society," of which I think he said Pope was the promoter—I said "Yes, your name is on the prospectus," taking out this prospectus (produced) from my pocket, "and I have been making inquiry about it"—I then drove him to the Grosvenor Bank in a cab—he went inside and had an interview with Mr. Penfold, I did not hear the conversation, I saw Pryor there—I then went to the police-court with Titcomb and Penfold and renewed the application, and Mr. Penfold produced this 21l. bill; it is dated "March 10th, 1884," at two months for 21l. for value received, to Sidney Cheshire, 26, King William Street, Strand. "F. Pope, accepted, payable at the City Bank, Sidney Cheshire," and in the corner is written "Account closed"—Titcomb then said to the Magistrate "When I was manager to the Grosvenor Bank I accepted this bill for Pope"—I believe he said "accepted," but he meant "received," "and I gave him permission to draw 11l. or 12l. on it"—the Magistrate refused to issue the warrant, saying

that Pope might reasonably think he was entitled to draw cheques on it, and I failed—in a day or two other complaints came in and I renewed my application on April 22nd, but it was still refused on the same grounds—Mrs. Barrett and several others who are not here complained—on 1st August I took this letter from Titcomb's pocket or from a drawer by the side of which he was sitting at 97, Leadenhall Street. (This was from Pope, dated 22nd April, 1884, making inquiries as to who held the 12l. 14s. cheque). In July, I think it was, I saw Pope in the Strand with seven or eight others, Cheshire was one, the others were neither of the other prisoners—they seemed to be in consultation at the corner of King William Street, and when they saw me there was a general rush in all directions, but Pope came up to me and said "Halloa, Marshall, I hear you have been trying to get it up for me again"—I said "I don't know if I have, I think you have done me among you this time"—I took Titcomb on 1st August at 97, Leadenhall Street on another charge—I opened the City and Suburban minute-book, and when I came to all these names I ran my finger down them and said "You have got a rum lot here," and when I got to the name of Pugh I said "Is this Arthur or the old man?"—he said "It is old Jimmy" that is the man who absconded—Pope's, Cheshire's, and Titcomb's names are down here, and others who I know very well by name—I took Pry or on October 1st in the street at St. Oswald's Road, Fulham—I could not find him at 14, Parliament Street, it was between 8 and 9 o'clock p.m., I saw him coming and crossed over to him, he had his umbrella up—as soon as he saw me he said "Well, Marshall, what is brewing now, seeing you here?"—I said "I have got a warrant against you for conspiracy"—he said "Read it"—I read it to him, and when I came to the name of Clifford he said "I don't know that man, and you know I would not conspire with Pope and am not likely to do anything to bring me within the meshes of the criminal law"—I said "I know you are pretty careful, but I find you introduced Pope to the Grosvenor Bank"—he said "I may have done, bat I am not so sure about it"—I found this pawn-ticket on him at the station, it is for a crimson carpet and office furniture, pledged at Mr. Bichardson's for 9l. on 27th September, 1884, by James Pugh, of 5, St. James's Street—I said "It is very curious that that furniture is pledged in the name of Pugh"—he said "Oh, there is nothing in that"—I fancy he said it was furniture from Parliament Street, and when I went there I found the furniture had gone, and from inquiries I found it was the furniture from there.

Cross-examined by Pryor. A witness is paid so much a day for attending this Court—when I said 20 days I was combining the whole inquiry before the Magistrate and this Court—if you only received 5s. you must also have a certificate for your attendance before the Magistrate—I got the warrant about noon on the day of your arrest—I did not say that there was any difficulty in finding you—I do not know on what business you were at the Grosvenor Bank, but I had my idea; my ideas are not always right—the deposition is dated September 27th; that was the Saturday before quarter-day—the landlord wanted possession from you, and I eventually gave him the key—the furniture was all gone except a stool with a board laid across it for a table; the oilcloth was not there, the floor was bare—I brought a great many books and papers from your office, 14, Parliament Street, and some from your address in St. Oswald's Road—I have never had any trouble with you.

Cross-examined by MR. SEYMOUR. I have not got the letter of resignation

here—I had no authority to take possession of it—I have not seen any letter from the Company with regard to Mr. Titcomb resigning—I have not searched the papers myself; there may be such a letter—Mr. Titcomb went to the Court on 18th April and made a statement to the Court, and it was inferred that he was influenced by the letter from Pope—that statement did not lead to his arrest—there is a mistake in the date, the information is wrong as to the date—I found the letter on Aug. 1st, with other papers; it is dated 22/4/84—that was four days after he made the statement—whatever the value of his conduct or statement on the 18th was, it is a mistake that he was influenced by that letter, for it was written four days afterwards—he said that some facts had come to his knowledge which induced him to waver in his opinion of Pope, but he did not say "and to have nothing more to do with him," but substantially he did—Mr. Penfold was a witness for the prosecution before the Magistrate—I have not seen him here—I considered him an important witness as to my obtaining the warrant—he was the assistant-manager, and would act in Titcomb's absence—I cannot say whether he continued there after Titcomb left—I do not know the name of Fastridge among the rum lot, or of Lewis—I should not like to say much about Dr. Marks, I should not like to give an opinion—I apply that expression to any one except those I actually know something about—I apply it to Pugh, Cheshire, and Pope—I will confine myself to those.

Re-examined. It was in April that Pope said Mr. Titcomb was resigning his connection in consequence of what he had heard, and in July I called his attention to the rum lot—in August Pope was carrying cheque-book to be stamped—I did not see this letter before August 1st—I cannot tell when the figures, 22/4/84, were put on the letter, there is no difference in the ink—Mr. Titcomb only went once to the police-court, and I am quite sure that that was on April 18th; whether those figures were put on later I don't know; I made the application on that very day.

CHARLES BARHAM RIDDELL . I live at Maritime Cottages, Elm Grove, Peckham—in March, 1884, Sidney Cheshire took a house from me; Cambridge Lodge at Cambridge Heath—he bought some things in the house, for which this cheque was handed to me by Roantree. (This was dated April 2, for 3l. on the Grosvenor Bank, signed by Pope.) I paid it into the Grosvenor Bank; it came back marked "Refer to drawer"—I afterwards got this letter. (This was dated "1, Relf Road, Peckham Rye, April 7th, 1884," and stated that he found the cheque had been unpaid through some mistake, but that he would send the amount to Spring Gardens to-morrow, and it was signed by Pope.) I saw Pope with reference to it several times—he made various excuses saying he was not prepared to pay the money at the time—I never got it.

Cross-examined by Pope. The only transaction I had with you was with reference to the cheque.

ALEXANDER STEWART MCCHRISTIE . I have been cashier at the Grosvenor Bank over two years—Titcomb was manager up to the 31st of March—this is the introduction of accounts book, the autograph-book to know customers' signatures—no account can be opened without the knowledge and consent of the manager or deputy manager—I find on 30th January, 1884, Pope was introduced as a customer by James Pryor, of 14, Parliament Street—Pope is described as an accountant, of 26, King William Street—this is the pass-book issued to Pope by the bank—this is a copy

from the ledger showing the daily balance and the overdraft—before the 47l. 10s. bill was credited on 12th March the account had been overdrawn from 10th February—the account was overdrawn again after the paying in of the bill on 17th March to the amount of 7l. 4s., and it remained overdrawn to the closing of the account—nothing was done with the account after 18th March—I don't know if the 21l. bill was found in a drawer at the bank after Titcomb had left—it has never been entered to the credit of Pope, nor any portion of it that I can trace at all—I cannot say if it was entered in the book to be collected, or if it was attempted to be collected—I don't know about that—I don't know if anything was paid on the 47l. 10s. bill when it became due—75 cheques in three books of 25 each were issued to Pope during the currency of the account—these are the counterfoils—44 have been returned unpaid, dishonoured—I have a list of names and dates of those dishonoured cheques—during the time that some cheques were dishonoured others were honoured—Titcomb, the manager, would instruct me up to 31st March, whether to dishonour them or not—I should not pay more than I knew there was at the bank, without Titcomb's order—this list extends beyond the 31st of March—I found there were 18 dishonoured while Titcomb was there, and 18 honoured during the same period including overdraft—13 of the dishonoured cheques came through other bankers, and five of them were presented over the counter and returned—the honoured cheques during the overdraft were: Barton, 1l.; Pope, 3l.; Grosvenor Bank, 3l. 5s.; Self, 5l.; Self, 2l.; Self, 5l. 10s.; cheque retained unpaid to debit, 2l. 10s.; Self, 2l. 10s.; House Property Distribution Company, 1l. 15s.; petty cash', 2l.; House Property Distribution Company, February 29th, 4l.; Roantree, 5l.; Willing, 5l.; Fevre, 15s.; Roantree, 3l.; Self, 3l. 10s.—this is the 47l. bill—it was for 50l. and 2l. 10s. was discount—I can't say if it was discounted—the House Property Distribution Company's account was opened at the bank on the 28th of February—the introducer has not been filled in—this letter is from Sidney Cheshire, 26, King William Street, containing the signatures, as specimens of handwriting of those who signed the cheques. (This stated that a banking account of the Howe Property Distribution Society was to be opened under the directors' control, and that Sidney Cheshire secretary, Mr. Roantree, and James Pry or would sign. A letter of 31st March stated that at the statutory meeting on the 14th Cheshire, Hughlings, Pope, and the manager of the Grosvenor Bank were elected directors.) Hughllings, Pope, and Cheshire became signatories at that time—one cheque-book, of which these are the counterfoils, was issued to the Company—the cheque to Golding passed to William Blake was torn from their cheque-book—the House Property Distribution Company's pass-book is the same as the account at the bank—this list corresponds with the ledger account—21l. 5s. was the total amount paid in by the Company—their account was opened by a cheque of Pope's for 1l. 15s.—on the 9th of May the balance of 2l. 11s. was left—he paid in a cheque for 3l. 10s. on 8th April; that was dishonoured, and the balance was then 2l. 11s.—the dishonoured cheque for 3l. 10s. was met by that—in April there was no money there—this cheque drawn by Pope on 3rd May in favour of the London Fish Dinner Company was dishonoured on 9th May, when presented by Ridgway and Company—this is a form of proposal of July, 1883, for a loan of 15l. to Pope in Pryor's handwriting filled up by Pope—Mr. Bailey Fuller was security

for that, and that was to be paid by one or more instalments—I can't say if it was paid off.

Cross-examined by Pope. Your account was not always overdrawn—in January, 1884, your account was in credit for some time, and was overdrawn from February to the middle of March, when you had something to your credit, and then became overdrawn again—I debited your account with the 7l. 10s. item and the 7l. 6s. item by the manager's authority, I should say—I think no notice was given to you that your account had been debited with those sums—I should think it would be on account of that that some cheques were dishonoured—I should have been able to pay the cheques for 3l. 5s., 1l. 5s., and 5l. if that sum had not been placed to your debit—a cheque was paid to Roantree after that debit—on 16th, 19th, and 21st February there are three cheques of 5l. each for the House Distribution Company—I do not know if those were the same cheques presented on three different occasions; if so, it would reduce the number of dishonoured cheques by two—I do not know without seeing the cheque if the items on 27th and 29th February and 29th March were one cheque; if so, it would further reduce the number of dishonoured cheques—the same would be the case with the cheques of 12th and 13th March—I was shown at the police-court a great number of these cheques which were found in your drawer—a cheque from the London Fish Dinner Company has been produced. (Mr. Muskett stated that it had been found at the prisoner's office.)—I should say you might have gone to the bank and paid money for it without its being represented twice—I was a witness in Gauntlett's action against the Grosvenor Bank—I think part of his claim was that the bank had placed 50l. to the debit of his account without his authority—I cannot say if it was through that that some of his cheques had been dishonoured—the verdict went against the bank.

Cross-examined by Pryor. Your name as introducer in the autograph book means you introduced him as a party fit to open a banking account—I was not present when it was signed—I have heard nothing in reference to when the signature was put there—I was cross-examined to it at the police-court; I have not ascertained since—you introduced several other people; there is one on 28th January and one on 15th February without the name being filled in—the bank might have accepted Pope without an introduction, as he had a loan six months before with the authority of the manager or deputy manager—Bailey Fuller was surety for the loan—this is the surveyor's report on the back of the proposal. (The report stated that the proposer had lodged with the surety for 12 months, who had bought his house, and that the proposal was good.)—I do not know without the books that he paid 340l. off of the loan of 400l.—Pope opened his account with a cheque for 15l. on 30th January—we did not debit 8l. to him on 31st January—we debited 7l. 17s. 6d. on 1st February—I must have had instructions to do so; it must have been due on his loan, and we took it to pay that—I cannot say if we gave him notice, or called on the surety, or gave a receipt for it—I cannot give an opinion as to whether that account was opened to collect arrears on the loan—the first cheque returned was on 5th February—people take it for granted we should pay off the loans by helping ourselves; they have pass-books and can find it out—I do not know what you said to Titcomb and the chairman when the account was opened—your name is not on

any of the House Property Distribution Company's cheques—Titcomb left the bank on 31st March—no cheque-book was issued till April.

Cross-examined by MR. SEYMOUR. The account was opened with Pope in the deputy manager's handwriting—in the July previous there had been a letter from Hollis, the surveyor, reporting in his favour—two days after the account was opened with 15l., 7l. 17s. 6d. was charged against it on account of arrears of the loan, and the result of that was that one or two of Pope's cheques were dishonoured—I got instructions to do that from Titcomb or the deputy manager, and they would do that in the bank's interests rather than Pope's, as a matter of business—I should say bills discounted were entered in the discount book; I had nothing to do with that department, I could not say who kept it—if a bill were not discounted, but a sum of 10l. or 11l. advanced against it for a short time, I should not expect it to be entered in the discount book—Titcomb and Penfold used to manage the bills at that time, I think—none of the House Property Company's cheques were dishonoured—they were signed by the directors—the first cheque of the Company was issued by the Company on 1st April after Titcomb had left the bank—on 31st March there was 17l. 15s. to the credit of the Company at the bank—on 17th March 10l. had been paid in—nothing was paid in after 31st March till 8th May—while Titcomb was at the bank not a shilling was drawn out for the Company—the three cheque-books were issued to Pope on 30th January, 28th February, and 21st March—I believe Titcomb was attending to the bank business on 21st March—the action against the bank lasted some days—I cannot say if it began on 17th March or if it was on 21st March—I think Titcomb was in attendance at the bank the entire day during the time the trial of the action was on—I cannot remember who issued the book; if asked for it over the counter I might hand it over—I cannot tell if Titcomb was a party to issuing the third cheque-book—I should very likely give it across the counter, and a junior would enter it in the book—the numbers of the cheques would be entered in the cheques' book; that would give me no information as to who gave it out—Pope's account was eventually finished on 21st March, when there was the over-draft of 7l. 8s, 9d.—nothing has ever been done since, and that still stands to his debit—Titcomb has given me authority to return Pope's dishonoured cheques—I should have told him how the account was on those occasions or he would have referred to it, and if it was overdrawn he would quite properly have directed me to dishonour his cheques—that occurred many times—sometimes money had been paid in, and then when cheques were presented they were paid if the account enabled them to be—I referred to the account for each cheque whoever it came from, and the cheques would be honoured or dishonoured according to its state—on 22nd March a cheque drawn by Pope for 10s. 6d. to Pry or was presented over the counter and dishonoured—I should think I did that on my own responsibility, knowing how his account stood—as a rule I returned or honoured on the manager's instructions, but he would give me instructions and I would frame my judgment at other times—I returned the 10s. 6d. In consequence of his instructions, but I won't say I showed that cheque to him—he had told me some time before I must not honour any more, however small—Titcomb always had plenty to do; I should say he devoted himself with all his might and power to the bank's interest—there was an advertisement for a shorthand clerk in March—he never

said anything to me about wanting another assistant—he did not complain to me of the way Penfold kept the accounts—he complained to Penfold that he had not done certain things, and several times of things he had not entered.

By Pope. If you had brought money to the bank I should have taken it—I never gave you notice to close the account and not to draw any cheques.

Re-examined. I did not hear of an accountant being advertised for—Pope's account was inactive after the 7l. overdraft in March—there are only four cheques of Pope's which were paid on presentation—the final draft of the House Property Distribution Company came out of Pope'a book, and 3l. 10s. was then paid in, and brought back the balance to 2l. 11s.—I don't think I should have cashed Pope's cheque if it had been left to my judgment—I think it more likely that if I cashed any of his cheques after his account was overdrawn, I did it on Titcomb's instructions—my belief is that cheques honoured after Pope's account was overdrawn were referred to Titcomb.

By MR. SEYMOUR. Or the deputy-manager.

THOMAS WARAM . I am manager of the Grosvenor Bank—after 31st March I succeeded Mr. Titcomb—at that time Pope's account was overdrawn to the amount of 7l. 8s. 9d.—I do not find any record in the minute-book of the Bank of the discount of a 50l. bill—I find in the rough minute-book an entry on the 6th March, "Pope, House Property Distribution Society, 50l., three months bill. February 28th"—that bill was dishonoured—it would be part of the manager's duty to attend upon the directors—the minutes should be read to the directors—if there was any trace of this bill in the minute-book it should have come to the knowledge of the directors—I found a 21l. bill in the safe of the bank—it appeared that Pope was allowed to draw against the bill for 47l. 10s. to about that amount—a bill-book was kept in the bank; there was no entry of this bill in it—the minute-book for November, 1883, is not here; the rough minute is here—on 22nd November I find this entry: "The International Fish Dinner Company, Limited, applied for a loan of 200l.; refused"—that is in Titcomb's handwriting—this (produced) is the form of application; it sets out the security, amounting to about 800l.—on 20th September, 1883, I find an entry in the rough minutebook in Titcomb's writing: "Mr. Pryor, loan 300l.; refused"—I produce a cheque dated 31st October, 1883, for 300l. payable to Mrs. Mary Pryor, drawn by Thomas Rintoul and A. Beaumont Spink, directors of the Grosvenor Bank, countersigned by Titcomb, drawn on the Imperial Bank—on 30th October Pryor's account was overdrawn 2l. 10s. 1d.; the 300l. appears to his credit on the 31st—I found at the bank a bill of sale by Pryor in favour of the bank, and a memorandum in Pryor's writing: "I approve of my wife, Mary Prior, executing this bill of sale"—I have the statutory declaration here; that is signed by Mrs. Pryor—that is filled up by Penfold and superscribed by G. C. Payne—in that declaration Mrs. Pryor states: "I have not assigned my estate, and I was at the time of executing the bill of sale fully possessed of this property"—there is a schedule to the bill of sale—when it came into my possession I sent Mr. Cunningham, the auctioneer, to the bank to see the furniture and effects at the premises—he was called as a witness for Titcomb at the police-court—the bank claimed the furniture, and was

met by two persons named Allen and Cook, claiming it—I saw Pryor with reference to their claims—Barnard Allen is Pryor's brother-in-law—Pryor said that Allen had a hire-note on the furniture—I referred prior to the declaration made by Mrs. Pryor with regard to that—I asked him how she could make a declaration that the furniture was her own if it was on hire—he said "Oh, the furniture was only taken away for security, to secure the bank"—we were not aware at that time that Allen was Pryor's brother—Cook claimed a portion of the furniture, I can't say which—I spoke to Pryor about his claim nearly in the same terms as the other—he said it was only a very small amount; about 15l. would settle it—I don't know the amount of his claim—I understood Allen's was over 70l.—it came before the Court on an injunction and was dismissed; it came before the Master on an interpleader—the Master advised to have the issue tried; Cook said "No, I shan't try an issue"—Allen said at first he would, and then withdrew—the furniture was taken away and never replaced; we could not trace it, and never recovered it—I have seen a list of the customers of the bank, found at Pryor's place—I should say that nearly all the business done with those persons has been a loss—the 300l. kept Pryor's account in credit up to March 8th—there was then an overdraft of 25l.—interest was allowed up to Christmas.

Monday, January 12th, 1885.

THOMAS WARAM (Recalled and further examined). I have now here the regular minute-book of the Grosvenor Bank—the rough minutes should be copied into this, and should be read at the next meeting, to be approved and signed—there is an omission of that entry in the minute-book—there is no entry of the loan being refused—on 25th October there is this entry: "Mrs. Pryor applied for a loan of 300l.; granted"—the rough minute-book merely states "Pryor 300l." without any other remark—there is no entry of anything about Hollis and Spink—the entry of the loan being granted appears to have been interpolated—it is Mr. Penfold's writing—in the rough minute-book immediately following "Pryor, loan 300l." there is "Spink to report with Mr. Hollis;" that is Titcomb's writing.

Cross-examined by Pope. Titcomb was at the bank for three or four days after 31st March, when I became manager—if we make an advance on a bill we do not put it to the credit of the account—it is possible that Titcomb may have allowed you to draw on that bill—the bank afterwards sued you on the bill—we could only sue you on the amount of the bill—we sued the acceptor and you as well—if the 21l. bill had been paid it would have been put to your credit—I remember proceedings against the bank at the Westminster Police-court—I was not under the impression at that time that you were directly connected with those proceedings—you afterwards wrote to the chairman and asked for an appointment with him—in consequence of that I think I wrote and made an appointment, and I was present at the interview—it was stated if you paid your overdraft and interest they would renew the 50l. bill—I gave our solicitor instructions to carry that out—the costs on that bill I think were 8l.—I remember nothing about the 75l. bill—I remember your complaining of the costs—I believe you suggested to the chairman that he had better take a 75l. bill to cover the whole; it was not taken—I remember your

stating something about the proceedings injuring the House Property Distribution Company.

Cross-examined by Pryor. I have only been manager to the bank nine months—I have only acquired my knowledge of the transactions from the books—previous to my appointment I had been an accountant; previous to that I had been in a bank some years, about 25 altogether—I was five years in the Consolidated Bank—if I said in my deposition 14 years, it is a mistake—I have not been anything else, I have not been a promoter of banks, I have assisted in promoting one; it was not a success, it was never offered to the public—I have seen your name in the books of the bank several times, I can't say how many, a great many—I have not compiled a book from your introductions; it is there, they amount to about 100 or 200 perhaps—I only find your name in the books coupled with one of the co-defendants', Mr. Pope's I think—you were a shareholder in the bank; you held 250 shares I think, 50 belong to your trustee in bankruptcy—the money was lent to Mrs. Pryor—I have seen her three or four times—I do not remember her bringing me 20l. on her last visit—I remember your saying that 20l. should be paid on certain conditions—Mrs. Pryor said she had 20l., I never saw the money, I have no doubt she had it, because I knew where it came from—I have never seen the furniture in question under the bill of sale—some time after my appointment I found the accounts in confusion and the books irregularly kept—the books were kept by the clerks under Mr. Penfold—he was chief clerk or deputy-manager; he superintended them, and was responsible for them—I never consulted him as to the state of your account—I opened a new set of books in June, after the completion of the half year—I have made some sweeping alterations since I have been there—that did not include Mr. Holder, the chairman from his daily attendance, or Mr. Thompson, the vice-chairman, or three directors—it was impossible that I could be in a position to sweep away a director—we have eight directors now instead of eleven—Mr. Cunningham, the auctioneer, will do no more business for the bank—he has done business with the bank since I have been there—I refused to have any business to do with you—I know that Mr. Penfold made a statement to the solicitor for the Treasury, I was present part of the time—he denied that this entry was interpolated—I say that it was, it was written at a different time, that can be shown from the ink, it is darker ink—this is the first time I have heard it stated that he was called away and left it to dry—there is nothing in the minute of 25th October that incriminates you, of course you could not have been present—I believe there is an indictment against Penfold—I believe that indictment does not include these alleged false entries—there is a cash statement at the end of the minutes, with the number and amount of the loans granted every evening—there is an entry there of the 300l.—that is not interpolated—the total of loans granted the evening of 25th Oct. is correct—there is no cash statement of the refusals—this is a cash statement supposed to represent the balance of the bank that week, and in that your 300l. is included—the entry in the rough minute-book on 24th October is "Pryor's loan refused," and immediately following there is "Pryor 300l.; Spink and Hollis to report" in Titcomb's handwriting—that is two lines down—I don't say that that refers to your loan, I simply say it is there—I understood Mr. Spink to say he never reported—there was no application from Benham that evening—if the 300l. had been paid

of course there would have been no prosecution—the directors are the prosecutors, not I—I believe Mr. Hollis has been connected with the bank from its commencement—he used to attend the weekly Board meetings—I should say that matters were not discussed at the Board which did not get on the minutes—this loan would very likely be incidentally mentioned—I should say Hollis ought to have entered his report—I have searched the report-book and so has he; he did not find one—I don't find Allen's name in the books of the bank—he is your half-brother—Allen and Cook claimed the furniture—I don't know either of them—we did not remove the furniture till after we had the order of Vice-Chancellor Bacon—I am aware that the costs were paid and the Sheriff withdrawn—the application for the 200l. loan was found at Mr. Hollis's—it is not your writing—I believe all the defendants are customers of the bank, and most of them hold bills of sale, and their names appear in Perry and Stubbs's lists—you have paid off several loans, not amounting to 100l.—Mr. Hollis's report on Pope's loan of 15l. is here—that loan was granted—I do not find any loan in the name of Cheshire—I knew nothing of him—in paying a cheque we should only refer to the autograph-book for the signature—Pope's current account was about 7l. 8s. 9d. overdrawn—Roantree's dishonoured cheque for 5l. made the overdraft—I have not asked Roantree to pay it; I don't know him—I believe Pope is a shareholder—when he opened his account I think he had a 25 cheque-book—I have heard it stated in evidence that many of those cheques were dishonoured; if so, I should say it would be imprudent to issue a second cheque-book—the last interview I had with Pope must have been before this prosecution was commenced—I saw him three or four times, and that was in reference to try and settle your matter of 200l., to prevent this prosecution—I do not think I find your name connected with any of the co-defendants in the cheques or bills—your application of 20th September for the loan of 300l. was' refused—this is the only application paper I have found in the books, and there is no date to that—I have not found a letter of 20th September. (MR. BESLEY put in a draft of the letter. The application of 24th October for 300l. was put in and ready submitting as security 12 acceptances, amounting to 332l. 15s. 8d., also a bill of sale on his furniture, which would realise 600l. at least, and offering to take 200 shares, the deposit upon which to be deducted from the loan.) The application is for 300l., or such sum as the security will justify—an inventory should accompany the offer of a bill of sale; the manager would hand it to the surveyor, he would make his survey if possible by the next Board day, which would be 23rd September—I have no report why it was refused on the first occasion—the inventory was handed to the auctioneer—I do not produce it—I do not remember if there was one; if there was it was given to the auctioneer; his clerk says there was not such a thing—if Mr. Maynard can produce it it would surprise me—in addition to the bill of sale there was a promissory note for 390l.; that is the practice—there should be a clause that the goods should be insured—I do not produce the policy or the receipt—Mrs. Pryor stated when she first came that she had actually told the manager it was on hire—there is no record of a single bill being offered—if bills came into the bank from you they would be entered under your name—I find your name on five small bills—your loan has not been paid off—the bank is not in your debt; in March there was a cheque of yours drawn from your current

account of 32l. 10s., which went to your credit—I remember your letter saying you would take 200 shares as part of the advance—I found 200 shares allotted to you—I received a cheque for 25l. the week following the bill of sale—the money was advanced on the cheque—the advance was granted the 31st of October, and the cheque was signed the 8th of November—it was out of the credit you got placed to your account—your application states the furniture is your own—the bank solicitor carried the bill of sale out—there were 11 directors to the Company—Perry's and Stubbs's lists were laid on the Board-room table—the bill of sale was registered—I am not aware you deposited certain securities on behalf of Miss Barnard—you showed me Dr. Dillon's security obtained by fraud—Titcomb and you had certain transactions with each other—I only found out by an accident on my part that you had got the 20l. 15s. on this bill, and had not had a farthing in the credit for that money—I found Gillon's and Clancy's securities, and Willis and Jackson's bill among the bank securities—Lindsay's bill was lodged after I was there—those amounts were left out of all the books in which they ought to have appeared—it appears in the cash statement, but does not appear for what—I found those securities of Gillon and Willis in an old drawer and other places; they should have been in the safe with the other securities, and a note should have been made in the books—you had the money on Clancy's bill—a cheque was passed for a sundry account, and placed to the credit of your account, so that it did not pass under the directors' notice at all—I should say your securities were worthless; you have never asked for them back; you asked for them to be produced here—I can't say if I gave any value for Clancy's bill of sale—the last instalments on Mrs. Pryor's bill of sale were paid by your overdrawing your account—on 8th March your cheque for 32l. 10s. was put to your credit, which made your debit 25l.—subsequently your account remained overdrawn 13l. 13s. 5d.—I took proceedings against Mrs. Pryor in consequence of a distress for rent being put in—I received information of that from you or Mrs. Pryor—previous to that there were proceedings in the County Court with reference to the bill of sale—you came to me for a letter, which I signed, and they immediately withdrew, and I understood you received damages in consequence of the person being put in possession—I understood it was my bill of sale prevented your things being taken away; it was reported to me by the deputy manager—the County Court Judge gave 20l. damages to Mrs. Pryor—I went into possession, and seized for 315l.—the auctioneer paid the bank nothing for the sale of the furniture, because he had so much to pay out in consequence of the steps you took—he paid 40l. over and, above the sale of the goods—this is the advertisement of the sale of the goods on 15th August (read)—I have not got the account here—the auctioneer said the goods only realised 70l. or 80l.—I believe I have not sent you the account; I believe you had notice of the sale; a catalogue was sent to you, I believe—I did not apply to you for the deficiency, because I knew you could not pay it—Allen and Cooke produced the hire notes of the furniture before the Master—the first time I heard of the hire note was when Mrs. Pryor said she stated it at the time she signed for the bill of sale, and you were present—you stated yourself that Allen had taken the goods away—the order was that you should return the goods to your premises, that we should pay the instalment, and then we should deliver up the bill of sale to you and retire from the premises—

the goods were not returned to the premises—Mrs. Pryor had applied to the Court of Chancery to restrain us from taking the goods away—it cost us 150l. as well as the 300l.—we were informed most of the drawing-room furniture was taken away by Allen—I don't allege anything was taken away by Cook—we had to appear before the Master, because of two persons claiming—we lost the furniture through it, nothing more—we applied for a summons at Westminster against you and Mrs. Pryor for obtaining money by false and fraudulent representations; that she made a declaration that it was all her own, and you concurred in it.

Cross-examined by MR. STATHAM. When Titcomb brought forward Pryor's application for a loan he did so as manager, there was nothing extraordinary in it, it was his duty—the rough minute book has his endorsement "Refused"—in the second minute book it is "Pryor, 300l.," it does not say "Granted"—the two preceding ones have "Granted"—Mr. Pryor's second application in the rough minute book referring to that was of an exceptional nature in that respect—following it is "Hollis and Spink to report," that might or might not refer to Pryor's loan, if it did it was Mr. Titcomb's entry for the protection of the bank—taking it as it now stands, I should say the words below referred to it—Penfold copied the rough book into the minute book, from the entry I gather it is an interpolation—I have not found in the book any interpolation in Titcomb's writing—if it was Penfold's interpolation the corresponding entry in the column of figures would not appear to be interpolated—the 300l. being entered in the column would not tend to shake my suspicion that the other was interpolated—Mr. Titcomb did not enter up the column—I find no entry by Titcomb in the minute book referring to Pryor's loan being granted—three directors, Ridgway, Birch, and Spink, signed that cheque—300l. is rather a large cheque for our bank; we don't have many in a week so large—a director signing it would have his attention drawn to its object and cause; we may presume their attention was called to it—I believe the pass book is laid on the directors' table every week—I do not think it is their practice to go through it, only to look at the outstanding balance—the first legal proceedings in connection with Pryor's loan were against Pryor and his wife, then Bowlem took out a summons against the bank on 17th July, and technically succeeded—no criminal proceedings were taken before Titcomb was brought into it—the bank's present solicitors defended the bank against Bowlem prior to Titcomb being accused—it is a frequent custom for bankers to take customers' bills, which although not discounted, are drawn upon to a certain extent, and the bill is not then placed to his account, and that would explain that, with reference to the 20l. bill, Titcomb said he would allow them to draw 10l. which was not entered in the books; there should be an entry of the security in the bank books—the bill would not necessarily be entered in any book, but there should have been a book in which it would be entered; there was no book kept—deeds deposited at the bank to be drawn upon would be entered—Titcomb sent a letter after he left the bank asking for compensation—he did bills of sale after to left, not for the bank—he took bills of sale and afterwards mortgaged them to the bank—a resolution was passed by the directors that I was not to do any more bills of sale, but that I should take them as any other security on a mortgage—there was no arrangement made for Titcomb to take the bills oi sale and mortgage them to the bank—Titcomb

tried soon afterwards to start the City and Suburban Bank after this, it was to be a money-lending bank—I am not aware that he took any of his own connection to it—if Pryor's loan had been properly paid up, the charge of conspiracy would not have been known—the first cheque of the House Property Distribution Company was paid in on 28th February, and the first cheque drawn on 1st April, after Titcomb had left the bank—bad debts occur more generally to younger than to older banks—I have been connected with a smaller branch of the Consolidated Bank—I left because of a disagreement with the directors—I charged a man with forgery without consulting the directors—I said yesterday at Westminster Police-court it was on account of losses; the loss arose out of this—a loss incurred by a bank does not necessarily reflect on a manager; to some extent it does so—I had something to do with the Britannia Bank—it never was a bank except for being registered—I did not make 1,000l. out of it, it never had a shilling—I know Mr. Mordaunt—I decline to say if I got 1,000l. from him—I think he had eoinething to do with promoting the Britannia Bank—I decline to say if I do not answer because it would incriminate myself—I decline to say if I stated at the Westminister Police-court that Mr. Mordaunt parted with 1,000l. to me—I brought no testimonial to the Grosvenor Bank—I was appointed manager through the directors, no one gave or wrote me a letter—I did not say at the police-court I had had one—I am told an advertisement appeared for a clerk; I do not know if that was because Titcomb was overworked—when a loan was introduced and a report made on it, the report should be more important than the introduction; if Holis Us and Spinks reported on the loan their report would be the most important—I know nothing as to whether Pryor offered additional security on the second application for his loan—Vice-Chancellor Bacon gave an injunction in our favour with reference to that loan—if Titcomb introduced the loan not knowing the circumstances connected with it, it would be a valid one legally—among the bank papers I have found no cheques, bills, or negoitable instruments coupling Titcomb's name with any of the other prisoners.

Re-examined. This is the only proposal for the 300l. loan that I have seen—At is in Pryor's handwriting, and on account of the furniture at 56 Oswald Road—the answers to questions 10 and 11 are: "Have you any bill of sale or mortgage on your goods?" "No." "Any previous borrower?" "No"—the security is the bill of sale and joint promissory note of Mr. and Mrs. Pryor—this was issued in the interpleader action, where Allen and the Bank and Cook were different parties on 17th June, 1884—it shows the hire of the furniture for two years by Pryor from February, 1882—this is another document showing the pawning of some property of the same description as that in the bill of sale on 16th May, 1884—about 60l. or 70l. of the 300l. has been paid in instalments, including the 32l. overdraft—nothing came to the bank from the sale; we had to pay about 40l.—Benham was one of Pryor's introductions—I believe that was a 1,400l. loss.

By Pryor. Cook's hire-note of February, 1882, is marked as an exhibit in Court—at the foot-note of Mrs. Pryor's bill of sale she states to the satisfaction of the Bank how she became possessed of the furniture, and she made an affidavit it was hers—the name on the ticket is Mr. Barnard; he was associated with you in Parliament Street—I am not aware that he lodged in your house—Benham had a loan of three

figures on your introduction—if it has been paid off the Bank has not had the money—the Bank lost 1,500l. through Benham, but it does not follow that they lost that through you.

THOMAS HOLDER . I am a cab proprietor of Westminster, and have been chairman of the Grosvenor Bank since it was formed—Titcomb was manager till the 31st March or 1st April—the application for a loan to Pope on Fuller's, his landlord's, security, is in Pryor's handwriting—Pope is described as a director of public companies—I don't think Titcomb gave me any information with reference to Pope's respectability—Pope a tier wards opened a current account—I don't know who introduced him—that would be taken by Mr. Titcomb—it would be the bank manager's duty, if he took in a bill for an indefinite amount and there was an overdrawn account, to bring it before the directors, and not to enter it in a bill-book—I found that this 20l. bill was in the bank after Titcomb had left—he did not say he had that bill of Pryor's, or that he had allowed Pope to draw against it—I never saw Pope's bill for 42l. till after Titcomb went away—I then found it in the bill case—I knew Pryor by sight, and as having a very bad reputation—on 20th September, 1883, I remember his applying for a 300l. loan—Titcomb brought it before the Board—I said we could do no business with Pryor, and it was not gone into—one of the directors put it; it was refused absolutely—we heard he was a bad character, and refused to have anything to do with him—the question of security was never discussed—the fair copy minute-book would be read at the next meeting—when Titcomb read them on the 27th I noticed nothing about the refusal of Pryor's loan—on 25th October I see in the rough minute book "Pryor, 300l." and neither "refused" or "granted;" it never came before us—Hollis's report was never brought before us in September—the matter was only brought forward once, and then refused—in the fair minute-book, 25th October, I find the entry, "Pryor's loan, 300l.; granted"—Titcomb would read the minutes from the minute-book for them to be approved and signed by the chairman—I should have known if he had read out Pryor's name—Titcomb did not read out from this cash account amounting to 488l., the details including "Pryor 300l."—I should have known if he had—I did not consent to the 300l. being given to Mr. Pryor—I always signed the cheques; I went to the bank every morning for that purpose—I was not aware that this cheque of 30th October for the 300l. had been signed—I did not know Pryor was paying instalments to the Bank—after Titcomb had left Pryor came round and said it was a pity to go on in this way; he wanted to make some arrangement—I said "The Sheriffs are in now for some one else"—he said "You can get them out"—I said I would not try to get them out; the case had gone too far, he had swindled us enough, and that "we must try the case now, it must go on—he brought his wife with him once—they said the things belonged to some party—I asked him how he came to swear they were their things—we went to action; the Court granted in our favour, but we lost more than the money by it—we got nothing by the security—Allen and Cook were the people claiming—I never saw them, and did not meet them and bring forward a claim—the tillings were sold, but the expenses were more than they realised—the proposal from the International Fish Dinner Company for 200l. was refused—it was brought forward two or three times by Titcomb

—Hollis brought it forward first—Titcomb said it was a good loan, and that the Baroness Burdett-Coutts was going to support it—I went over the place at the Barbican, came back, and reported at the Board meeting that it was a swindle on the face of it.

Cross-examined by MR. DILL. I knew nothing about Errington in connection with the International Fish Dinner Company.

Cross-examined by Pryor. I knew nothing about the internal affairs of the bank, only what I learnt from Titcomb—I did not know Pope was in connection with the bank before your introduction in July—I cannot say if I came across Cheshire's name before then—you were always hanging about the bank—you took no responsibility, I suppose, about the respectability of the people you introduced—the surveyor would inquire into a case and report—I am not aware he reported Pope as a good security—I should not look over the minutes before signing as a rule—you made no representations to me which induced me to refuse or grant a loan—you first spoke to me about it after Titcomb left—you came two or three times—I think you wanted us to go and square the Sheriff; I said you must go yourself, I could not square him—we had a trial and lost 1,000l. damages—I do not know if you had anything to do with that introduction—I am not aware our manager said he did not like contesting the Sheriff under Mrs. Pryor's bill of sale, and that you said you would contest it; you said you would give us 20l. to bring all the things away—I believe the bill of sale was contested in the County Court, I know nothing of it—Cook made no claim against the bank—I have not looked at the bill of sale, if I had seen it in Perry's list it would have come to my knowledge—I never saw Mrs. Pryor till she came with you—she made no representations—sometimes the directors looked over Stubbs's list—I believe no remark was made about the loan till after you had gone—we instructed the auctioneer to sell the furniture—we have never asked you for the deficiency—we are great losers—we consented, if you took the Sheriff out and paid 20l. down, that we would wait—I am not aware when the Sheriff went out or when the goods were removed.

Cross-examined by MR. STATHAM. Hollis brought forward Pryor's application—when a loan was applied for it would go into Titcomb's hands; he would give it to Hollis to report on, and Hollis would report on it to Titcomb, who would bring it before the Board—Titcomb has not complained of Hollis, I have complained to him, it has been the matter of mutual complaint between us—the surveyor's report is more important than the introduction; we are obliged to rely on the report and ignore the introduction to a certain extent—I have suggested to Titcomb that I was afraid Hollis was receiving a little black mail—we had no second application for the loan, it never came forward a second time—it was refused the first time because we had such a bad report of Pryor, and I said if we lent him money he would lend out money himself and cut our business away—we had a double reason—as soon as I made that suggestion the directors refused the loan, and the matter was never gone into—I do not think I saw Hollis's report—I know nothing as to whether the surveyor was to be paid if the loan came off—I believe his report was a formal one—a testimonial has been presented to me for my interest in the bank—Titcomb worked hard for the bank—he has complained to me that he had to pay the clerks out of his own pocket; I have made it up to

him—he volunteered to show the bank that they had made 7,000l. loss or thereabouts; he brought the balance-sheet before us—his salary was 150l. and 5 per cent on the net profits, it was therefore his interest that the bank should make as much profit as possible, as that was the mainstay of his income—I attended at the bank every day—for a short time I was paid for my attendance—I had sufficient confidence in Titcomb to sign cheques which he put before me without suspicion—I do not think Titcomb said that he had no opinion of Hollis as a surveyor—I have not complained of Cunningham—the bank generally charged 15 to 20 per cent for a loan, generally 20 per cent.—Titcomb did not complain of directors borrowing at a less rate—Birch borrowed at 7 per cent, under peculiar circumstances—the pass-books were produced at each meeting once a week—I have looked at the balance, I have seen the directors looking at it—very often the book was not there, we forgot it two or three weeks—Titcomb has never been with me to the Barbican—he said it would be a good loan, and it was two or three weeks after that that I went—I went inside.

Cross-examined by MR. WARBURTON. I know nothing of Hughlings.

Re-examined. I do not know whether Mrs. Pryor's bill of sale was ever published in Perry's or Stubbs's list—up to the time of Titcomb's leaving I was ignorant of it, and believed he was acting in the bank's interest—I had a fish dinner at the Barbican, and paid 6d. for it.

By MR. STATHAM. I do not know that Mr. Titcomb was ever present when a bill of sale was executed.

THOMAS RINTOUL . I live at 13; Vincent Square, Westminster, and am one of the directors of the Grosvenor Bank—I remember a proposal for a loan to the International Fish Dinner Company being brought forward by Titcomb—I opposed it; it was renewed several times, and always refused—all the refusals ought to have appeared in the minute-book—I have no remembrance of any loan to Pryor being proposed to our Board—this is my signature to this 300l. cheque payable to Pryor—Titcomb placed it before me—I signed it hesitatingly, asking him for an explanation why it was put before me for signature—he said the directors had passed it on the meeting-night after I had left—I believed what he was stating was true, and I thought it was my duty to sign the cheque on the face of that.

Cross-examined by Pryor. You made no representations to me to get that 300l. cheque—I never spoke to you or to your wife that I know of—Penfold did not out first ask me to sign it; he did not lay it before me—I did not point it out to the Board of directors after I had signed it—I can't say if they might have seen it in the pass-book; the pass-look laid on the table when it suited the manager; more frequently it did not—I can't say if Titcomb's name was to it when I put mine, or whether yours was—I could not swear to the date; I signed it—I can't say if money was given for it at the time; I always looked on you with suspicion.

Cross-examined by Titcomb (who in the absence of MR. SEYMOUR declined fa further services of MR. STATHAM, and conducted the remainder of his case himself). I don't know if I was present at the Board meeting when instructions were given to place a man in possession at Rendal's house or whether I heard it reported—I could not say whether I heard of the man being in possession before or alter I knew the money had been obtained surreptitiously—I swear you placed the cheque before me—I

can't say what date I signed it—I do not know if it was placed to Pryor's credit before being signed by the directors—I have signed numerous other cheques at your request—I could not tell you the name of another one—you have Bent cheques to my business premises to sign—I remember this, because it has been brought before my notice more than others—I knew Pryor's name—I did not think much about it—I signed it on the faith of your statement, taking you to be an honest man—I believe I left Board meetings early—I was in the habit of leaving early; if I had not I should have known something about the cheque—I don't think I was present when Mr. Dregg's bill, entered in the minutes, was considered—you brought forward the loan to the International Fish Dinner Company more than twice, I should say from memory—I think at two following meetings—you have very seriously pressed many loans—I can't pick them out—you have worked very hard—I have no recollection of your paying clerks out of your pocket—I had the greatest confidence in you—Cunningham kept the clock back in Napp's furniture salo for some reason—I objected, and said it should be sold—you did not bring forward at the Board meeting that I had had it too cheap; I have heard him swear that it was worth bl. 10s.—I got it for 5 guineas.; that was the price at which the bank had bought it out—Cunningham stated in his report that he bought it in for 4l.—I swear I did not know that the directors borrowed money cheaper than other people—I believe Birch paid 10 per cent—the directors' fees were a guinea a sitting, and amounted altogether to 300l. a year—I believe you resigned your position as manager to do bills of sale for the bank; that was not the sole reason for your leaving, the directors were dissatisfied with the manner in which you had conducted the business of the bank, and pressure was put upon, you to leave after the Gantlett trial; we then learnt that you had been a policeman 16 or 17 years ago, and a relieving officer at Camberwell after that—some of us lost faith in you at the time of the Gantlett trial—at our dinner on the 24th March, 1884, after the Gantlett trial, your health was proposed, it was usual to propose your health—the trial lasted a week; I can't Bay if you were in Court all day, you were there several days, possibly you were at the bank both morning and night during the trial—the pass book was not always on the Board-room table; I asked for it sometimes and it had to be brought down—bills of sale are now being done very judiciously, I can't say if they are for people introduced by Pryor—I can't say if the surveyor had any in getting the loan paid to the International Fish Dinner Company—I think Hollis said something about the Baroness Burdett Coutts, aud that if she went into it the Prince of Wales would take it up—you said nothing about that, you said it would be good business for the bank—the minute book was on the Board-room table during the Board meeting—it was not very often opened for inspection, it could not always be found when asked for; I have asked you for it and you have made some trifling excuse, and said some one would get it—there was nothing secret or sly in that matter during the Board meeting—I dont know that there was a special bank committee to inspect the bank books—I did not complain that I was not on it—I can't say if the committee reported to the directors monthly or quarterly—I can't say I recollect hearing about Pryor's loan; you read the minutes and left out what you pleased—it was never read on the week following, or I should have heard it and made some remark in reference to it—I don't swear I

noticed it was left out—I won't swear I did not say at Southwark that it might have been read and I not have notted it.

Re-examined. The reported amount of bad debts during the last halfyear was 700l.—since Titcomb left we found the bad debts amount to nearer 10,000l. than 700l.—I don't know how the amount taken by the shareholders in dividends compares with the loss of capital—although Titcomb gave Pryor credit on the 31st October for 300l., the money was not drawn from our bankers till the 5th November; two meetings would then pass before our attention was called to the banker's book and the going out of 300l.

By Titcomb. I cannot say whether the cheque was drawn on the 31st October and not paid into the Imperial Bank till the 5th November, it would show it was not signed when it was paid in.

Tuesday, 13th January, and two following days.

HARRY NELSON BEAUMONT SPINK . I am a chemist, of 8, Maraham Street, Westminster—I am one of the directors of the Grosvenor Bank—I remember being present at a meeting of the directors when a proposed baa to Pryor was brought forward, it was not entertained; the entry in the rough minute book "Spink and Hollis to report" was pointed out to me at the police-court—there was never any suggestion that I should report upon this matter to Pryor's—it was the general rule that I should fill up the bodies of cheques that were signed by the directors and countersigned by Titcomb—I never to my knowledge heard any minute read out that pryor's loan had been granted—the body of this 300l. cheque is not in my handwriting, it looks to me to be the writing of Fenfold, the deputy manager—I would not swear to it, but it appears so—I have not the slightest recollection of signing that cheque—the usual practice was that the cheques were filled in at the meeting of the directors, and the chairman and two of the directors would sign them at the meeting—several cheques were put before us by Titcomb to sign at the same time, and I should sign them as a matter of course; he would either send them across to my place, or I should go across to the bank and sign them.

Cross-examined by Pryor. I never spoke to you in my life—I only made two reports for the bank, one was as to a person named Benham, and the other was in the Harrow Road—I can't tell when Benham's was, I have no means of fixing the date, it is not clear to my mind, except that I reported on the case—Benham's was not his first application for money—I have no idea what his first loan was, I know that he had had money from the bank; the directors felt uncomfortable about it, and I was requested to report to the surveyor; it was a much larger amount than 57l.—I have not seen the bill of sale—it first came to my knowledge that you had had an advance of 300l. a considerable time after—I did not see it in passbook, or notice it at the end of the minutes; it was not read in the usual way or I must have noticed it—the passbook was generally on the table, I don't know that I looked at it—I have frequently signed cheques for any amount that Titcomb put before me—the refusal was some time in September or October, it is entered in the rough minute book as September 20th—I have no knowledge of any application of that character coming before the directors but on that one occasion—I let a portion of my place to Mr. Payne, a solicitor—I am not aware that this bill of sale was carried out by him, he never mentioned it to me—I can

swear that the minute of the acceptance of the loan was never read in my presence; I don't think it would have passed unchallenged if I had been there, because I had a peculiar idea with regard to your business.

Cross-examined by Titcomb. I don't say that you placed this cheque before me to sign, I have no recollection of signing it, but that is the only way in which I can account for it—the cashier has on two, three, or four occasions asked me to sign cheques, it is possible this may have been one; but where one was placed before me by the cashier, 50 have been by you—we opened the Islington branch some time in October, you devoted a good deal of attention to starting that; if you were not at the chief office Penfold would be in charge—I don't know that we were short of clerks at that time—I always looked on Mr. Holder, the chairman, as a businesslike man, I looked upon him as a very clever financial man, I don't think I ever called him a prophet—I cannot say that it was about the time of Pryor's loan that I was asked to report on Benham, or that it was about the time of our dinner at Highbury, it might be about that time—I recollect Pryor's loan being not entertained, I do not recollect it being placed before the Board afterwards—I do not recollect Pryor's application for 200 shares being placed before the Board—I believe he is a shareholder, whether these shares were allotted at that time or not I could not say, I don't recollect it; I could not say whether I was present at that meeting, I was frequently late in coming to the meetings and possibly I might not be present when the minutes were read—cheques have been omitted to be signed at the Board meeting, but it was not usual—there have been differences of opinion at the Board meetings, not what I should call dreadful rows—that was not about the time this loan was brought forward, I should think it would be before that and before the Islington matter—I never heard Mr. Holder say that he only knew what Titcomb told him about business; I know that he, as chairman, very often made reports—I was always under the impression that he was acting under your advice—I think the minute-book was generally on the table—the entry as to Pryor's loan looks very much like being interpolated; the thing is closed up—"loan of 300l." and "granted" are on the same line, which does not occur in any other part of the book—that was written by Penfold—I find in the cash statement immediately following, these minutes an entry of "Pryor 300l."—that does not look as if it was interpolated, the chairman's signature is immediately below that—I believe that was the only sum of 300l. that evening—there is another entry of three figures, in bills, in the same column; there is a break off between "loans" and "bills"—this is the only three figures in loans—I do not know that Penfold has ever been asked about that entry—I have no recollection that the manager reported that he had spoken to Penfold about it—Penfold was not asked before the Board in my presence whether he made the entry—I do not recollect your writing a letter to the Board about the loan in July—I could not say whether it was read; I know there were several letters received from you from the time you left till four or five months after, but whether there was a letter of that character it is impossible for me to say—I have no such letter—I cannot fix the time when I made the Benham survey—I do not know if the surveyor's attendance book is here—I don't think I signed the attendance book as an attendance for making that survey; it was usual to do so, but I don't think I did.

Re-examined. If Pryor's name had come before me I should not have allowed the loan to pass unchallenged, because from time to time I had persistently opposed business introduced by Pryor—I could not positively say whether Ben ham was introduced by him, but I am under the impression that he was—I find Benham's name on 25th October in connection with twelve bills of exchange ordered to be discounted—it would be no part of my duty to report about those; I reported on a further application of his on a bill of sale—my report was with respect to Benham, not Pryor—I should not think that was on 25th October if it was with regard to bills—there was no application from Benham as to a bill of sale, only to bills, and I did not report upon those; it was with regard to some other transaction of Benham's that I had to report; I could not tell whether that was before or after the opening of the Islington branch—Titcomb always attended the Board meetings when I was there.

By Pryor. Benham applied for a further loan with a charge upon his house and furniture, I distinctly remember that, because that was one of the two I reported on—I went with the surveyor—he wanted 600l.—I reported that they should not advance more than 95l. or 100l., it had nothing to do with bills of exchange—it does not say that the bills were lodged as additional security—my memory is perfectly clear that my report about Benham was not in any way connected with bills of exchange.

WILLIAM SAMUEL BIRCH (Re-examined). I see in the rough minute book of 20th September the words "Pryor's loan refused," in Titcomb's handwriting—I remember the loan being refused—I believe it was my proposition that it should not be granted—I don't recollect why it was refused; I know why I refused it myself, it was because I had no faith in Pryor—that was the reason I gave when I proposed it—the loan was unanimously refused—I do not remember its ever being brought before the Board again—I never heard any minute read afterwards that the loan was granted—this is my writing on this cheque of 31st October for 300l. to Mrs. Mary Pryor—on some occasions cheques were put before us to sign, not on a Board night, and it was said they were omitted on the Board night, and upon the faith of this cheque being drawn and signed by two directors I signed unknowingly; I did not know that I was signing a cheque to Mr. or Mrs. Pryor, I should have demurred to it—Titcomb never called my attention to the fact that that loan had taken 300l. from the bank and was being repaid to the extent of 90l.—I had no idea that Pryor was returning money to the bank by way of instalments—I had no idea that he had had a loan—my attention was never called to the transaction by Titcomb—no money came back to my knowledge with respect to the loan of Allen and Cook—this entry of "Spink and Hollis to report" is another case; I believe it was to view a house of a man of the name of Benham—I recollect proposing that Spink should accompany the surveyor—I see Benham's name appears in the minute-book—that transaction was all bills—it was on that occasion that Spink was asked to report.

Cross-examined by Pryor. I believe on two occasions only was Spink authorised to report—you was not present when the loan was rejected—I have never spoken to you in my life—I could not tell whether that cheque was endorsed Mary Pryor at the time I signed it; I simply know that the two other signatures were there, and having confidence in Titcomb, thinking it was all right, unfortunately I signed it—I cannot possibly

recollect the date on which I signed it—unfortunately I did at times sign cheques without reference to anybody, having confidence in Titcomb—they were mostly drawn at the Board—I might perhaps take up the passbook at the Board to look at the balance at the time—I did not look at Perry's or Stubbs's Gazette—the then vice-chairman, Mr. Thompson, generally had to look over that—there is a book containing a list of shareholders and the date of allotment—I am aware that you paid something on some shares—I am not certain whether I saw Mrs. Pryor more than once—I never heard her make any offer to settle it; the object of her visit was to argue that she was right in allowing the furniture to be removed by Allen—he took it away on the hire agreement—I never heard of any claim more than this, that Mrs. Pryor said it was on a hire agreement, and that they had taken it away—you were not present on that occasion.

Cross-examined by Titcomb. I don't recollect Pryor's application coming before the Board more than once; I think that was in September—I can't recollect whether 200 shares were allotted to Pryor in October—at the end of the minutes of the 8th November it says: "Mr. James Pryor applied for 200 shares in the Company, and it was resolved to allot"—it is usual to put the shares allotted at the end of the minutes—I used continually to say "I don't like Pryor's business; is this Pryor's application? then I propose that it is not done," and I was very sorry that the directors didn't see as I did—there was a great difference of opinion about Pryor—if I had the whole of the directors of my way of thinking the business would not have been carried out—it was proposed and seconded, and one man could not stand against the others—I have not a letter which Pryor wrote to you as manager, repeating his application and offering the 200 shares as additional inducement to the directors to make the advance—I don't recollect that being read at the Board—I do not recollect that I was present at a small committee when Mr. Cunningham, the auctioneer, was ordered to place a man in possession at Pryor's—I don't recollect telling Cunningham all that had passed when this loan was granted—I don't think I could have had a conversation with Cunningham and not remembered it—I was not present at several interviews with Cunningham about this matter—a committee was appointed to go through the bank books every month—they reported as to the balance at the end of the month—they had not to report on the books; the accountant would do that—I don't recollect that there was any comment made about Pryor's account or about Pope's account—the directors tested the balance at the end of each month; they didn't check each item—I don't recollect any complain made as to Pope's or Pryor's account—I can't answer for others, but I didn't like trading with Pryor—I have heard it said at the Board "What does it matter if the security is good?"—I could not swear that I heard that said on Pryor's application—I never heard his application brought forward more than once—I am certain that you advanced the loan to the Fish Dinner Company—you said you thought it a good business—I am not certain that Mr. Hollis recommended the loan—I remember hearing that the Baroness Burdett-Coutts was going to join the Company; I don't know whether that was from Hollis or yourself—I don't recollect hearing him say that if she did join the Prince of Wales would probably become a patron—I don't recollect who asked me to sign the 300l. Cheque—you might have done it or Penfold, or a clerk might have done it—the

Islington branch was opened on 15th October, the birthday of one of my children—the loan it appears is supposed to have been granted ten days after—I don't know that your time was wholly occupied with the Islington branch, for some time after it was opened, you were backwards and forwards there at times—Penfold was not supposed to lend money in your absence—I believe the chairman was there every day in your absence; he was paid 10s. a day to assist you—you were there the best part of the time—the reason of your resignation was because there was a good deal of dissatisfaction over the Gauntlett case on account of things not going on so well as they should have done—I never had an interview with one of the jurymen in that case; one of the jurymen never worked for me—the action was against the bank for improper seizure to recover money on a bill of sale—the instrument was informal in some way—I can't say whether that instrument was drawn by the solicitor to the bank—the chairman's own solicitor conducted the case—I do not know that Mr. Thompson, the vice-chairman, was in the habit of bringing bad business to the bank—after your resignation the Board passed a resolution of regret at your resigning; that was before they had looked into the books—I attended at your office to get your signature to some transfers, amounting to 300l., some weeks after your resignation—I told you in the presence of the gentleman who witnessed the transfer that the money should be placed to your account next week if you had not had it, but I understood you had the money—we passed a resolution that we would never do another bill of sale under your advice; we did a bill of sale after that—after we found the state the books were in we felt we could never trade with you any longer—I believe you were repeatedly asked to come to the office, but you never came—the bank charged from 20 per cent, discount on bills; they charged me at the rate of 10 per cent.—I borrowed 1,000l. at 7 per cent., and I allowed 590l. to remain on deposit 3at 5 per cent., with the understanding that in case I withdrew the 590l. I was to pay 10 per cent, for the other, and I ultimately paid the interest and every farthing of the capital back—I have not been asked to produce the deposit-book; I don't know whether it is here—I gave my promise that it should not be drawn out, and it has all been paid—I do not owe the bank any money now; the bank owe me money—I always received 10 per cent, dividend on my shares up to the time you were in the bank—we paid 10,000l. for the goodwill of the old Company, of which 5,000l. in cash was paid—I never heard that my father borrowed money of the bank.

Re-examined. The nominal value of each paid-up share was 10s.—we have not made any call owing to our losses; we have had to call up the 10s.—it was 2s. 6d. at a time before that, then 5s., then 7s—three calls, have been made since November, 1883, of half-a-crown each, bringing it to 10s.—Pryor paid 25l. out of the 300l.; he has never paid a shilling since.

GEORGE HOLLIS . I live in Great Smith Street, Westminster, and am surveyor to the Grosvenor Bank—I have known Pryor for about three years before these proceedings were taken—I have known him as introducing clients to the Grosvenor Bank for the purpose of borrowing money—I attended nearly all the Board meetings—I remember a proposal for a loan of 300l. to Pryor—it was brought before the Board and not entertained—it was not even discussed—the chairman made some remarks that

were not at all in favour of the loan, and it was at once vetoed—there was no reason why I should report on the matter—the entry in the rough minute book "Spink and Hollis to report" could not refer to that loan—I was prepared to report, but the loan not being entertained no report was ever made by me.

Cross-examined by Pryor. I cannot fix the date of your application—my memory as to the date is only served by reference to the books—the entry in my survey book coincides with that in the minute book, the 20th September, 1883—without reference to my fee book I could not say whether I went to your house on that occasion—when a loan on a bill of sale is applied for, the usual course is that the inventory and application form are handed to me by the secretary, and I visit the house and report—that occurred in your instance, and I should have reported if the application had been entertained—until it came before the Board I did not know that it would not be entertained—I think it was in October I went to the house—I went once unofficially and once officially—I went through the house on each occasion; at an interval of a week or 10 days—I am paid a percentage of 10s. in the 100l.; that would be 30s. for 300l.—I have not not my fee book here—I don't think the original entry was 400l., and then altered to 300l.

Cross-examined by Titcomb. I believe I am not a director of the Grosvenor Bank; it is a question for the Court—I am told by the secretary that I am not—I am surveyor; I am quite content with that—during the time you were manager I considered myself a director; I attended all Board meetings with very few exceptions—I may have been present when proceedings were ordered to be taken against Pryor and his wife for obtaining this money by fraud—I don't recollect the circumstances; it would have nothing to do with me—I have heard bickerings at the Board at times, as there are on all Boards—I recollect the starting of the Grosvenor Finance Company—we were both primary movers in that, and we both worked for nothing for some time—I have known you 14 or 15 years; it may be 17—during all that time we have had more or less monetary transactions—I have not known any act of yours unworthy of a good and respectable citizen—until these proceedings were started I never heard anything said against you—I once helped to get up a testimonial for you—I believe I was chairman, and presented you with a gold watch—I could not say you were not a book-keeper—I know you had to do with loan offices—I remember Mr. Lane, the accountant, showing you how to make certain entries—before giving evidence at the police-court I had to make a statement to the Solicitor to the Treasury—Vasin the habit of attending at the bank nearly every morning to take instructions—I have seen you sign papers without reference to books—I did not make an official surrey as to the International Fish Dinner Company; it was merely to look into the character of some of the directors, to report whether the loan was worth entertaining—there was no fee for that—I was prepared to say something about it, but the chairman took it out of my hands, and it was at once vetoed through his influence—his influence at the Board was very great at that time—no proposal for a loan could come before the Board without the knowledge of the manager—I received a notice from Pryor that such an application was going to be put forward—I went to the premises of the Fish Dinner Company once, and had a sixpenny dinner there—that was the only time I went to the place—

I think I went there to make inquiry—I am prepared to swear I was not there three times—I think Hughlings showed me a letter purporting to be from Mr. Burdett-Coutts; he was applied to to help them—the loan applied for by the Fish Dinner Company was 200l.—I had a coffee-house for which I wanted 100l., which was to be handed over to the bank as a collateral security—as to Pryor's loan I cannot possibly fix the date when I first went to the house—I did not tell Mrs. Pryor that there was plenty of security for the money—I have said that the goods were worth 200l. or 300l.—I did not to my knowledge speak to Penfold about that loan—I have heard it remarked at the Board that it did not matter from whom applications came as long as there was sufficient security, but that has not been favourably received; others have remarked that it did matter to get respectable people to deal with—you wrote me a letter about Pryor's loan, which I read to the Board—I replied to your letter, and said I could not call to memory what induced the directors to alter their first decision, and I say so now, if they did alter it—I said the loan was refused by the Board, and to the best of my recollection there was not sufficient security for the amount—if the loan was granted it was without any report from me—I know of no case of a loan granted on a bill of sale without a report from me—several cases have been pointed out to me this last week where a loan has been refused in the report book and afterwards granted without any reference to me—I cannot point out any other case, where there was no written report and yet I received ray fee—I have not looked for such a case, I dare say there are such, there may or may not be—I received my full fee for this though I did not make a written report—there is not a blank left in my week's report where this report should be entered (Referring)—this is not the 25th October, it is the end of the previous week—if the matter came before the Board twice it was in my absence—I have been accused of receiving 10l. from Pryor to get the loan advanced, a shameful accusation, and no one knows it to be more untrue than yourself—I was not present at the Board when the prosecution against you was ordered—I have not been in the habit of accompanying Pryor to make surveys; he has gone with me on one or two occasions—you spoke to me about it, and said it would be best avoided, in which I concurred—the 300l. cheque was written by Penfold—I do not know that the bill of sale was written by him; it looks more like his than yours—I should say the declaration is in the same handwriting; it looks like Penfold's—I cannot say that I have met Penfold and Pryor out together—I never saw you in company with Pryor anywhere except at the bank—I do not know that the directors are very anxious to get you convicted; it is not a feeling that has been publicly made known, if such a feeling does exist—I certainly am not anxious to get you convicted, I have nothing to gain from your conviction—my owing you money has nothing to do with any feeling against you, or with making me say that I did not report on Pryor's loan—I recollect the opening of the Islington branch on 15th October; I do not recollect that there were some very great rotes at the Board at that time; one is so used to rows at Board meetings that one does not take notice, I have taken no interest in them—there have been differences of opinion in reference to Islington—I had nothing to do with it.

Re-examined. I first received a letter from Pryor stating that he was going to put forward the loan to the International Fish Dinner Company

—I did not have a special interview with him about it—I was in the habit of seeing him at the bank every morning, and I dare say we spoke about it then—he gave me particulars about it—I believe it was in consequence of what he said that I went there and saw Hughlings—the only time I heard mention of Pryor's loan at the Board was when it was refused.

By Titcomb. After Pryor's loan was refused the Board continued to receive business through him, up to about March this year.

JOHN DONALD . I am employed under Mr. Loveday at Mr. Toole's Theatre in the Strand—Mr. Toole is landlord of 26, King William Street—on 21st January, 1884, the shop portion, the ground floor, was let to Pope and Cheshire under this agreement for three years at a rent of 52l. 10s. a year, payable quarterly—two quarters were owing, and we put in a distress, and got possession from the police after this charge.

ARTHUR JENNINGS . I am clerk to Mr. Tebb, of King William Street—he is the owner of Gray's Inn Chambers, 20, High Holborn—I let a back office, third floor, to Errington under this agreement of 21 at July, 1884, at 18l. a year—he put up the name of "The House Property Distribution Company"—he also put up the name of "Henderson and Co." on a printed slip—I think I saw Hughlings there on one occasion—we got possession before 29th September before any rent was due.

EDWIN HANCOCK . I live in Church Row, Islington—on 24th, 25th, and 26th June, 1878, I saw a person named William Barnard Allen-Pryor was present—Allen described himself in Pryor's presence as his brother-in-law—he said that commercially he was Barnard, and socially he was Allen.

Cross-examined by Pryor. I knew Allen as associated with you in monetary matters in Cornwall—he described himself as a furniture dealer, but he was a money-lender.

GEORGE WALDUCK (Police Sergeant L). On Monday, 25th August, I went in company with Inspector Chamberlain and Sergeant Boswell to Gray's Inn Chambers, Holborn, and there saw Errington, Hughlings, and two other persons who gave the names of Tilbury, and the name of Henderson and Co. was on the door—I asked Errington his name—he said "Errington"—I said, "The name of Henderson and Co. appears here"—he said, "Yes, because I am trading here in the name of Henderson, it is my wife's maiden name"—he spoke to Liddle, and then to Hughlings, who said, "My name is Smith"—Chamberlain said he recognised him as Mr. Hughlings; he then told him we were police officers, and read the warrant to him, and said we were going to search the place—at this time there was no warrant against Errington—I asked Hughlings if there were any papers there belonging to him—he said "No"—we found a quantity of papers relating to various companies, which I handed to Mr. Muskett—the other three men then went away, leaving us with Hughlings—Hughlings said, "By what I can see of it I am the victim again," or something to that effect—he said Errington was the promoter of all of them, and he had acted as director and secretary—I took him to the station—he then gave the name of Hughlings, and said he was sorry he had said his name was Smith.

FRANCIS BOSWELL (Policeman). I arrested a man named Golding—subsequently, on 23rd August, from information, I went to Manchester,

and there found Pope detained at the police-station—I had a warrant which I read to him—I told him also of another cheque passed to Mr. Dewebury—he said "I know nothing of the first cheque; the second I have a complete answer to, I have seen Mr. Dewsbury"—I found on him a number of papers, a prospectus of the Lancashire Fish Dinner Company, two keys, a memorandum of association of the Company, two bills of exchange, one for 75l. dated Aug. 18th, drawn by Pope, directed to the House Property Distribution Society, Limited, accepted payable at the Capital and Counties Bank, one signature being of Sidney Cheshire and the other of Hughlings; the other for 50l., drawn by Pope and accepted by the same persons, and a number of letters—I found this letter at Pope's lodging, at 1, Rolf Road, East Dulwich. (This was dated 6th August, from Pope to Fuller: "I heard something yesterday from which I think it better to keep out of the way for a few days," &c.) This other letter was found on Golding. (This was from Pope to Golding: "I have not got a blank cheque at home; I have one of the Company's for 5l. 5s., you might borrow 2l. on it; if you can get 1l. on it I shall be truly glad.")

Cross-examined by Pope. When I took Golding I asked him whether his name was Pillinger or Golding—he said "Wilson"—I said "I hold a warrant for your arrest for conspiring with Pope and obtaining 3l. 5s. from Mr. Lake"—he said it was paid out—I said "Nothing of the sort"—he said "I will do so now, give me time, I will open up to you a gigantic system of fraud, the largest you have ever known; I will prove it myself "—at the station the officer read over the charge—he called me and Ward to him and said "Remember what I have told you, as God is my judge I will prove all I have told you"—he was afterwards called at a witness and repeated that before the Magistrate.

WILLIAM CHAMBERLAIN (Re-examined). I was at Gray's Inn Chambers on 25th August and arrested Hughlings there—I have heard the account given of the conversation that took place, it is correct—on 5th October Errington came to the police-station—he said he had heard that there was a warrant for his arrest, he only knew it two days previous—I read the warrant to him—he said "It would have been all right if it had not been for Dr. Mark, he drew all the money out of the bank"—I think he said Pope had only been at the office once—I had been looking for him from 26th August—he absconded from his lodging.

Cross-examined by Pope. I had possession of some of the keys of your office for about three or four weeks—I gave them up before the rent was doe.

Cross-examined by MR. DILL. I have not known Hughlings personally—I believe his character has been good up to 12 months previous to his arrest.

Cross-examined by MR. LYNN. When I first saw Errington there was no warrant out against him—I asked him to stay for some time—he was in the room for half or three-quarters of an hour—I asked him to see what I took away—he did not give me the keys—the drawers were unlocked I believe—he put no difficulty in our way—he had communicated to the solicitor before coming to the station.

HERBERT GEORGE MUSKETT was recalled, and produced the various documents referred to in the course of the evidence, found upon the defendants or at their offices.

HENRY MARSHALL (Re-examined by Titcomb). I have stated that when I called on you on 18th April you were writing a letter resigning your position as a director of the House Property Distribution Society—I still adhere to that statement; you took the letter off the counter and showed it to me, it was not finished, not signed I think—I produce a letter from Cheshire accepting your resignation—there are some initials upon it very like mine; I have no recollection of putting them there—that is the way I write my initials, but this is not the letter I saw; I swear that—I cannot account for their being there—I don't recollect you telling me I had made a mistake as to the letter—you have complained of me, among others, for swearing falsely—you did not to my knowledge make application for perjury against any one but myself—the Magistrate did not say that you had made out a very strong case—I am speaking from the newspaper account, I was not there; all I can tell you is that your application was refused—I don't believe I put those initials on that letter—I never had a complaint against me till yours—I did not swear at the police-court that you brought forward the loan to the International Fish Dinner Company; it was the result of my information, and it has been proved in evidence.

Re-examined. I have been in the police 16 years, and am now an inspector—Titcomb made an application against me for perjury while this case was proceeding at Southwark—I understood that he did not complain of my evidence, but my information with respect to a date—no process was granted—he has accused the directors, the surveyor, and lots of the witnesses of committing perjury—he said to me when Mr. Hollis had given his evidence "Well, I thought you were a liar, but he is a bigger liar than you are." Titcomb. I say so now. Witness. You said so of most of the persons who had to give evidence.

WILLIAM CHAMBERLAIN (Re-examined by MR. WARBURTON). I have inquired about Errington's antecedents—I believe he was for 18 years manager to Messrs. Peek, Frean, and Co.—up to two years ago I believe he was a very respectable person; since that my inquiry has not been in his favour—his friends speak well of him up to the last two yean; since then he has left his wife and behaved badly to her—he is here now through drink and bad company.

Hughlings and Titcomb received good characters.

POPE, HUGHLINGS, and ERBINGTON— GUILTY. of conspiracy to defraud, and obtaining money under false pretences. Fifteen Months' Hard Labour each. Pope also

PLEADED GUILTY to a previous conviction at this Court in March, 1880, of obtaining money by false pretences.

PRYOR— GUILTY of obtaining money by false pretences. Twelve Months' Hard Labour.


There were other indictments against Titcomb, which were postponed to the next Sessions.


OLD COURT.—Monday, January 12th, 1885.

Before Mr. Recorder.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-165
VerdictsGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentencesImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

165. ARTHUR JAMES (28) PLEADED GUILTY to stealing a hammer and other goods of William Ralph; also to burglary in the dwelling-house of Edward Toller, and stealing a tablecloth and other articles; and also* to a previous conviction of felony in the name of Alfred White, in March, 1878, six months of which conviction was unexpired.— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-166
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

166. JAMES BRUCE COURTNEY (31) to forging and uttering orders for a banker's cheque-book, and orders for the payment of 2l.10s. 6d., 55l., and 2l., with intent to defraud. Eighteen Months Hard Labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-167
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

167. THOMAS PENDERGAST (21) to burglary in the dwelling-house of Agnes Tate, and stealing a clock and other articles, her goods, and other goods belonging to Agnes Tate and others; also** to a previous conviction of felony in November, 1882, at this Court, in the name of Thomas Brown.— Seven Years' Penal Servitude. And [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-168
VerdictsGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentencesImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

168. LOUIS CAMPBELL (30) to stealing 20 yards of satin, sateen, and other goods, of Eleazer Lazarus, his master; and also to obtaining by false pretences 20 yards of satin and 20 yards of silk from Frederick Cator, with intent to defraud; also to forging and uttering an order for the delivery of 20 yards of satin and for the delivery of 20 yards of silk,— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]

NEW COURT.—Monday, January 12th, 1885.

Before Mr. Common Serjeant.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-169
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceMiscellaneous > sureties

Related Material

169. THOMAS CHAMBERLAIN (16) PLEADED GUILTY to unlawfully uttering counterfeit coin. He received a good character, and Mr. Wheatley, of the St. Giles's Mission, undertook to assist him.— To enter into recognisances.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-170
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

170. WILLIAM GEORGE LINGWELL (38) to stealing; whilst employed under the Post-office from a registered post letter a 5s. note, the property of Her Majesty's Postmaster-General.— Fifteen Months' Hard Labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-171
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour; Miscellaneous > sureties

Related Material

171. WILLIAM RENDELL** (16) and JAMES BOND* (13) to stealing a post letter, the property of Her Majesty's Postmaster-General, Rendell having been convicted at Worship Street in December, 1883.

RENDELL— Two Years' Hard Labour. BOND'S father stated that he would he would be taken back at his last place, and was bound over to bring his son up for judgment when called on. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-172
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

172. HENRY SKIPPER to stealing whilst employed in the Post-office a letter containing a postal order for 15s., of Her Majesty's Postmaster-General.— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-173
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty; Not Guilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

173. HARVEY CAMP (17) and FRANCIS PARKER (15) , Unlawfully having counterfeit coin in their possession, with intent to utter it, to which



ELIZABETH WILKINSON . My husband keeps a tobacconist's shop at 35, Ferdinand Street, Kentish Town—on 7th January, about 6 p.m., Parker came in for some cigarettes, which came to 1d.—he gave me 1s. and I gave him a sixpence and fivepence—I then said "I mink this is not good"—he said "It is a good one"—I said "I think it is very light"—he said "It is a good one, I am quite sure; I will tell you where I got it from. I was up at Chalk Farm Station, and a man gave it to me for carrying a box from that station to the other one, and I do not think it is a bad one"—I said "Well, I know you, and I should not think you would bring me a bad one"—he said "No, ma'am, I would not"—I marked the shilling, this is it—he left the shop—a detective

came in; I handed the shilling to him, and he went out and brought back Parker—I charged him.

THERESA MYERS . My brother keeps a wine and beer shop at 37, Ferdinand Street, two doors from Mr. Williams's—on 7th January between five and six o'clock Parker came in, spun a shilling on the counter, and asked for a bottle of ginger-beer—I broke it in the tester; these are the pieces (produced)—I said "I am afraid this is a bad one; where did you get it from?"—he said "From my mother"—I said "I think you had better take it back, my dear, to your mother, and she had better take it where she got it; she can best change it"—he said "Yes, I think I had better"—I handed him the pieces, and he left—Harry Brown was in the shop—a detective afterwards brought the two prisoners.

HARRY BROWN . I live at 121, Queen's Crescent, Haverstock Hill—on 7th January I was in Mr. Myers's shop about 5.45, and saw Parker there—Miss Myers asked my opinion of a shilling—I said that it was a bad one, and asked Parker where he got it—he said that his mother had sent him with it—Miss Myers broke it in the tester—these are the two pieces.

JOHN OTTWAY (Police Sergeant 7). On 7th January I was on duty in Camden Town, and saw Camp about five o'clock in High Street—I followed him into Ferdinand Street, where he met Parker—they spoke together for about five minutes, and Camp handed Parker something—Parker went into Mrs. Wilkinson's shop, and Camp stood round a dark corner—Parker came out in about two minutes—I then went in and spoke to Mrs. Wilkinson—I then came out and saw Parker meet Camp and hand him something twice, and Camp returned him something, and then went into No. 37—when he came out he joined Camp at a public-house in Haverstock Street, and handed him something, and then went into a urinal while Parker stood outside—Camp came out, joined Parker, and I took them in custody—I found in Camp's left hand seven counterfeit shillings wrapped in paper with paper between each, and he dropped a shilling behind him from his right hand—I picked it up—I searched the urinal and found these two pieces of the bad shilling which was uttered at Myers's—I received this other shilling from Mrs. Wilkinson—I found on Camp a sixpence and fivepence—Parker handed me a cigarette and said "That is what I bought"—I found no money on him—Camp said that he bought the coins of a man in a public-house on the Dials.

WILLIAM WEBSTER . I am examiner of coin to the Mint—this shilling uttered to Mrs. Wilkinson is bad and of 1866—this broken one is bad, but I cannot tell the date because it is defaced—the seven coins found on Camp and the one he dropped are bad and several of them are from the same mould as that uttered by Parker, others are from the same mould as the broken one—they buy them in rolls of paper to keep them from rubbing and take out one at a time and rub the black off against their trousers.

The Prisoners' Statements before the Magistrate. Camp says: "I told the detective where I got the coins from." Parkers statement was that Camp met him and sent him into the shops with the coins, telling him to say that his mother sent him, but that he did not know they were bad.

PARKER'S mother gave him a good character. NOT GUILTY . Sentence on CAMP†— Two Years' Hard Labour.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-174
VerdictGuilty > with recommendation
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

174. HENRY LOOKS (64) , Unlawfully uttering counterfeit coin.

MESSRS. CRAUFURD and LLOYD Prosecuted; MR. FRITH Defended.

MINNIE GREGORY . I am barmaid at the Hercules Pillars, Great Queen Street—on 22nd December, about 11 o'clock p.m., I served the prisoner with half a pint of beer, which came to a penny—he gave me a shilling—I tried it; it bent, and I showed it to my mistress—he saw that and went out as fast as he could, only drinking half the beer—Mr. Lucas ran out and fetched the prisoner in with a policeman—this is the coin.

JOHN LUCAS . I keep the Hercules Pillars—my wife handed me this coin after the prisoner had left—I went out and saw him running across the road among the cabs—I stopped him and said "Have you any more bad money about you?"—he said "What do you mean?"—I said "If you won't tell me you must come to a policeman, you have been passing bad money at my place"—I took him to a policeman and then to my house, where he was searched and 9 1/2 d. found on him—he had left half the beer—my wife handed me this bad shilling—I went with him to Bow Street and saw him searched again, and some money and a ticket-of-leave were found on him.

ALFRED GOWER (Policeman E 516). I received the prisoner in custody on 17th December—I said "Have you any counterfeit coin?"—he said "No"—I searched him and found a sixpence and 3 3/4 d. in bronze, a pocket-knife, a scarf pin, and a ticket-of-leave—I said "Where did you get it?" alluding to the shilling—he said "I took it in change for a sovereign a month ago," but going to the station he said that he did not know how it came into his possession.

Upon MR. CRAUFURD proposing to put in the ticket-of-leave, MR. FRITH objected to its being read, on the ground that by s. 37 of the 24th and 25th Viet. c. 99 "the offender shall in the first instance be arraigned upon so much only of the indictment as charges the subsequent offence, and if he plead 'Not Guilty' the Jury shall be charged in the first instance to inquire concerning such subsequent offence only" and the reading of the ticket-of-leave might inalove a violation of this enactment. MR. CRAUFURD contended that he was entitled to have the ticket-of-leave read, it having been found upon the prisoner. The COMMON SERJEANT, after vainly appealing to MR. CRAUFURD not to have the ticket-of-leave read, ruled that if MR. CRAUFURD insisted upon it he was entitled to have it read. The ticket-of-leave being read stated that Henry Looks was convicted at this Court in June, 1879, for unlawfully possessing counterfeit coin, and sentenced to seven years' penal servitude, but afterwards received Her Majesty's licence to be at large during his good behaviour.

WILLIAM WEBSTER . This shilling is bad.

GUILTY. Recommended to mercy by the Jury, believing they had been influenced by the reading of the ticket-of-leave.

He then PLEADED GUILTY to the conviction of unlawfully possessing counterfeit coin. MR. FRITH requested the Court to reserve the point as to the admission of the ticket-of-leave, but the COMMON SERJEANT, after consulting the RECORDER, declined to do so.— Eighteen Month' Hard Labour.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-175
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

175. MARY ANN CAIN (40) , Unlawfully having counterfeit coin in her possession, with intent to utter it.


MAURICE EDWARD WALSH . I am a clerk at the West Central Post Office, Holborn—on the 13th December, about 6.30 p.m., the prisoner came in for 10s. worth of stamps and gave me these five bad florins—they were very dark and I said "In whose pocket have these been?"—she said "In mine," showing me her empty purse—I asked a gentleman to detain her while I went round the counter—I said "Have you got any more?"—she said "No"—I kept her, sent for a constable, and gave her in charge—she was either very much confused or under the influence of drink.

WILLIAM FORSYTH (Policeman E 86). The prisoner was given in my charge—she said nothing then, being under the influence of drink or confused—I think she knew pretty well what she was doing—she was searched at the station and a sixpence found on her—I said "Where do you live?"—she said "I decline to give it"—going to the station she pointed to the corner of Bloomsbury Square, and said "That is where the man stood who gave me the money as he promised, and gave me sixpence when I brought the stamps back."

WILLIAM WEBSTER . These five florins are bad; three are from one mould, and two different from each other—they are well made but very much knocked about.

The Prisoner's Statement before the Magistrate. "I did not know they were bad, a man gave them to me to go and get some stamps."

GUILTY .— Four Months' Hard Labour.

NEW COURT.—Tuesday, January 13th, 1885.

Before Mr. Common Serjeant.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-176
VerdictGuilty > unknown; Not Guilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour; Imprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

176. JAMES BUTLER (65), ALFRED SEYMOUR (46), and CATHERINE DACE (25) , Unlawfully having counterfeit coin in their possession, with intent to utter it.

MESSRS. LLOYD and WILKINSON Prosecuted; MR. BLACKWELL defended Butler.

GEORGE BURTON (Policeman L 131). On 12th December, about 11.30 a.m., I was in Barron's Place, Waterloo Road, with Dockerill, another constable, and saw the two male prisoners leave 8, Barren's Place—I followed them to a public-house in Strutton Ground, Westminster—they went inside, and shortly afterwards Dace came there, and Butler, who had previously come outside, spoke to her—they went into the house again and remained about half an hour—Butler then came out and went on the Broadway, Westminster—I followed him, the other two prisoners joined him, and I followed them into St. James's Park to Grosvenor Street, Grosvenor Square, where Butler handed something to Dace, who came back and went into a milliner's shop—she came out, joined them again, and they went into Oxford Street—Dace went into Mr. Chevalier's shop, and Seymour stood about 50 yards east of the shop, and Butler 50 yards west on the opposite side—Dace left the shop—I went in and Mr. Chevalier showed me this bad florin (produced)—I marked it and left it there, and came out and followed Dace into Bryanston Street, where they all three joined, and Dace handed something to Seymour—I called two constables; we arrested the prisoners, took them into Mr. Jessett's shop, and searched them—Butler drew a packet from his pocket

and threw it behind some baskets at the back of the shop—I afterwards picked it up, it contained these ten counterfeit florins (produced) wrapped up separately in tissue paper—I found on him two florins, four shillings, and threepence three-farthings all good—I found on Seymour two shillings, three pence, and a piece of tissue paper similar to the other, with marks on it as if money had been wrapped in it, and a pouch of tobacco—I received a purse from the female searcher in Dace's presence, containing two half-crowns and three-halfpence, she said in Dace's presence that she took it from her—they were charged with uttering counterfeit coin and having possession of ten others—Butler said "I did not know all were bad, I thought there was something wrong when the officers caught hold of us"—Seymour said "I know nothing about it"—Dace said "I do not know these men, they are strangers to me"—Butler and Seymour gave me their names but refused their address—Dace said "I live at 8, Barron's Place, Waterloo Road"—that is the house I saw the two male prisoners come out off—I went to Mr. Jessett's on the 17th, and received from him this counterfeit florin (produced).

Cross-examined by MR. BLACKWELL. Butler had not the slightest appearance of having been drinking—I know nothing against his character—I don't think that a prisoner is photographed unless he is sentenced to penal servitude—I could not follow up my inquiries because he refused his address.

Cross-examined by Seymour. I did not see you do anything wrong—I do not know whether you picked up the piece of paper in a public-house which I found on you—I did not go to 8, Barrow Place, and take your child five years old out of bed and cross-question her—I did not go to your employer since you have been in custody and expose you to him—you gave me four references to go to, but you declined to give me any reference at first.

----JESSETT. I am a greengrocer, of 31, Bryanston Street, Portman Square—I did not come into my shop till after the prisoners had been taken away—I found a bad florin in my shop, about 7.15 a.m., among some baskets; I gave it to a constable.

GEORGE DOCKERILL (Policeman L 55). I was with Burton, and have heard his evidence; it is correct—Seymour went to the right, and the other two to the left—I turned the corner sharp, and thinking they might see me I turned back again, and in doing so lost sight of them.

WILLIAM HOFFNER CHEVALIER . I am a tobacconist, of 456, Oxford Street—on 12th December, between 2 and 3 p.m. Dace came in for an ounce of tobacco, and gave me a florin; I gave her 1s. 8d. change—when she left Burton came in; I showed the coin to him; he marked it—this is it (produced); it is bad.

MARY WHITE . I am a florist, of 1, Piccadilly West—on 21st November, about 5.30 p.m., Dace came in with another woman—Dace said to my assistant "Will you give me that small bundle of violets out of the window?"—she said "Do you mean a coat flower?"—she said "Yes, tow much is it?"—my assistant said "One shilling"—Dace said they Will you take something less?" and turned to me—I said "Yes, you can have it for 9d.; I suppose you want it for a present"—I saw her put something into my assistant's hand, I did not know what, but she went to the door, and showed me the edge of a silver coin as she left the shop; she came back through another door with a policeman, and said to me "This is a

bad half-crown"—Dace could hear that—I took it in my hand, and said "How do you know it is? have you tried it anywhere?"—she said "I have been to the next shop"—I sent it to the post-office by a young girl and had it tried—she brought it back bent, and I then gave it to the policeman and gave Dace into custody—this is it, I believe.

ELIZABETH CHIPPS . I am assistant to Mrs. White—Dace came in and handed a half-crown to me; I went into the next shop with it, and brought a constable back with me—the coin was sent to the post-office and bent there—I gave it to Byrne.

SYDNEY BYRNE (Policeman C R 20). On 21st November, about 5.15 p.m., Elizabeth Chipps called me to Mrs. White's shop—I saw Dace and another woman there—Mrs. White gave me this coin—Dace said that she had some more money, and showed me her purse with a good florin and threepence in it—she said she received the half-crown from her husband—they were given into my custody, remanded for a few hours, and discharged.

Cross-examined by Dace. I got a very good character of you at two laundresses' you referred me to.

WILLIAM WEBSTER . This half-crown is bad; this florin uttered by Dace is bad, and is of 1880; these 10 florins are dated 1879 and 1880, and among them are five from the same mould as the one uttered by Dace—the florin found in the shop is bad, and from the same mould as the five.

WALTER VINE (Police Sergeant L). I am gaoler at Marlborough Street Police-court—on 22nd November Dace and another woman were in my custody in Court, and Seymour was present; he went into the box and stated that he was Dace's husband, and that she was a hard-working woman.

Witness for Seymour.

SYDNEY BYRNE . (Re-examined). I went to your place on the night they occurred, and left word for you to be at Marlborough Street at 10 o'clock next morning—I htfve nothing to say against you.

Witness for Dace.

MARY ANN NASH . My husband is a carman—I was present when Dace was married to John Dace 10 years ago; that is the prisoner Seymour. (The marriage certificate was here put in)

Seymour, in his defence, stated that he never tendered any money, and no money was found on him he was merely with the other prisonersf who he had known for some years.

Dace's Defence. All I have to say is I was under my husband's control, and I did as he told me.


BUTLER— Twelve Months' Hard Labour. SEYMOUR— Five Years' Penal Servitude.


The COURT commended the conduct of Burton and Dockerill.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-177
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

177. FREDERICK HILLIER (45) , Unlawfully uttering counterfeit coin.


ESTHER HIGGINS . My husband keeps the White Hart, 69, Long Lane, Spitalfields—on 23rd December, about 12 p.m., the prisoner came in alone, but was followed by another man, who he asked to take a drink with him, and called for gin for two and a bottle of lemonade; that came

to 9d., and the prisoner put down a half-crown—I gave a shilling, sixpence, and threepence, and put the coin in the till, where there was one other half-crown, but it was new and good—the other man drank his drink and left, and the prisoner remained and asked for a cigar price twopence, and tendered another half-crown—I put it in the till, and gave him two shillings and fourpence change—he then asked for twopennyworth of whisky hot, and gave me a third halfcrown—I became suspicious, and gave it to my husband—I then looked in the till, and found two bad half-crowns and one good one—I gave these to my husband—the prisoner could not hear what was said, but he got up and attempted to leave the bouse, but my husband stopped him—no one else had been served, and I did not take a half-crown from any other person.

Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I kept the last half-crown in my hand, I did not hand it to three or four people to look at—the man with you was one of our customers—he was not there when I took the second halfcrown—I saw you put it down.

JOHN WILSON HIGGINS . On 23rd December my wife showed me a half-crown, and I saw the prisoner in the small bar by himself—he got up and went to the door—I took hold of him and asked him what he meant by passing bad coin—he said, "What do you mean?"—I said, "You know"—I gave him in custody with the three coins.

Cross-examined. I believe two customers looked at the coins, there was nobody else in the middle bar.

SWINGFORD BUTCHER (City Policeman 308). Mr. Higgins gave the prisoner into my custody for uttering three bad half-crowns—he said nothing; he was very violent—I took him to the station with the assistance of another constable, and found on him two florins, a sixpence, 18 shillings, 12s. 4 1/2 d. in bronze, all good, a watch and chain, and other articles—Mrs. Higgins marked the coins in my presence.

WILLIAM WEBSTER . These half-crowns are all bad, and two of them are from the same mould.

The Prisoner's Statement before the Magistrate. "I changed a sovereign, and I did not know that I had that bad money in my possession, otherwise I should not have uttered three bad coins in 20 minutes."

Prisoner's Defence. I am a seafaring man; I came from Montreal last month; I had been away 12 months. I bought a guernsey and changed a sovereign, but did not know whether I got bad money in the change. I have tried to find where I bought the guernsey, but cannot; it is somewhere near the New Law Courts.


He then PLEADED GUILTY** to a conviction at this Court of uttering counterfeit coin in January, 1882.— Six Years' Penal Servitude.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-178
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

178. JOHN FLYNN (17) , Unlawfully uttering counterfeit coin.


JAMES HENRY MORRIS . I keep the George and Dragon, Camberwell Road—on 17th December, about 2.15 p.m., I served the prisoner with some whisky, which came to 4d.—he gave me this half-crown—I said, "This is a bad one"—he said, I received it from a gentleman for carrying a parcel from Euston Station to Camberwell Road, I received 3s. 6d."—Inspector Dunleary then came in, and I gave the prisoner in custody with the coin.

GEORGE DUNLEARY (Police Inspector P). I was called to the George

and Dragon—the prisoner was there, and Mr. Morris showed me this coin—I said to the prisoner, "Where did you get this from?"—he said "A gentleman gave me 3s. 6d. for carrying a box from King's Cross Railway-station to Camberwell Road," but at the station he said he carried it from Euston Station—he gave his name John Bean, and gave two different addresses—he was remanded and discharged.

CORNELIUS FAIRBRASS (Policeman P R 5). The prisoner was given into my custody—he said, "I received 3s. 6d. for carrying a parcel from Euston Station to Camberwell New Road," but at the station he said he carried it from King's Cross Railway-station—I received this half-crown from the inspector—it is marked.

Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I went to your house in Camden Street; you were simply a lodger there—they did not attempt to give you a character though I asked them.

JAMES KIRK . I keep the Mortimer Arms, Tottenham Court Road—on the evening of 9th December the prisoner came in and asked my barmaid for a quartern of gin in a bottle—he put down the half-crown, which she handed to me, and I found it was bad—he said he got it from a man outside—I went outside but saw no one—I gave the coin to a constable.

LIZZIE BURTON . I am barmaid to Mr. Kirk—on 29th December I served the prisoner with a half-quartern of gin, price 3 1/2 d.—he gave me a half-crown—I saw it was bad, and gave it to my master.

JOSEPH TITCOMB (Policeman E 150). Mr. Kirk called me, and the prisoner came into the bar just after me—I said, Where did you get this half-crown?"—he said, "A man in dark clothes gave it to me outside"—I took him outside, but he could not see the man, and I took him back to the bar—I searched him there and found only 1d. on him.

WILLIAM WEBSTER . These coins are bad and from different moulds.

Prisoner's Defence. I was in Tottenham Court Road, and a man asked me to go for a half-quartern of gin, and gave me the penny which was found on me.

GUILTY .— Eight Months' Hard Labour.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-179
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

179. ELLEN CHESTER (21) , Unlawfully uttering counterfeit coin.


GEORGE DOMAN . I am assistant to Mr. Morris, hosier, of 25, Upper Street, Islington—on 2nd or 3rd December, about noon, I served the prisoner with a collar, price 3 1/2 d.—she gave me a bad half-crown—I bent it in the tester, gave it back to her, and asked her if she had any more—she said "No," and gave me a florin—I knew her by sight.

Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I have not seen you since—I pointed you out to the next shopkeeper, and found he had taken one from you.

EDITH CHORLEY . I am assistant to Mr. Spain, a draper, of Upper Street, Islington—on 12th December, in the forenoon, I served the prisoner with a yard of net, price 5 1/4 d.—she gave me this half-crown—I put it in the till—there was no other half-crown there—I gave her the change—Mr. Spain afterwards took it out and found it was bad—this is the piece of net (produced)—I can swear to it.

HENRY COLLARD SPAIN . I am a draper, of 29, Upper Street, Islington—on 12th December, between 11 and 12 a.m., I examined the till, and found one half-crown in it, which was bad—this is it—I gave it to the police, who marked it in my presence.

JOHN SOMERS (Policeman). On 12th December, about 12.30 p.m.

Mr. Spain handed me this half-crown and I marked it—I took the prisoner on his description on 15th Dec., at 9.30 pm.—I told her I should take her on suspicion of passing a bad half-crown at Mr. Spain's shop on the 12th—she said "I Know nothing about it"—I took purse out her left hand and took her to the station, where I found in it a florin, three shillings, and three halfpence, all food money—she gave her address 88, Ormond Road, Stamford Street, Blackfriars—I went there and searched the place, and found this piece of net in a drawer.

WILLIAM WEBSTER . This half-crown is bad—if the other coin bent easily in the tester that would be bad also.

The Prisoner's Statement before the Magistrate. "I have only to say a gentleman gave me the half-crown which I passed to the witness Chowner; I deny having been in Mr. Morris's shop at all."

Prisoner's Defence. I am unfortunate, and a gentleman gave me that half-crown.


29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-180
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

180. WILLIAM RICHARDSON (17) , Unlawfully uttering counterfeit coin.


EMILY WEBB . I am 10 years old, and live with my father and mother it 126, Montgomery Street, Great Church Lane, Hammersmith—on 2nd December I was in Montgomery Street about 4.30, the prisoner beckoned to me—I went to him; he asked me if I would go and get him two ounces of tea and he would give me a farthing; I said yes, I would go, and I went to Mrs. Phillips, a grocer's in Great Church Lane, with a halfcrown, which the prisoner gave me—Mrs. Phillips gave me 2s. 3d. change and the tea—I gave them to the prisoner—he was at the same place—he gave me a farthing and went up Church Lane—on Friday, 5th December, I saw him at the same place about the same time; he beckoned to me, but I ran home to my mother, and went with her to Mrs. Phillips.

AGNES PHILLIPS . My husband is a grocer—on 2nd December the little girl came in for two ounces of tea, and gave me a half-crown—I put it in the till, where there was no other half-crown, and gave her 2s. 3d. change—I looked in at the till about 10 o'clock and found it was bad—I showed it to my husband; he bent it—the girl's mother came to me on Friday evening and gave me some information.

GEORGE PERCY . I live at 58, Pharaoh Road, Kensington—on 5th December, in the evening, I was in Pharaoh Road, and the prisoner whistled to call me; I went to him and he asked me to go and get him a half-quartern loaf, and gave me a half-crown—I went to Mr. Wharfts's shop—I gave him the half-crown and he kept it—we then went and looked for the prisoner, but could not find him.

ASTON G. WEHRFRITZ . I am a baker, of 1, Denmark Terrace, West Kensington—on 5th December, in the evening, Percy came in for a halfquartern loaf; I gave it to him; he put down this half-crown (produced)—I tried it in the tester, found it was bad, and went out with the boy, but he could not point out anybody—I gave the coin to a constable.

JAMES GRIFFEN (Policeman T 517). On 5th December, in the evening, I was in Clive Road—the last two witnesses made a communication to me—I went into Milsen-Road, and from a description Percy gave me I recognised the prisoner who was standing close to Mr. Thorpe's rag—on my approaching him he moved towards Masbro-Road,

North—I followed him, got in front of him, and he crossed over—I told him I should take him in custody on suspicion of sending a boy with a bad half-crown to a baker's—he said "I done nothing"—I searched him and found. 6 1/2 d. in coppers in his pocket—I took him to the baker's shop—Percy followed me and said "That is the man"—Mr. Wehrfritz charged him and I took him to the station—on the way there he said "I admit sending the boy with this one to the baker's at the corner of Pharaoh Road, a man gave it to me, I gave him sixpence for it; he came from King's Cross, he has been over here before—I searched him at the station and found on him a florin, a shilling, and two sixpences—while I was following him he passed in front of No. 13, Milsen Road, close to the railings, where there is a small garden—Inspector Bates afterwards showed me this purse containing 21 florins and two half-crowns, all bad—I was present when Ellen Sheehan identified the prisoner—directly she came in at the door she said "That is the man"—the prisoner said nothing to that—the prisoner was afterwards placed with several other men and Emily Webb picked him out.

ELLEN SHEEHAN . I am nine years old, and live with my father and mother in Pharaoh Road—I met the prisoner in Pharaoh Road on a Friday in December—he said "Will you go and get me two half-crown of the best shag round the corner?" and gave me a florin—I went to Mr. Hellier's shop round the corner, gave him the florin, he gave me the change and the tobacco—I went out, but could not find the prisoner—I afterwards gave the tobacco and the change to the police at the top of Barnsbury Koad—I went home and afterwards went to the station and saw the prisoner there, I am sure he is the man.

WILLIAM HELLIER . I am a tobacconist, of 82, Hasbro' Road, South Kensington—on 5th December Shahan came in for two half-ounces of the best shag and gave me a florin—I put it in the till, where there was no other florin, gave her the change, and she left—I had a suspicion it was bad, followed her out, and saw the prisoner in custody—I then went to the till, found the florin was bad, went to the door and gave it to the constable—this is it, he gave it back to me—I went to the station and gave it to Inspector Bates.

JOHN WHIDDETT . I am potman at the Bird in Hand, Masbro' Road—on 6th December, about noon, I was passing a house in the Milsen Boad and saw a purse lying inside a little frame in the garden about 18 inches from the railings—I opened it and found 21 florins and two halfcrowns—I took it to Mr. lies, my master, and left it with him for about a quarter of an hour——he and I then went to the station and gave it up to the police, I pointed out the place where I found it to Griffin.

EDWIN ILES . I keep the Bird in Hand, Masbro' Road—on 6th December Willet brought me this purse, and I found in it 21 florins and two half-crowns—I considered they were bad and took them to the station and gave them to Inspector Bates.

JOHN BATES (Police Inspector P). I received this purse from Mr. lies containing 21 bad florins and two bad half-crowns, I handed it to Griffin—I produce a bad florin I received from Hellier.

HARRY ABSOLOM (Policeman T 750). On the night of 5th December I was near Mr. Hellier's shop—Sheehan spoke to me and handed me 1s. 8d. and two half-ounces of tobacco—I afterwards went to Mr. Hellier's shop—he gave me a florin, I gave it back to him—this is it, it is marked.

WILLIAM WEBSTER . This half-crown from Agnes Phillips is bad and of 185O; the next is Wehrfritz's half-crown, that is bad and of 1875; the next is a florin of 1873; that is bad—these two half-crowns and 21 florins in this purse are bad, the half-crowns are dated 1850 and 1874, the 1850 one is from the same mould as the former one, and among the florins are three of 1873 from the same mould as the florin uttered to Hellier.

The prisoner in his statement before the Magistrate said that he bought the coins from a man whom he met, who told him to go to a baker's shop with them, and that when he refused he told him to send a boy, and that it was the other man that dropped the purse over the railings.

The Prisoner's Defence. When I was put out to be recognised they were all men who were put beside me, and one little girl pointed me out in the dock; a man got hold of her and said "Is that him?" I never uttered these coins to the children.

GUILTY .— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-181
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

181. EDWARD JONES (21) , Unlawfully uttering counterfeit coin.

MR. GOODRICH Prosecuted.

EDWARD ERNEST PERRY . I am barman at Mr. Errech's, of the Foresters' Arms, Blackman-Street, Borough—on 5th Dec. I served the prisoner with a half-pint of ale and recognised him—I said "I know you from last Saturday" and jumped over the bar and stopped him—he had called for something on the previous Saturday and tendered a bad florin, and on this occasion he tendered, another—I put it outside the till lest there should be a dispute about it; and directly after he left I examined it, found it was bad, and showed it to my master—I then put it in the fire, and it ran through and melted in the ashes, it was soft in the tester—I sent for a constable.

Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I do not remember your coming in on Wednesday, the 10th.

CHARLES GENTRY (Policeman M 54). The prisoner was given in my custody—Mr. Perry said "I recognise this man from last Saturday, he tendered me a two-shilling piece, which I found was bad after he was gone; he has now tendered me another; I will charge him"—he gave me this florin—the prisoner said "I did not know it was bad, a gentleman gave it to me a half-hour ago; I was not near the house last Saturday"—I found on him one shilling and fourpence all in coppers.

WILLIAM WEBSTER . This florin is bad—a counterfeit coin put into a fire would disperse at once, but it would require a white heat to melt silver.

The Prisoner's Defence. I did not know the florin was bad, a gentleman gave it to me a half-hour before for carrying a box to Tooley Street.

GUILTY . of the second uttering.— Six Months' Hard Labour.

FOURTH COURT.—Tuesday, January 13th, 1885.

Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-182
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

182. ROBERT BEVAN (22) , Unlawfully assaulting Alfred Raven, and occasioning him actual bodily harm.

MR. MCNAUGHTEN Prosecuted.

SAMUEL SMALE (City Policeman 203). On 29th November I was in

Aldersgate Street, opposite the Manchester Hotel, at 1 o'clock—I saw the cabman Raven with his cab, the prisoner was inside in a drowsy state, drunk; he got out, had an altercation in reference to his fare—Raven demanded six shillings for driving him from the Walworth Road, and asked his name and address—I gave it to him, and the prosecutor said if the prisoner would follow him to 35, Cooper Street, City Road, his father would pay him—I told the cabby to proceed by way of Barbican, and followed, them to the Australian Avenue, the end of my beat, and then left them—the prisoner was drunk but capable.

WILLIAM MCDONNELL CLARK (City Policeman 207). On 29th November I was in Redcross Street, and saw two men struggling on the ground—I went and pulled off the prisoner, who was uppermost—the man underneath complained that his leg was broken, another constable came up and took the injured man to the hospital, and I took the prisoner into custody; he was drunk, not incapable, he knew what he was doing; the injured man was a cabman, his cab was standing by at the time.

WILLIAM MILLS (City Policeman 157). On 29th November I was in Hedcross Street, and saw Clark standing in the middle of the road by the side of the prisoner—two or three yards farther off on the ground I saw Raven, who exclaimed "My leg is broken"—I asked him how it was done in the prisoner's hearing—he said "He kicked me," nodding his head in the direction of the prisoner—I directed Clark to take him to the station, placed Raven in a cab and conveyed him to St. Bartholomew's Hospital—the prisoner was drunk but not incapable—at 6 o'clock he was placed in the dock and the charge read to him—he said "I did not do it, he fell to the ground"—afterwards he said "We had a scuffle, and being the stronger of the two I threw him; I was drunk at the time."

ALFRED RAVEN . I am a hackney carriage driver, of 4, Northampton Buildings, Clerkenwell—on 29th November I was in the Walworth Road, when the prisoner engaged me, and asked me to drive him to a street leading out of Old Street, which he said he would show me—I drove him to the Manchester Hotel, Barbican, and then looked down the trap and found he was asleep—I tried to wake him but could not—a constable came up and woke him, and he go out of the cab and walked away—I told the constable he had not paid me; the constable called him back and followed him through the Barbican—he told the constable he would pay me, and the constable told me to go—I followed the prisoner till I got as far as Redcross Street, where he went into a urinal—I looked round and saw he had come out the other side and was going down Fore Street—I laid hold of him and said "You mean doing me"—he caught hold of my arm, and said "B—I will learn you to call copper," and he kicked me and broke my leg—I caught hold of his collar and he fell on me, and would have got away if two constables had not come up—I was taken to the hospital, where I was for six weeks.

The Prisoner's Defence. He wanted to charge me 6s.—he punched me on the nose; we had a scuffle and I fell on him, and suppose in doing so I must have broken his leg.

W. M. CLARK (Re-examined). When I took the prisoner in charge he was not bleeding anywhere.

GUILTY . The Jury considered that the prisoner had received provocation.— Six Months' Hard Labour.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-183
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

183. JOHANNA AUSTIN , Feloniously marrying Joseph Austin, her husband being alive.

MR. MCNAUGHTEN Prosecuted.

AGNES JONES . I live at 17, Aldenham-Street, Somers Town, and am Richard Jones's daughter—my brother Michael was married—the prisoner brought to our house and introduced to me by my aunt, Mrs. Bellinger, as my brother Michael's wife—I saw her several times afterwards at her house 14, Hereford Street.

JOSEPH AUSTIN . I live at 15, Sandford Street—I married the prisoner on the 23rd May, 1870—this is the certificate—she told me she was single; I was a widower—I produce the marriage certificate of Michael Jones to Johanna on the 14th November, 1859, and also the certificate of We Jones's death on the 29th August, 1878.

By the COURT. I have not lived with the prisoner for four or five years—I prosecuted her for bigamy to get rid of her, because the parish sent me to prison on two occasions for not supporting her.

ELLEN JONES . I live at 9, Harry Street, Lisson Grove, and am Rickard Jones's wife—when I married him his family consisted of Isaac, Mike, Agnes, Jack and Jenny—I was present at the prisoner's marriage with Michael Jones in St. Pancras Church—I can't say when—he died about six years ago—I can't say if Michael was alive in 1870.

MR. MCNAUGHTEN here stated that he would not proceed further with the prosecution.


29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-184
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceNo Punishment > sentence respited

Related Material

184. DAVID JAMES WILBY (24) , Robbery with violence on John Andreas, and stealing a bag, book, and 135l.

MR. HORACE AVORY Prosecuted; MR. BLACKWELL Defended.

JOHN ANDREAS . I live at 1, Queen's Walk, Castle Bar, Eating, and am a flour factor—the prisoner had been in my service as groom and gardener up to 6th December last, when I discharged him—I have been in the habit of going to London to collect money for a good many years—the prisoner used to go with me—I drove—he waited with the horse while I went into the shops—I brought home the money in a bag when it was too late for the bank—on 18th December I drove to London and collected altogether about 135l. in gold, which I had in a linen bag when I returned home between 9 and a quarter past 9 o'clock—I drove up Mount Avenue, which runs by the side of garden—in the Avenue I noticed a man running up, and just as he got out of the dark I had a good look at him—he by the side of my garden paling; he seemed start out of the dark and run towards the garden near the entrance—I drove into the yard, assisted the boy in taking the horse out, and then I took the bag out of the trap and walked towards the house with the bag in my left hand—when I came to the gate between the pleasure-garden and the kitchen-garden, through which I had to go I found a rope tied across, which stopped me—I said "Hallo! what is this?"—I came a step further and met the prisoner; he got hold of me and felt about—I did not know what he meant to do—looked him full in the. face, and thought of giving him one—he gripped me by the right arm, which made me powerless—I noticed another man standing on one side one or two steps from me—the prisoner let go of my right arm and took hold of the bag and made a sharp snatch and had it out of my hand—he and the other man then ran off together—I ran after them, shouting

"Police!" "Thieves!" and "Murder!" as far as Karr's Fields, below my garden and a terrace of houses—when they got into Karr's Fields, which is rough with refuse and rubbish; I was afraid to follow them, being alone—while the prisoner was running away and within hearing I called out to him "I know you"—a gentleman came out of the bottom house—I ran after a cab and drove in it to the police-station and gave information, and the police came up with me to my house—we found the dog. a St. Bernard and bull cross, which was usually kept chained in a kennel by the stable, tied up in the lawn-tennis house—I had not tied it up there, and did not know of its being tied up—the policeman untied it, and it came straight to me; it was a fair watch-dog—I don't say it was friendly to every one; I don't think a stranger would untie it—it had been kept in the stable-yard while the prisoner was in my service; he fed him—I recommended the police to go to the prisoner's house, but they wanted me to drive to the station again, and afterwards we drove to North Fields, I believe, and then to the prisoner's house, 5, Sylvester Terrace, North Fields—the prisoner was up then, and went to bed again—one of the policemen said "You had better behave yourself, because you know me"—the policeman took him into custody, and told him what he would be charged with—I don't remember what the prisoner said—I saw the policeman pick up the prisoner's boots from the room in which he was sleeping, and after the prisoner was charged, I went with the policeman to my garden with the boots and saw the policeman compare the footmarks with the boots—one of the boots was peculiar; the policeman made a mark with it by the side of the footmark, and they appeared to correspond—we found the rope was partly clothes line and partly sash line; it had never been in that place before—the clothes line was hanging up in the garden, and a piece had been cut off it—I saw no more of the bag or money.

Cross-examined. The police searched the prisoner's house at once, while I was there, and found nothing connected with this matter—I should say we got there about 2 1/2 or 3 hours after the robbery; it was before 1 or 2 a.m.—I said before the Magistrate I got him at half-past 9, but I corrected that when it was read over to me; it was earlier—the robbery was all over by half-past 9—I believe it was before 12 we got to the house—there had been a very heavy shower while I drove home and some wind, but it was not so dark when I got home, and the rain had ceased—it was not a very dark night; I think there was a little moon, I did not notice if there was or not, but I think there might have been, because I saw it the next night—I have been driving to London many years and bringing money back, and have never before been robbed—the prisoner had left just 12 days before—my previous servant had been with me nearly nine months, I should say—I have had a good many grooms and gardeners; some did not stay—there would be four, or perhaps six, persons who had been in my service who knew I brought money home; some were country chaps I felt confidence in—there was one a week after the prisoner; he was disagreeable, and I discharged him—I am not aware of any persons in the village who knew it—I dare say the whole thing, from catching my foot in the line to the bag being run away with, would have taken three or four minutes—I looked right into the prisoner's face, face tp face, before any attack

occurred—I did not call out his name—I said "I know you"—I gave the police his name.

JOHN WESTON (Sergeant Detective X). I saw the prosecutor at the station at 10.30—I received information from him of the robbery, and went with him, made inquiries in the neighbourhood, and went to the prisoner's house, 5, Sylvester Terrace, Northfield Lane—the prosecutor gave us the address—I knocked at the door, the prisoner's wife let us in—the prisoner was in bed with his trousers off, partly undressed in the front room—I said "I suppose you know what I want you for?"—he said "No"—I said "This gentleman is going to charge you with stealing a bag containing about 135l."—he said "I know nothing about it; I was at the Black Horse till 6 o'clock"—I noticed the prisoner's boots standing at the bedside, and saw him put them on—they were dirty and clayey, and there was dirt half way up the back of his. trousers and half way up his back as if lie had been running—I said "You have plenty of dirt about you, is if you have been running, and you seem to have soil on your boots"—he said "It is not soil; I was out in all that rain"—it had been raining previously—the Ealing roads are sandy and clayey, and there are fields—I took the prisoner to the station, where he took his boots off by my direction—I went with them to the prosecutor's house—I found one footmark close to the gate, and one close to where the struggle took place, and two inside the stable gate, not far from where the struggle took place, leading from the stable yard into the Avenue Road, the way the prosecutor said the men ran in—I made marks with the boots by the side of those footmarks; they corresponded in size and shape—the prisoner's left boot had had a toe tip with nails under it, and they corresponded with marks in footprints—on the right boot there was no toe tip, but a tip on the heel—I found corresponding marks for both right and left—I found a piece of clothes line and sash line at the front gate leading to the stable yard—one end was tied to an iron bar driven into the ground, and the other end was lying down right across the footpath, where the prosecutor said he as attacked.

Cross-examined. I went to the prisoner's house about 12 o'clock—between 9 and 10 o'clock there was very little rain, I think; it had been raining very hard previously—there was no moon; it was a dark night—there was no light in the prisoner's house—after we had knocked some time the prisoner's wife came and let us in—I asked to see Wil by—she said yes, he was in bed—I know there has been nothing before against the prisoner—I have been at Ealing about 18 months—if he was a man of bad character I should be sure to know something of him—I did not tell him what time the robbery had taken place—he said he was at the Black Horse till 6 o'clock—I made inquiries, and found he had been there with another man, who has been missing from the neighbourHood since that night—I found the prisoner's wife and two little children in the room—no grown-up children; nobody but wife, who could not be called to give evidence—his boots were ordinary in material, not in particulars—there had been a tip on one; there had not been a tip on the other, because a piece would have been taken out to let the tip in as it tad on the one—walking on it after the tip was off would not have worn that place; it would wear more rapidly than if it had a tip—the leather was cut away from the tip—the tips leave a mark if they come off—I made a mark at the side of the footprint with the boot, and judged by

comparison, and then I put the boot over the footprint, and measured exactly—I found the marks on the loose gravel, gravel and clay.

Re-examined. I found an impression of the left foot with a tip, and of the right foot without a tip, in the stable yard, and of the left foot and right foot in the yard—there were about nine square nails inside the tip, an unusual thing.

THOMAS ALDER (Policeman X 319). I was at the station when the prosecutor came there, about 9.45—I went with him in a cab to a field about 500 yard away from his house, and to a lawn tennis house in that field—the two doors were fastened up with string, which was tied to the knob of one door and stretched across to the other door, and fastened to the knob of that—inside the house we found the dog—he growled at me as he came out—I saw the rope fastened across the path—I saw footmarks on the garden bed close to where an iron post was driven into the ground—we could not see if there were any footmarks near the lawn tennis house; it was on the grass—the was a lump of mud lying outside the house.

JOHN ANDREWS . I am the prosecutor's son—I am 11 years old—I remember the prisoner being in my father's service—about a fortnight before he left I had a conversation with him just by the stable door—he said that "Anybody could easily collar your father by catching hold of him here and here"—I said "What would he do with the other hand?"—he said "He would have something in that; his bag," and he said "I could take that away," and then he went into the stable, and murmured something just as he went in—I said "I will tell pa," and ran off, and then came back again—I told either pa or ma afterwards.

Cross-examined. I told them on a Wednesday afternoon—I think I had been talking about some robberies, as a man got in our garden—pa let the dog loose, and he ran away—I did not go to the police-court—my father has had two grooms and a little boy during the last six months; one besides the prisoner—that one was there about a month; the one before him was there more than a month, I think—after the prisoner went a man came for a week—we have only the boy since; we have nobody now.

Re-examined. I told my father or mother about this the same day.

GUILTY.— Judgment respited.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-185
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

185. WILLIAM SUTTON (25) , Robbery with violence on William Telfer, and stealing 10s.

MR. MCNAUGHTEN Prosecuted; MR. CLUER Defended.

WILLIAM TELFER . I live at 30, Poel Street, King Square—on Christmas morning I left the Central Club, Central Street, St. Luke's, at 3 o'clock to go home—12 or 13 years from the club I was tripped up, I did not see by whom, and I fell heavily on my left shoulder—I felt some one on me and a hand in my trousers pocket, which was turned inside out, and the contents strewn on the pavement and road—I had two sovereigns and a half-sovereign and some silver in the pocket—a constable came up, pulled the prisoner off me, and I picked up my money, 30s., from the road, but missed half a sovereign—I had only seen the prisoner once before to speak to—when down I felt a blow on the side of my right ear; I could not see who delivered it, being face downwards.

Cross-examined. I have not met the prisoner in the club; I could not

say whether he was a member—I had given him a glass or two that night—I was quite sober, the heat overcame me and I came out into the cold; the air seemed to revive me—I came out to go home—I was not waiting for the prisoner to go home with me—I know a house he goes into, I don't know if he lives there—he did not come up to me and take my arm when we both fell together—I made no statement to the police about having felt a blow—my left trousers pocket in which my money was, was turned inside out, I had to turn it back to put the money in again after the constable came up—I don't think the prisoner had a chance to run away; the constable pulled him off, he tried to resist.

WALTER EASTON (Policeman G 344). On Christmas morning I was in Central Street, St. Luke's, and about 3 o'clock saw the prosecutor leave the Central Club about 40 yards from me—when he had gone 10 or 14 yards I saw the door open and the prisoner come out and he tripped up the prosecutor with his left foot and fell on him heavily—I went towards them, when I got half way I heard money rattle on the pavement—I pulled the prisoner off; the prosecutor picked up his money and said he was half a sovereign short—as I tried to get hold of prisoner's left hand he dropped half a sovereign out of his hand on to the pavement—I took him to the station, where he said "If I had taken his money I should have given it to him to-morrow."

Cross-examined. The prosecutor did not appear overcome with drink—I noticed his left trousers pocket was turned inside out when he got up—I was 40 yards off when I saw the prisoner trip him up; I am certain I saw him, there is a lamp over the club door—I never saw the prisoner take the prosecutor's arm—he put out his left foot before he got up to him—I have made inquiries about the prisoner—he gave a correct address—he has been working at one place for six or seven years, and has been lately discharged on account of coming in late and keeping bad company—he said at the station "Even if I had kept the money till next day I should have given it back to him."

The Prisoner's Statement before the Magistrate. "He is a friend of mine. I did no harm to him. He treated me several times, and he was drunk and I was going to see him home. He fell and his money came out of his waistcoat pocket, and I picked it up and gave it to him, and the halfsovereign I held in my hand and was lifting him up when the constable came up."


29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-186
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceNo Punishment > sentence respited

Related Material

186. ELIZABETH NORTHROP (26) PLEADED GUILTY to endeavouring to conceal the birth of her child— Judgment respited.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-187
VerdictsGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentencesImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

187. HERBERT SWEENEY (29) to obtaining by false pretences from Henry Burton 10l., with intent to defraud, and to unlawfully forging and uttering a false instrument with a like intent— Twelve Months' Hard Labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-188
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

188. ALFRED COOK** (21) to breaking and entering the shop of Sidney Lawrence, and stealing 38 metal chains and other articles.— Eighteen Months' Hard labour. And [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-189
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

189. CHARLES BARTLETT WESTCOTT to marrying Elizabeth Margaret Addison, his wife being then alive.— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]

OLD COURT.—Wednesday, January 14th, 1885.

Before Baron Huddleston.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-190
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

190. WILLIAM BUTLER (23) and WILLIAM WHITWELL (23) , Feloniously killing and slaying George Russell.


ANNA WEST . I am the wife of John West, of 16, Bygrove-Street, Poplar—on 22nd December, between 7 and 8 p.m., I was in Gerard Street, Poplar, and saw Butler and Russell, the deceased, fighting together—I knew them before—they were striking each other with their fists on the ground—I persuaded Russell to come away, and he went with me into Bygrove Street—a crowd followed, and the two prisoners came up and hit him with belts which they had in their hands—there were buckles on the belts, and they struck him with the buckle end on the crown of his head and on his left ear—his head bled very much—after he came from the doctor's I took him to a friend's house, Mrs. May's—he remained there till Christmas Eve, when he was taken to the hospital—before they struck him they said, "Here is the cow's son"—they were the worse for drink, and so was Russell—Russell had no belt.

EMMA GILES . I am single—on 22nd December, at 7 p.m., I was at my door, which is right opposite the Horn of Plenty public-house, and saw a disturbance between the prisoner Butler and Russell—they were both strangers to me—I saw Russell knock Butler down—Butler had his coat off—he got up—they did not fight again; Russell walked away—Russell knocked Butler down twice in the course of the fight—I afterwards heard Butler say, "We will belt the beast"—Whitwell was with Butler—they both took their belts off, bound them round their wrists, and with that they went into the poor man Russell, and both hit him with the buckle ends of their belts—Russell had no hat on—he fell down when he was struck—I saw Whitwell hit him on the head with the belt, and kick him when he was down, saying "I will kick his b——brains out"—I saw blood all over Russell's head—I saw Butler with an open knife, and he said he would cut his b——throat—the belts were very broad, with very large buckles, larger than this one (produced).

CHARLOTTE MAY . I am the wife of Edward May—I knew George Russell—he was brought to our house bleeding on Monday, and on Wednesday he was taken to the hospital—on Wednesday evening, 24th December, Butler came to our house and said, "I beg your pardon, Mrs. Russell, I hear your husband has been took to the hospital; I heard you, would lock us up, but I hope you will not do so"—I said, "Don't you think it was a cruel thing to go behind the man and hit him with belts?"—he said, "Yes, we both used belts"—I thought he meant he and Russell, and I said, "He does not wear a belt"—he said, "I should not like to be locked up, and I hope you will not lock us up, I am very sorry, I was very drunk."

OWEN CLAYTON JONES . On 24th December I was acting as house surgeon at the London Hospital—the deceased was brought there—he had three wounds on his head; they looked like cuts, but they were beginning to heal—one was on his head, one on his hand, one on his ear, and one half an inch above it, that was a very slight wound, and one on the middle line about two inches behind the roots of his hair—there was a scab on his nose as if he had had a wound there—I attended him till

the following Saturday, when he died from hemorrhage of the brain, as part of his skull was driven in—he was never sensible—I made a post-mortem examination—bleeding into the cavity of the brain was the cause of death, but there was no direct connection between the wounds and the bleeding.

Whitwell's Defence. I saw Eussell and a woman having a row; he called out, "Fetch your man, I will fetch mine," and two women started fighting. Russell got hold of the little chap, and got struck in the eye and butted in the stomach, and they went against the window-ledge, and Russell put his hand to his head, and then they started fighting again with belts.

GUILTY .**.— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour each.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-191
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

191. LEWIS ROBERT UNDERWOOD , Feloniously killing and slaying Ellen Scanlan.


JAMES DALE . I am a clothier, of 73 and 87, Pimlico Road—on Christmas Eve, about 7.30, I was in front of my shop, No. 87, and saw a Hansom's cab coming from Chelsea towards Ebury Bridge at rather a rapid rate, between eight and nine miles an hour—I made a remark to a constable who was standing there—being Christmas Eve there were a great many people about—it is a narrow road about 24 feet wide—I did not see the woman run over, but I saw the driver tumble over when he got where the accident happened—I went up to the spot, and saw the woman picked up—she was screaming—she was taken to Dr. Nevill's—I saw the constable take the cab away, leading the horse.

Cross-examined. When I spoke to the policeman his back was turned to the cab—there were a number of stalls and costermongers* barrows there, and some of them had naphtha lights flaring—a great many people were shopping.

RICHARD TUCKER (Policeman B 538). I was on duty in uniform, and about 7.30 Mr. Dale called my attention to a Hansom cab coming along Pimlico Road towards Ebury Bridge at the rate of nine or ten miles an hour—it was about 50 yards from me when I first saw it, and the horse was galloping—the prisoner was driving—the cab passed me—I saw a woman cross the road just by Bloomfield Place—the horse knocked her down, the near wheel went over her body, and the driver fell off his seat by the jolt, but his legs were fast to the box and his head hanging down—the cab went on, but a brewer's dray was turned on purpose to stop it—I saw the prisoner slash his horse with a whip a little before he came to me—I went after him, and when I got up to him he was still hanging—I assisted to take him off the cab—he appeared to be drunk.

By the COURT. I came to that conclusion by his actions; he could not stand and he could not talk properly; he was staggering from one side to the other—he had been hanging with his head downwards about two minutes, but I could tell that he was drunk before he passed me because he was swaggering on the top, I mean that he could not sit properly on his seat—I did not smell his breath.

By MR. POLAND. I took him to the station, which was five or ten minutes' walk—he walked between two young men—the inspector saw him there.

Cross-examined. He was caught by his legs; his head was hanging

downwards, and the whole weight of his body was on his ankles; after which I say that he could not walk properly.

HONOURABLE HAROLD DILLON . I live at 3, Swan Walk, Chelsea—on Christmas Eve I was coming from Ebury Bridge along Pimlico Road, and saw a Hansom cab about 40 yards off coming towards me; the horse was excited, and was coming very fast; he was out of control, the driver had do hold over him; the horse appeared frightened at the noise and at the lamps.


29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-192
VerdictNot Guilty > no evidence

Related Material

192. LEWIS ROBERT UNDERWOOD was again indicted for unlawfully driving at a furious pace, to the danger of the public.

No evidence was offered.


29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-193
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown; Guilty > lesser offence
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

193. HENRY LAVENDER (29), WALTER LAVENDER (19), and JASON MASSEY (19) , Maliciously shooting at Thomas Roberts, with intent to murder him. Second Count, with intent to do him grievous bodily harm.

MR. GRAIN Prosecuted.

THOMAS ROBERTS . I am gamekeeper to Mr. William Vale Knight, of Woodlands, Hatch End, Pinner—I have known the prisoners eight years—on 27th December, about 10.30, I was watching in Ruislip Wood; my master has the shooting there—Daniel Weston was with me—I heard a shot a little distance off, and 10 minutes afterwards another shot—it was moonlight—I told Weston to go to Arthur Robart for assistance—he came back in a few minutes, and we went 300 or 400 yards towards where I heard the shots fired—I then heard another shot, ran in that direction, and heard a fourth shot—I heard somebody walking in the underwood, and caught sight of three men apparently kneeling by three trees; they appeared to catch sight of us, and they drew back into the underwood—I went there and got within 12 yards of them—when we got within 5 yards of them they all three rose their guns, levelled them at us, and all three fired—I was struck on my left leg—they then ran into the underwood—I recognised them; they were the three prisoners—I followed them—I had this stick with me and made a strike at Walter Lavender, but one of them took the blow of the stick off and it came down just heavy enough to knock Walter Lavender's hat off—I then made a strike at Massey, knocking him down, and broke my stick in two—I got hold of him by the throat and said "D—you, Jase, I did not think you would shoot at anybody," and hit him with my fist on the side of his ear and said, "Now if you like to go quietly with me I will take you quietly"—he said "You are mistaken"—I said "What do you mean, Jase? do you think anybody don't know you?"—he had a gun in his hand—he said "Where are you going to take me, John?"—that is the name they call me—I took him outside the underwood and 300 yards down the broad ride, and heard somebody in the underwood, as if they were walking to get in front of me—I saw somebody coming down the ride and called out "Is that you, Weston?" I received no answer; the figure came on till it was within 20 yards of us, and then I recognised Walter Lavender, whose hat I had knocked off—Massey jumped on one side and Walter Lavender immediately levelled his gun at me—I said "D—you, Joey, you are a d—lot of cowards for shooting at a man when he is doing his duty;

I don't want to be killed, and I know you; I will let you go rather than be killed."

By the COURT. Massey jumped aside so as to expose me to the fire of the gun, but I tried to put him between me and the gun so as to avoid Walter Lavender from shooting me—Walter did not speak till I let Massey go; he then said "Let the b——have it, Joe"—Walter then levelled his gun at me and pulled the trigger; the cap went off, but the charge misfired—they then went away—I blew my whistle; Policeman Dewing answered me, and I went with him to the place where I had left Lavender and Massey—we saw somebody cross the Ride from the opposite side, about 50 yards in advance of us—I can't swear to him—I afterwards went back to the spot where I had been tired at and picked up a coat—I afterwards went with the constable to Massey's house; I saw the father there asleep, the son was not there—we searched the house—we also went to Walter Lavender's house and searched it; he was not there—on 29th December I saw Massey at the police-station at Uxbridge—I examined his head and found a wound where I had struck him.

DANIEL WESTON . I assist Roberts in keeping these woods—I have known the three prisoners since I was four years old—I was with Roberta on the night of 27th December in the woods—I saw three men with a gun each, kneeling down—they shot at me and Mr. Roberts—the prisoners are the men.

Cross-examined by Henry Lavender. I came out of the Union when I was four years old, and I have known you ever since.

THOMAS DEWEY (Policeman X 362). On 29th December Roberts spoke to me in the wood, and gave me the names of some persons—I went with him to Massey's and Lavender's houses; neither of them were there—I know them; two of them live 300 or 400 yards from the wood—I didn't go to Henry Lavender's house; he is married, and lives at another house—Walter is his brother.

DANIEL WESTON (Re-examined). I was shot in my left arm twice—I was standing up—I had an overcoat in my hand, and the shots went through that and through my velvet coat, which protected me—I staggered when the guns were fired—about two months ago I had a conversation with Walter Lavender; he said he would shoot any keepers or policemen who came to him at night in the wood—I said I did not think he would do that—I also had a conversation about the same time with Massey about the wood—he said that he and Walter Lavender would not be took by no keepers or policemen.

Cross-examined by Walter Lavender. You have threatened my life, both to me and to several others.

Cross-examined by Massey. We were alone when you told me that.

WALTER WELLER (Police Inspector). I produce a stiff black hat found on a spot in the wood about 15 yards from where this affray took place—I also produce a great coat which Weston gave me, and a coat and waistcoat and shirt—there are two shot marks on the left arm of Weston's coat, and they have gone right through the velveteen coat and shirt—on 28th December I went to Henry Lavender's house and saw him in his garden—I asked him if Lavender and Massey were in his house—he said "No," and I did not search—this is Roberts's hat and stick; they were found a few yards from the place.

THOMAS ROBERTS (Re-examined). This black hat is similar to the one I knocked off Walter Lavender's head—I had no firearms, only this stick, which I broke when I hit Massey.

----CHERPENTIER. I am assistant to Mr. Roberts, of Uxbridge—on 30th December I examined Weston's shirt, and on his left arm I found two wounds which had been made with shot; it is probable that one had penetrated—I saw Roberts on the same day, and I examined the front part of his left thigh and found two wounds.

JAMES BRAY . I know the three prisoners—I am a labourer, and live at Rueston—on 27th December, about 7 p.m., I saw Walter Lavender and Massey and a third party whose face I did not see—I said "Good night" to them, and Lavender replied—they were going towards Park Wood—I didn't notice that they were carrying anything.

Cross-examined by Walter Lavender. You must go towards the wood to go to your home from the Three Bells.

By the JURY. I knew Massey very well, but did not recognise the third man.

CLEMENT PEARSON . I am gamekeeper to Mr. Clutterbuck—about 6.30 p.m. on 27th December I was at the Six Bells public-house, Ruislip Common—that is about a quarter of a mile from the Park Wood—I have known the three prisoners several years; I saw them all there—Walter Lavender and Massey left first, and Henry Lavender left about a quarter of an hour afterwards—I didn't see in what direction they went; I didn't leave the house.

WILLIAM LAVENDER . I am a labourer—I am no relation to the prisoners—I know Henry Lavender; I was walking with him on Saturday evening, December 27th, and he said he meant to have something before long—we were walking under the wood, but we were not talking about game—we went to the Six Bells after that, and the other two prisoners were there when we went in.

Cross-examined by Henry Lavender. I had been with you all day—you were not out of work—we were chaffing along together when you said that.

JOHN HARVEY (Policeman). On 29th December I took Henry Lavender in custody—he was at work in the Copse Wood, Ruislip—I told him I should take him on a charge of night-poaching and attempt to murder—he said "I know nothing about it; I was not there, I left the Bells at 8 and went home and was in bed at 10."

WILLIAM CROUCHMAN (Policeman). On 29th December, about 10.15 a.m., I apprehended Walter Lavender and Massey at the Falcon public-house, Uxbridge; they were together—I told them I should charge them with night poaching on Saturday night and attempt to murder—Massey said "Not us;" Lavender made no reply.

Henry Lavender in his defence stated that when he left the Six Bells he went to his mother-in-law's and stayed there about ten minutes, and then went home, and it was 8.10 when he got indoors, and that he had his supper with his wife and went to bed just before 10 o'clock, and never saw the other prisoners after 6.45.

Walter Lavender's Defence. I know nothing about it.

Massey's Defence. Walter Lavender and I went to the Six Bells about 6.45, and then went home and took his overcoat indoors, and went across the hill to Watford and stopped there till 10 o'clock, and came back by

train and laid down on the common till the morning. The cut on my head was done the right before.


MASSEY and WALTER LAVENDER**— GUILTY on second Count. Recommended to mercy by the Jury on account of their youth. Five Years' Penal Servitude each.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-194
VerdictNot Guilty > no evidence

Related Material

194. HENRY LAVENDER was again indicted for shooting at Daniel Weston, with intent to murder him, upon which no evidence was offered.


THIRD COURT.—Wednesday, January 24th, 1885.

Before Mr. Common Serjeant.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-195
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

195. WILLIAM BROOKS (42) , Stealing half of a 5l. bank note, the property of Her Majesty's Postmaster-General.


MARIA ELTON . I am Colonel Frederick Elton's wife, of York Place, Portland Square—on 3rd October last we were living at Exmouth, and I wrote a letter to Mr. Shaw, of Doctors' Commons, enclosing this half of the 5l. note, 39336 of 15th January, 1884, 75/0 and retaining this other half—I gave the letter to my husband to post.

COLONEL FREDERICK COCKAYNE ELTON . I was residing at Exmouth in October—if Mrs. Elton gave me a letter to post on 3rd Oct. I posted it—I was constantly in the habit of posting letters for her, it would have been between 12 and 5—I always took the letters to the post-office; there is only one in Exmouth—I remember at the time Mrs. Elton sent something to Mr. Shaw—I do not know what was in the letter.

JOSEPH FREYER . I am overseer in the circulating department of the General Post-office—a letter posted at Exmouth, between noon and 5 o'clock on 3rd October, addressed to Doctors' Commons, would be delivered by the first morning delivery the following morning, at 8 o'clock.

JOHN SHAW . I am a stockbroker of Wardrobe Chambers, Doctors' Commons—on 4th October I did not receive a letter from Colonel or Mrs. Elton of Exmouth, nor half of a 5l. note—I have had several remittances, but not on that date—about that day I may have—I am quite sure I never received this half 5l. note.

EDWIN SEWELL . I am a letter-carrier in the Eastern Central district—on 4th October it was my duty to deliver letters at Wardrobe Chambers, Doctors' Commons—I delivered there all the letters I had for that district—in the course of the delivery I should not have had to traverse Cornhill—I was not near Cornhill at all that morning—I know nothing of the prisoner.

EDWIN GEORGE BROOKS . I am landlord of the Duke of Clarence, Rotherfield-Street. Essex Road—I have known the prisoner as a customer of my house for two years—I did not know his name—on Saturday, 4th October, he came in about 11.30 and asked me if I would Advance him some money on this half 5l. note—he said he had got it from Bristol, and he would not be able to get the other half before the following Tuesday morning—I advanced him 3l. on it—I asked him to write his name on it, and he wrote "W.J. Sinclair, 19, Arlington Street, New North Road"—on the following Tuesday he came again to

my place—I said "Have you got the other half of the note?" he said "No, I shan't be able to get it before to-night or the first thing tomorrow morning: will you let me have another sovereign on it"—I said "No, certainly not"—I told him to mind and bring the other half of the note to-morrow morning—he never called again—I made inquiries at the address he had given, and on 23rd December I saw him in Blackman Street, Borough; he was not alone then—I went up to him, he was alone—I stood in front of him; he said "Halloa, I am coming up to see you to-morrow, to give you that 3l."—I said "Oh no, you are not, you will have to go with me now"—I took him to Stone's End Police-station—he went quietly—I gave him in charge—he made no answer to it—I kept the half note till I gave it to the Post-office authorities, with whom I had communicated before the 23rd December; it has been in my custody or theirs all the time.

HERBERT WILLIAM CASTINGS HEWKE . I am a clerk in the Bank of England—there are not two 5l. notes of the same number and date in circulation at the same time.

EDWARD VINCOMBE . I have lived at 19, Arlington Street, New North Road, Islington, for 34 years—I know no one of the name of W. J. Sinclair living there, nor near me—I don't know the prisoner, and never saw him before I saw him at Bow Street.

CHARLES JAMES STEVENS . I am an officer attached to the Confidential Department of the General Post-office—on 23rd December I went to Stone's End Police-station accompanied by Bick, a police officer—I saw the prisoner there, Mr. Brooks was there too—we were shown into a private room, I told the prisoner who Bick and myself were, I said to the prisoner "You know who this is," alluding to Mr. Brooks—he said "Yes"—I said "You know Mr. Brooks?"—he said "Yes, he advanced me 3l. on the half of a 5l. Bank of England note"—I said "Do you know why you are being detained?"—he said "Yes"—I said "What is your name? where do you reside?"—he said "William Brooks, I have no fixed residence, I have been out of a situation for the last six weeks"—I took it down and said "What are you?"—he said "I am a commercial traveller"—I said "Who do you travel for?"—he said "I don't wish to say who I have travelled for"—I produced the half note with his endorsement and said."This note was enclosed by a lady on 3rd October, the letter was addressed to Doctors' Commons and should have been delivered on the following morning, the letter never reached its destination, how came the half note in your possession?"—he said "I found it in Cornhill close to the principal entrance of the Royal Exchange; I took it to Mr. Brooks, of the Duke of Clarence, Essex Road, who advanced me 3l. on it; I own I did wrong, I ought to have advertised it. I have nothing further to say, only I wanted a further advance of 10s. from Mr. Brooks, which he refused"—I said "Did you tell Mr. Brooks you had found the half note?" he said "No, I told Mr. Brooks I had the half note sent up from the country, of course if I told him I had found it he would not have advanced anything on it"—I said "Was the half note lying loose in paper when you say you found it?"—he said "It was lying loose on the pavement, it was not folded in paper"—I said "You say you have no fixed residence, where did you sleep last night?"—he said "I was walking the street all night"—I said "You have given the name of Brooks now, why did you give the name of Sinclair and the address 19, Arlington

Street, New North Road?"—he replied "The reason I endorsed the note in the name of Sinclair and not giving my right address was because I did not want anyone to find me out, so that I should have more time to find the money so as to redeem the half note'—he was taken to the General Post-office by Bick—when I told him he would be charged with being in the unlawful possession of the note and said "Do you wish to give me the name and address of any person who can speak as to your character?" he replied "No, I have got into trouble over it, and I must do the best I can; I don't wish any of my friends to know anything about me."

PHILIP BICK (Constable in the General Post-office employ). I was present on 23rd December when Stevens had a conversation with the prisoner—account, it is correct—on the way to the post-office I told the prisoner he had better tell us where he had been employed. (The COMMON SERJEANT considered that this as an inducement, but as the prisoner did not object to the evidence, it was taken.) He said "I have been a commercial traveller for a firm of cork merchants in Houndsditch" or "the Minories," but I decline to tell you their names"—I said "Where did you sleep last night?"—he said "I slept at a coffee-house in the Kingeland Road"—I said "What number?"—he said "I don't know, I forget"—I said "Where did you sleep the night before?"—he said "I didn't sleep anywhere, I walked to Edmonton and back."

By the COURT. I am not instructed to ask all those questions—the prisoner was not in custody then, he was merely detained.

The prisoner in his defence stated that he picked up the half note on Cornhill, at about 11 o'clock on the 4th, and that he told the tale he did and gave the false address because he wanted the money as a loan, which he intended to pay back; had he known the note was stolen he would not have gone to Mr. Brooks, who hew him, and whose house he passed within ten yards of every morning from 4th October till 15th December.


29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-196
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

196. EDWARD EATON, (25) Stealing a watch from the person of James Johnstone.

MR. MCNAUGHTEN Prosecuted; MR. GEOGHEGAN Defended.

JAMES JOHNSTONE . I live at 21, Cassel Grove, Clapton—on 24th December I was in Gracechurch Street about 9 o'clock—I then had my gold watch worth more than 10l. fixed to a gold chain, which I still have—I stopped to look at a sale of geese, the prisoner walked up to my side and stood by the side of me; he said "These are fine geese, aren't they"—I said "They are, they are cheap"—he said "Yes"—the man selling asked me to feel the weight of one; I did; the prisoner took one in his hand—I said "They weigh about ten or twelve pounds"—the prisoner patted his on the back and said "They don't smell very nice"—I turned back and walked a few yards out of the avenue; he said "I think I know you"—I said "I don't know you;" he said "My father is a farmer down in Norfolk, and he breeds these sort of geese; where do you come from, I am sure I have seen you somewhere, where was it?"—I said "Perhaps you have seen me at Old St. George's-in-the-East;" he said Do you know a man of the name of Pinchen"—I said I did by name; he mentioned several other persons—I said I did not know them—I moved along, he said "Come along and have a glass of something to drink," and he went towards the middle of the road; I said "No, thank you, I don't want it"—he said "Have a half-lemon or a

cigar, or something"—I said "No," and I passed on—when I got a few yards I found the prisoner on my left hand again, this was in Gracechurch Street, just before coming to Fenchurch Street Station—he said "I suppose you are going to Fenchurch Street Station?"—I said "Yes"—he said "Yes, so am I, come along and have something to drink"—I would not—I wanted to get rid of him—when we came to the public house by the side of the avenue just by Kino's, he said "Come in here"—I said "No, I won't have anything"—he said "Have what you like"—when we got to Lime Street, a lad brought a pair of steps out of a tobacconist's shop which caused an obstruction; he put up his arm like this and said "This is a pretty sort of thing, isn't it?"—he struck me on my right hand, seized me, and knocked me on the kerb—I kept my feet; the next moment I saw him elbowing his way through some people—I looked down and saw my watch-guard hanging down, and I said "That fellow has stolen my watch;" a man came up and said "Have you lost your watch?" I said "Yes, that man has taken it"—he said "He has run round the corner"—I went to the corner, he was just a few yards from turning the corner at the bottom of Lime Street—I ran very fast down Lime Street—he was walking round the corner—I put my hand over his shoulder, took hold of his collar, and said "You have stolen my watch"—he said "You are mistaken, I never saw you before, I don't know you"—I said "Never mind, come along"—I took him into Fenchurch Street—he went along quietly with me, protesting he did not know me, and had not seen me before—I held him till the constable came up, and then gave him in charge—I have no doubt he is the man; he must have run very swiftly to get to the bottom of the turning.

Cross-examined. I did not see him run—I had looked at my watch a minute or two before I lost it—I swear I had seen it after I had talked to the prisoner, it was safe up to the time of the obstruction—this was on Christmas Eve—I said before the Magistrate, "I last saw my watch a few minutes before I met him"—the last time I saw it safe was before the obstruction took place on the pavement—I have never lived at St. George's-in-the-East—I have not been there for a long time—I know Pinchen by name—the prisoner mentioned his name to me—the steps did not strike me when they were pulled out from the front of the tobacconist's shop—the prisoner did not strike me with the steps, his hands were not on them—I did not see him take the watch—I have my chain now, the watch was attached to the chain by a snip, that was not broken; the bow of the watch was—I know how it was done, it is the first time I have lost ray watch—the prisoner was not wearing gloves—I am quite sure of that—he had a stick—I did not say to him "Your face seems to me quite familiar, I think I have seen you before;" that may be part of a comic song—I did not see the prisoner speaking to anybody after he left me; he elbowed his way through the people, he had no time to speak—I followed him back to the station; he spoke to no person then, no one spoke to him from the time I came up to him at the corner of the street, until he came back to where the policeman was—I have not got my watch back—the prisoner was searched at the station, and no watch was found on him—I was looking at the geese for two or three minutes; there was a crowd of people, but I and the prisoner were standing apart—it was about three or four minutes to 9 when I had looked at my watch, about a minute

and a half before the obstruction took place—I don't know how far it is from where the man was selling geese to the place where the obstruction took place—I had looked at my watch after I had seen the man selling the geese, a few minutes before the obstruction—I said before the Magistrate that the prisoner said "I had never seen you before." (These words did not appear in the depositions.)

Re-examined. On my oath my watch was perfectly safe—if my guard bad been hanging down I should have noticed it, it was not hanging down till after the obstruction—I somehow have my doubts about the man.

CHARLES EAST . I live at 95, Clifton Street, Finsbury, and am assistant in a tobacconist's shop—on Christmas Eve Johnson was walking along the pavement when I was bringing the steps out—the prisoner struck him on the chest—Johnson called out "My watch is stolen," and the prisoner ran up Lime Street, and the prosecutor ran after him and brought him back, and told him he should charge him with stealing his watch—he said he knew nothing about it, he was quite innocent of it—Johnson called a policeman across the road and gave him in charge—the prisoner had thrown the steps between Johnson and himself before he struck him.

Cross-examined. The steps hit the prosecutor—I was pulling them out forwards of the shop door to light the lamps—I did not give evidence at, the police-court—the policeman brought a piece of paper to me three or four days afterwards—I did not tell him I saw the prisoner push the steps against the prosecutor, he threw them—there were five or six other people at the time at the left-hand window of our shop; three of the people remained there, and two came across the road and ran up Lime Street.

WILLIAM MATTHEWS (City Policeman 840). On the evening of 24th December, the prisoner was given in my custody—I took him to the station and charged him with stealing a watch—he said he knew nothing of it, that the prosecutor had made a mistake—I searched the prisoner and found nothing on him, except two half-sovereigns, 14 shillings in silver, and 2d. in bronze; two purses and a watch chain pinned in—they were both sober.

Cross-examined. I also found a pair of thick gloves—the prisoner gave the address 24, Longfellow Road, Bow, which I found was correct—he said "I am a respectable man, I am a horse dealer"—I did not find the watch—he did not struggle, but went quietly with me to the station; I did not catch hold of him—the station is about a quarter of a mile from that place—I did not see the gloves till we got to the station, he was holding them in his hands—I did not see any one speak to him on the way to the station—East told me that when the prosecutor shouted out he had lost his watch, two men ran away.

The Prisoner's Statement before the Magistrate. "I am not guilty."

The prisoner received a good character.


29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-197
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

197. MARY MERRICK (22) , Robbery with violence on Edward Kickum, and stealing 40l.

MR. MCNAUGHTEN Prosecuted.

EDWARD KICKUM . I was a cowkeeper, of Great Queen Street; I have just sold the business—on the evening 2nd December I was at the Prince

of Wales public-house, at the corner of Great Queen Street in Drury Lane—the prisoner, another woman, and two or three men were there, and knowing me, asked me to treat them—I did so, to two pots of beer and some whisky—I left to go home—I crossed Drury Lane and was going towards Endell Street, and one of the men with the prisoner came up to me and said he was going that way home, he would come round with me—he wanted to catch hold of my arm; I shoved him off—he said I had been insulting his wife—I knew him by sight—I said I had not—the prisoner came up and said "Oh yes, Mr. Kickum, you know you have"—they caught hold of me, and must have given me something in my face I felt, my feet seemed to give way, and my hands fell down—I said "All right, I know who you are"—directly afterwards I became insensible and felt myself dropping down, and felt them putting their hands into my pockets, but I could not help myself—I found the prisoner on one side of me when the other man said I had been insulting his wife—I knew nothing more till 6 o'clock next morning, when I found my cheek cut open, and I was very ill all that week, jumping at sounds and with a headache all the week—I had never had a headache before—I had been drinking but knew what I was about—they saw me changing a five-pound note in the public-house and knew I had money on me.

Cross-examined. I did not give you a sovereign and ask you to sleep with me that night—I don't know what time you went home, I last saw you in Wilson Street—I was taken to the station insensible—I did not say I was knocked about at half-past 8 when I went to the eel shop—I had some eels about 8—I have seen the other parties every day for the last eighteen months, but I have not seen them since this—you were all in the public-house when I came in.

By the JURY. I believe the prisoner had a child in her arms, she had not when she attacked me—she did not ask me particularly to treat her, the young men with her asked me inside and I paid for drink for them.

WILLIAM ROBERT (Policeman E 442). On 3rd December the prosecutor asked me to go to the Prince of Wales public-house between 1 and 2 o'clock; he there pointed out the prisoner in the Prince of Wales with another woman—I went in and told her I would take her into custody for being concerned in robbing this gentleman of 40l., and should take her to the station—she said she knew nothing about it at first—I asked her again on the way to the station, and she said she was there, and had drink with them, and knew the men that robbed him; that one, lived in Red Lion Street, Holborn, and the other in Gray's Inn Road—she would not give me their addresses more particularly—10s. in silver and sixpence in bronze was found on her—the prosecutor was found in Queen Street much injured, and was locked up for being drunk and incapable.

The prisoner, in her statement before the Magistrate and in her defence, said that the prosecutor came into the public-house and gave her drink; that he asked her to spend the night with him; that she refused; that he gave her a sovereign; that she took her baby and put it to bed, and went to bed herself, and did not see the prosecutor till next morning in the public-house, when he gave her is charge.


29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-198
VerdictsGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentencesImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

198. LEONARD DOBBIN (35) PLEADED GUILTY to obtaining by false pretences from William Houghton Bindekin 4l. 12s. 3d., with intent to defraud, to forging and uttering a request for the delivery of letters, and to forging and uttering an endorsement on an order for the payment of 13l. 15s.—* Five Years' Penal Servitude. And

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-199
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

199. JOHN SMITH (54) to having counterfeit coin in his possession, having been convicted** of feloniously possessing counterfeit coin at this Court in December, 1870, in the name of Tomlinson.— Five Years' Penal Servitude. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]

OLD COURT.—Thursday, January 15th, and Friday, 16th, 1885.

For the case of LONG, WALKER, and JONES, also ERNEST CLEMENTS, see Surrey cases.

THIRD COURT.—Thursday, January 15th, 1885.

Before Mr. Common Serjeant.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-200
VerdictsGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentencesImprisonment > penal servitude; Imprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

200. THOMAS HAZARD and GEORGE BAKER PLEADED GUILTY to burglary in the dwelling-house of Robert Wilson, and stealing a brooch, other articles, and 11s. 7 3/4 d., the property of Robert Wilson, and 108 postage stamps and 12s. of Her Majesty's Postmaster-General.

HAZARD*†also PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction of felony in August, 1883.— Five Years' Penal Servitude. And BAKER to a conviction of felony at this Court in March, 1878, in the name of Charles Smith.— Six Years' Penal Servitude.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-201
VerdictMiscellaneous > no agreement

Related Material

201. THOMAS AYERS (23) , Stealing five pieces of merino, the goods of Francis Cook and another.

MESSRS. BESLEY and BURNIE Prosecuted; MR. PURCELL Defended.

The Jury in this case being unable to agree upon the verdict were discharged, and the case postponed to next Session.

NEW COURT.—Friday, January 16th, 1885.

Before Mr. Recorder.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-202
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown; Guilty > with recommendation
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

202. ALBERT KERRIDGE (20) and WILLIAM NORTHCOTE (45) , Burglariously breaking out of the dwelling-house of William John Day, having stolen therein a bag and other articles, his property.

MR. TICKELL Prosecuted; MESSRS. MONTAGU WILLIAMS and F. J. LOWE appeared for Northcote, and MR. MEAD for Kerridge.

ANN DAY . I am the wife of Thomas Day, of 47, Bloomsbury Square—Kerridge is my stepbrother—he lived in our house up to November 20th, I think—on Friday night, November 21st, I went to bed about 1 o'clock—Kerridge was net in the house then—about 8.30 a.m. my servant called me downstairs, and I found a cupboard in the breakfast-room broken open, and all my silver plate, value 50l., was gone, a tea and coffee service, toast rack, and fish knife and fork—I had seen them safe on the Thursday—I also missed from upstairs a small travelling bag containing this flask (produced) and other things—I have since seen all the property that was stolen, and identified it—I also missed a gold watch and chain from one of the bedrooms—I last saw Kerridge in the house on Wednesday evening—I know Northcote.

Cross-examined by MR. MEAD. My father died on 17th December, 1869—my mother married Northcote, and she and he were appointed guardians of my brother and sister six months after my father's death, and my stepbrother has been up to September last under Northcote's charge—we made an application to the Court of Chancery, and Mrs. Northcote was removed from the guardianship and my husband and I appointed, but since that, I believe, Kerridge has been living with Northcote again.

Cross-examined by MR. WILLIAMS. I do not know whether Northcote and his wife are living separate; I believe he sometimes lived with her, and sometimes he was away for two months—Northcote's wife is Kerridge's mother.

CLARA KERRIDGE . I live at 47, Bloomsbury Square—I saw the doors and windows safely closed on Friday between 6 and 7 p.m., and next morning I found there had been a robbery, and I missed a watch and chain from my bedroom—the detectives were communicated with, and ultimately Kerridge was locked up—afterwards I received this letter from him from the House of Detention: "Dear Clara,—Just a line to ask you not to forget what I asked you when you came to see me; that was to ask Ann to withdraw the charge, and then I would get you your things back rather than I would do a month. I would give you a note of hand for 200l., and let you have it when it becomes due. I don't want to see this Christmas in prison. You can tell Will that I will do everything he wishes. Now I do hope you will get Annie to do that I asked yon, and I am sure this will be a lesson for me this time. Give my love to all and yourself, hoping this will find you ail quite well. I shall be glad when the time comes to get it over. I have not slept one night since I have been here. Now I think this is all, hoping this will be the last letter you will receive from me in prison, thanking you all for the dinners you sent me, also the teas.—Albert Kerridge."

Cross-examined by MR. WILLIAMS. I believe my sister has recovered all the property.

MARTHA BLAKE . I was Mrs. Day's servant—I saw the house locked up the night before the robbery—next morning when I went downstairs I found the kitchen in confusion and the area door open—it had been locked the night before—it had been unbolted from the inside and the chain taken down—the breakfast-room door was open.

BENJAMIN MORGAN (Detective E). On 22nd November, about 9 a.m., I examined Mr. Day's premisos—I found no marks of the premises having been broken open from the outside—a cupboard in the dining-room had" been forced open and a poker was lying on the table which agreed with the marks—on the afternoon of 1st December I went to Mrs. Laverall's, 15, Aspland Road, Tottenham, and saw a flask which Mrs. Day identified, in a cupboard—I produce the whole of the property which she has identified—on 6th December, about noon, I saw the prisoner Northcote at the police-court—that was the first time I saw him, that was the first day that Kerridge came up on remand—I said to him "Is your name Northcote?" he said "Yes"—I said "I am the officer who arrested your son for stealing a quantity of plate and jewellery from 47, Bloomsbury Square; be careful how you answer me, because I may use your answers against you at some future time; I have been informed that you have had some tickets from your son of jewellery and other articles pledged by him'—he said "Yes, I have had some tickets from him, but my bag which I

kept them in has been stolen, and I have lost all of them"—I said "Some I person has redeemed some of the jewellery"—he said "I redeemed a gold buckle ring and pledged it again at Pockett's, near Farringdon Station, in my own name; I know nothing about any other property"—I informed the Magistrate of the interview and the prisoner was called as a witness, and stated positively that he knew nothing about any property: the ring had not been identified, and therefore the deposition was not I completed—on 10th December, about 8 p.m., I was with another officer and saw Northcote and his wife at their house, 9, Winchester Terrace, Tottenham; I said "I have received information from your son that he took the proceeds of the burglary to your coffee-house at Kentish Town, and from there to his mother's house at Tottenham, and from there to the place where it is at the present time; are you prepared to give me any information?"—Northcote said "Am I obliged to say anything to criminate myself?"—I said "Certainly not, I have cautioned you before that I may use your answers against you"—he said "I had nothing whatever to do with it"—he afterwards said to his wife "It is all up, you had better tell them all about it, you had better show them where it is, or they will follow you"—Northcote and his wife then went to 5, Wingmore Road, Tottenham, the address of a friend of Mrs. Nothcote—Mrs. Northcote entered the house, and we three waited outside; she brought out a parcel and gave it to me, and we then went into a public-house, and in their presence I opened the parcel; it contained this leather bag (produced) containing this silver coffee-pot and tea-pot, sugar-basin, milk-jug, and toast-rack, which Mrs. Day has identified—Northcote said "I have had nothing to do with that lot;" he then said "Will you meet me tomorrow?"—I said "Yes"—he said "If you will meet me to-morrow I will bring you the tickets for the remainder of the property, and tell you all that I know about it; but if I come to the station will you detain me?"—I said "I can't tell you; you are not obliged to come, you are not obliged to tell me anything; I can't promise you anything, I shall be guided by circumstances"—we arranged to meet at Tottenham Court Road Station next day, at 2 o'clock, and we parted—at 4 o'clock next day I met him; he again said "Do you intend to detain me?"—I said "I don't know—he then said "On a Saturday the boy came to my coffee-house at Kentish Town about 9 o'clock in the morning, he was in an excited state, he had a bag in his possession; I said 'Don't bring that here to get me into trouble, take it away;' he went away, but returned, and afterwards took away the property; before he went he gave me this lamp and cap and told me to throw them out of a train window"—they have both been identified by Mrs. Day—they were, in the bag—he also had a fish-knife and fork in a case, and two brushes, and he said to me 'These are no good to me, I am going to break them up;' I said to him 'No, don't do that, give them to me,' and I afterwards pledged them for safety because the boy should not get hold of them; here are the tickets"—the pawnbroker produces the things to-day—I pointed out to him that they were pledged in the name of Henry Newman, Hawley Road, and said "If you were acting honestly, why did you not give your correct name and address?"—he said "Because I did not want to get into trouble"—he also gave me these three tickets, and said "I asked the boy to let me have these to take care of"—they relate to a watch and chain, the proceeds of the burglary, and the others to a

suit of clothes and some charms, not relating to the burglary—he said "I have been led into it by the boy, and I am afraid I shall get into trouble;" and he also said "It is clear I have not benefited by anything about the affair"—since he has been in custody he has given me information about a chain, which is in consequence produced to-day.

Cross-examined by MR. WILLIAMS I took down what he said from memory, directly after he was charged—this is it (produced)—he said "Am I obliged to criminate myself?" not "Am I obliged to criminate him?"

FRANK HOLT I am assistant to Mr. Arnold, pawnbroker, of 213, Kentish Town Road—I produce a fish carving fork and knife pledged on 27th November in the name of John Newman, and two brushes on the 29th in the same name; I do not recognise either prisoner as pledging them—I also produce a chain, two rings, a pencil case, and a locket, pledged in the name of Northcote, I can't say who by.

ALFRED SCHRODER . I am assistant to Mr. Thomas, pawnbroker, of 234, Kentish Town Road—I produce a gold watch and chain pledged on 22nd November by Kerridge.



He then PLEADED GUILTY** to a conviction at Middlesex Sessions in November, 1883. Recommended to mercy by the prosecutor.— Nine Months' Hard Labour.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-203
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour; Imprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

203. ARTHUR JOHN PARTRIDGE and ALEXANDER FLETCHER , Unlawfully conspiring to make certain false entries and omitting to make entries in the books of their master.


JAMES GARRETT . I am the estimate clerk of Henry Blacklock and Co., wholesale printers of Farringdon Road and also of Manchester—I keep an order book—this (produced) is order book No. 3, I, also produce a work note A 3045—I recollect passing that through the order book in the usual way—Mr. Partridge would give me instructions, but there is no writing of his on it—I either enter it in the book myself or my assistant would do it, I should check it before it went into the department—the entry is made under my instructions, but I did not see it made—this word "House" in one of the columns of the order book in red pencil is Partridge's writing—the entry is "A. 3045 Robinson, Stacey, and Co., 5,000 Illus. catalogues, demy quarto, and working 2,000 into the boots and 3,000 without, as explained to Mr. Graham"—this catologue answers the description of the one in that order—the word "House" is also written on the top of the work note, to the best of my belief that is Fletcher's writing—Partridge was general manager, a new customer would be referred to him, Fletcher was head of the warehouse and store department—when I had got this matter in order I passed it forward to the printing department—if the work had to go through more than one department it would go to each department in turn for the purpose of the different kinds of work—when the work is completed through all the departments it comes back to me to be filled up and charged out for me to price the articles; the work note shows the prime cost of all the articles in each department, and I put on a certain per centage of profit and pass it on to Mr. Partridge—when it is all priced out I take it to him and he passes it into the counting-house for the price to be entered

in the day-book under the heading of the particular customer—Partridge ought to sign it before it goes into the counting-house; 3045 is not signed by him—it would be posted from the day-book to the customer's account in the ledger—I have searched the day-book for that date, and there is no entry of that order—there is an account of Robinson, Stacey, and Co. in it on two pages, "bought" on one side and "sold" on the other, but I find no entry of these goods to their debit at any time—this (produced) is one of the delivery books—there is an entry in the order-book for circulars A 3047—that is the next entry to A 3045, it is "Robinson, Stacey, and Co., demy quarto circulars," he does not say how many—this is Fletcher's lithographed writing. (Messrs. Robinson, Stacey, and Co.'s order for illustrated catalogues was here road and also the entry in the order book A 3117, Robinson, Stacey, and Co., 2,500 large cards and plate backed with transfer, four on a sheet, thin ivory cards.) This is the card (produced)—Mr. Fletcher showed me this circular and asked my opinion of the style of it before it was lithographed—that order was executed to the best of my belief, but it never came through my hands—there are no such entries in the day-book as these two orders—I have also searched the ledger and find no debit to Robinson, Stacey, and Co.—I know both the prisoners' writing; these two letters, this memorandum, and this delivery note are in Fletcher's writing—the signatures, Arthur Partridge and Alexander Fletcher to this agreement (produced) are in the prisoners' handwritings—this letter is, I believe, in Partridge's writing, but it is in pencil. (The agreement was here read, dated 3rd March, 1884, between Mobinson, Stacey, and Co. and the defendants. Several letters from the defendants were also put in.)

Cross-examined. There is no quantity mentioned in this order for circulars; it was shown me by Mr. Fletcher—the body of it is in his handwriting, but I should not like to say whether the signature is Robinson, Stacey, and Co.'s or not; it is supposed to come from them—I did not upon seeing Mr. Fletcher writing ask him if he was writing a circular for Stacey and Co., because I knew he was one of the firm of Robinson, Stagey and Co., and there was an account of that firm in our books—I discovered that the defendants were Robinson, Stacey, and Co. early last year, about four or five months before they were dismissed—I do not know whether my principals knew it or not—I did not consider that there was anything wrong in it; I did not know the particulars—I knew they were carrying on a portion of the same business as our firm—they were manufacturers and we were the merchants, both dealing in the same class of article—to the best of my memory there was no charge before the Magistrate with regard to these circulars—there would not necessarily be a number in this book—the entry in blank is my assistant's—the number ought to have been entered as soon as it was mentioned to me or to my assistant—I did not discover that it was in blank till after the defendants were dismissed in September—sometimes the numbers are blank for 12 months—I can't say how many circulars were supplied, but other parties in the house know—in this order for catalogues and slips, 4,000 has been altered to 6,000 in my writing—1,000 of the slips were for the house, but I don't know whether they were supplied—I don't charge the defendants with stealing the slips—the 1,000 is in pencil—I don't mean to say that 6,000 catalogues were supplied; 2,000 only as far as I know—the whole were printed, I believe, but never delivered—in the ordinary course we should work till the work was completed, before carrying out the cost

price in the work note, and in this case the order was not completed, and until it was done the work note would not come to me—when I carried out the cost price on the work note I did not assume that the work was done, because I knew the thing had been stopped through their dismissal—I knew that it had not been done, but I assumed that it had been in order to carry out the cost—orders are not paid for before they are completed unless we are paid by instalments—besides these catalogues some keys to them were printed; that was a separate order from Robinson, Stacey, and Co.—I think the catalogues would be to a great extent useless without the key, but not absolutely—the key is explanatory of each article enumerated, to give the price of it—I can't tell you the meaning of this"2,000 name" at the bottom, but Mr. Graham, to whom the memoranda refers, will tell you—on the face of it it does not appear whose catalogue it is, but the key would explain that.

Re-examined. This (produced) is the order for the key: "Robinson, Stacey, and Co., 5,000 keys to illustrated price-list; A 8240, June 26th"—that was ten days after the other order, and I believe part of that order was executed—"A 3240" is not posted to any name; it is struck through, it is transferred to the house by the word "house" being written in red pencil by Mr. Partridge—this is one of the keys—they would be no advantage to Blacklock and Co.; just the reverse—I am almost positive that the whole of the woodcuts belong to Blacklock and Co.—if a person gets hold of 2,000 illustrated catalogues any printer could print the key, and that would be minute in price as compared with the catalogue—I put it at 2l. compared with 50l.—you could get 50l. worth of catalogues and make them complete with the key—they certainly should not have been marked as if the whole order was for the house—the order is entered in the book the same as if it was a customer under the head of "house," but there ought to have been two distinct entries, and then there would have been no necessity to erase—in printing the key no blocks are required—in printing the circulars and card on 28th June, if printed from blocks, it ought to have been carried into the day-book; there would be no delivery note—2,000 postage stamps are charged for—the work note should have been sent to me to be worked up in the usual way, but I never found it again—this line indicates that the order is entered in some other book, and it ought to be an indication that it has been passed into the day-book.

By MR. WILLIAMS. The cost of printing these catalogues would depend entirely on the number printed, it would decrease in proportion; if 6,000 were to be printed, 3,000 for the house and 3,000 for Robinson, Stacey, and Co., if it was made up in one order the 6,000 could be made up for less than double the cost of 3,000 proportionally.

ARTHUR STACEY . I have carried on business as a fancy cabinet-maker for some time—I have known Partridge since about Whitsuntide, 1883, as the buyer of stationery at Blacklock and Co.'s—about March, 1884, I went there and found Fletcher employed there—I think he introduced himself—this agreement bears my signature—I entered into it with the two defendants about the time that it bears date—a similar kind of business had been carried on by Mrs. Robinson before I got there, I believe I informed the defendants of that—I believe Mr. Partridge paid an instalment—I did not give any order for 5,000 illustrated catalogues similar to this, or for 5,000 keys referring to this catalogue—the first

I knew about the circulars was I was sent up on some business upstairs to Mr. Fletcher on Blacklock's premises, and he gave me about a dozen of them; these cards were placed inside the circulars; he also gave me them, and said he was sending out, or he had sent out, 1,700 of the cards and circulars—I kept various books at Robinson and Staoey's, and a little black book—Fletcher had the day book and ledger, I have seen them in his possession at his master's premises—he made a remark once about the price of the work, and I mentioned to him that he had overcharged; it was some building work or office fittings—a great number of letters and post-cards came after I had seen the circulars and after he told me he had sent them out—I recollect the catalogues coming to Goswell Road—I did not know that they were coming—they came in 40 parcels; I did not know what they contained; the carman spoke to me, I refused to take them, and he spoke to me again and I took them in—he did not present any delivery note, nor did I sign for the parcels—two or three clays after I took them in I saw Fletcher at the prosecutor's premises—I said, "I have shut Goswell Road, as I can't agree with you any longer as to the working of it," and I told him as to the 40 parcels of catalogues which he had sent over and I would not receive them—he pulled his coat up and said, "I have got somebody to put in your place "—he made an arrangement to come over at dinner-time and take die key and lock the place up himself—I waited for him till 1 o'clock; he did not come, and I locked the place up myself—I then went to him and offered him my card and address, and told him as he would not come over I had locked up the place—I offered him the key; he would not take it, and I afterwards gave it up to the landlord—on the Thursday, I think, he came over in the evening and went over the place, and asked me what it all arose out of—I said in the way he worked the business, I could not continue with him any longer—he asked mo if I would throw Mr. Partridge out and take the business up with him—I said "No"—in September I saw some of Mr. Fletcher's men removing the goods from the Goswell Road premises into a van—Fletcher's brother was there—I followed the van to 40, Hendon Street, Pimlico, where there was the name of "A. and W. Fletcher" on the side of the wall—I saw the goods delivered there—I had left the 40 parcels of catalogues at Goswell Road, retaining the key—there was no duplicate key to my knowledge—about a fortnight after that I went to the premises and unlocked them with my key, and saw one catalogue out of the 40 parcels lying on a bench—the 40 bundles were delivered on August 23rd—I had a settlement with Blacklock and Co. on July 16th, and received a cheque for 125l. 11s.—5l. 10s. 10d. discount was taken off, which balanced the account up to that date, including, I believe, a settlement of all entries on their side—I took the cheque upstairs to Mr. Fletcher at Blacklock's warehouse, and gave it to him—he told me to go and get it changed, as he could not, and I did so; I brought back the money and gave it to him.

Cross-examined. I was manager—I am master now the same as I was before—I have taken the premises since the defendants have been under charge, and have removed the name of Robinson, Stacey, and Co., but I have not taken down the plate, it is still on the glass over the fanlight.

Re-examined. I told Fletcher that I was going to discontinue having anything to do with the firm—I have never used the name of Robinson, Stacey, and Co. on any invoice or bill or book, the name was scratched out

on one or two bill heads which I used—I worked for Mrs. Robinson; I was apprenticed to her husband.

WILLIAM GEORGE SERLE . I am the prosecutors' manager, I was appointed on 11th September, about a fortnight after Partridge's dismissal—up to that time I had no connection with the firm—on September 30th I received a communication from Staley, and I informed Mr. Blacklock—I then requested Stacey to attend me in my private room on the premises—I showed him a catalogue with the name of Robinson, Stacey, and Co., 304, Goswell Road, London, in it, and said "Do you know anything of this firm Robinson, Stacey, and Company?"—he said "No"—I asked him again, and he still said no—I said "Do you know there have been some catalogues delivered to them?"—he said "Yes"—I said "Have you a signature for them?"—he said "No"—I said "Can you get the signature for them?"—he said "I can"—I said "I want it by to-morrow morning at 9 o'clock"—he left, and in the evening he came again and asked for Mr. Blacklock after he had left—next morning he saw Mr. Blacklock and myself—I asked him whose canceling this was on the work sheet—he said "I wrote the word 'House'"—I saw him on October 1st, and he said "I can't get the delivery notes signed for"—I said "Do you think after this we can keep you in our employ? if I had seen Mr. Blacklock last night I should not have been here this morning: although you deny all knowledge of Robinson, Stacey, and Company, you are a partner with them"—he said "Yes"—he was asked if he was a partner in the firm of A. and W. Fletcher—he said "No"—I had not seen this circular or card on October 1st, nor had I seen any entry or want of entry with reference to them, or any erasure or cancellation in the books, more than a line drawn through in the order book—as he left I said that he stood in a very serious position and it was open to us to give him in custody—he said "I hope you will not prosecute me criminally."

Crow-examined. On 30th September I first discovered that these men were carrying on the business of Robinson, Stacey, and Company—I do not know that Garrett knew of it; he ought to have reported it to me or to Mr. Blacklock—I should not have allowed it—of these 6,000 catalogues, 2,000. went to Robinson, Stacey, and Company, and 4,000 are still with us—the entry in the book does not say that a portion of the 6,000 were for the house, and I have a very great doubt about it—the 6,000 would be printed at far less cost pro rata than 2,000—above 2,000 of the catalogues have Blacklock's name on the slip.

Re-examined. I believe we have 1,000 still in which this could be placed, and 3,000 of these not yet delivered—6,000 of the key were printed, 3,000 with Blacklock's name, and 3,000 with Robinson and Stacey's name; those have not been delivered—no entry was made in the order book until the order was executed—there should have been no difficulty in making two entries in the order book of 3,000 each—I was not on the premises at all at the time the order was given, and therefore I could not be reported to—I never saw one of the cards or circulation till after the prisoners were committed.

FREDERICK WILLIAM DAY . I was the prosecutors' carman in August, and delivered 40 parcels of catalogues to Robinson, Stacey, and Company—Fletcher was my foreman, he gave me the order to deliver them—I did not take any forms with me according to practice, as I was told that

I should get them signed for in a day or so, when I took the rest—Stacey was not eager to take them at first—it is my practice to take a signature when I deliver goods, the only exception is Cook and Son and the Marine Engineer, and then I take a signature the next day.

JAMES DALY . I am foreman of Messrs. Blacklook's lithographic department; this is the work-book in which I make entries—I have taken four transfers from this copper plate (produced) and printed from the stone, there are four on a sheet—I have an entry in the work book "June 28th, 1884,3047, Robinson and Stacey, 2,000 quarto circulars, second and third pages"—I have charged 4s. for transferring, and 1l. for printing—I have another entry on July 3rd, No. 3117, for 2,500 copies, two pages, Robinson and Stacey—what we call two pages is back and front; 2s. is charged for the transfer and 14s. 9d. for printing; this (produced) is the article; the amount is 2l. 0s., 9d.—I delivered the work-sheet to the ware-room, where the circulars would be printed, folded, and sent on.

WALTER GRAHAM . I am overseer of the controlling and press department—I produce my work book—here is an entry of work note 3047—as far as I can remember Mr. Partridge gave me the particulars of it; it is "2,000 demy quarto circulars transferred"—the work was done, after which it ought to come back to me to fill in the price, but it did not come back—this is the circular.

JANE SEARGENT . I am forewoman in the folding and sewing department—I have an entry here, "July 4th. 3047. 2,000 copies four-page circular, three folds, card inserted and bands"—the bands came from Mr. Flitcher in the warehouse with the addresses written, and I got the postage stamps from him—he gave me money for stamps twice; he gave me so much to go on with, and I had to tell him how much more I wanted—I had instructions from Fletcher first, and Partridge came and suggested a different way, that the cards might not fall out—they would be sure to be finished when I made this entry, "July 18th, 2,000;" that enables me to say that on 18th July 2,000 were done—I sent them to Fletcher to have the edges out—I put the slips in and put the covers on—I put in this, "Robinson, Stacey, and Co.," by Fletcher's directions—I have another entry of 4,000 on 21st July—while I was doing them Fletcher said that 2,000 must be kept back for an alteration in the cover—I don't know what that was—I had possession of the work note at that time; this is it—my price is on it—I got no directions from Fletcher about altering the wrapper—4,000 were made up with covers, and I have 2,000 left, of which 1,850 are waiting for covers—I did the work on the key; I cannot give the date of it.

MR. BARTHOLOMEW. I was in Messrs. Blacklock's employ, and addressed several bands for circulars to different persons for Robinson, Stacey, and Co.—Mr. Guy, Messrs. Blacklock's corresponding clerk, gave me the list of persons to whom they were to be addressed, and paid me for it.

MR. GUY. I supplied directions to Bartholomew—Mr. Partridge gave me the order; he said it was to be done in overtime.

FRANCIS JOSEPH REVENTT . I keep the petty cash book—on 4th July I paid 4l. 3s. 1d. for postage stamps in one sum—I have only one sum that day for stamps—this (produced) is Baddeley and Reynolds's invoice; it has never been charged against Robinson, Stacey, and Co. to my knowledge—I paid for it on 8th October 1l. 2s. 6d.

Cross-examined. It was sent in to Mr. Blacklock.

HENRY JONES BELSHALL . I am employed by Messrs. Baddeley and Reynolds, engravers, of the Old Bailey—in April or May Fletcher ordered this card plate (produced) to be engraved; I forget how many cards he ordered—our firm sent an invoice to Fletcher, care of Blacklock and Co.—Fletcher asked me to transfer it to Blacklock and Co.; I did so, and it was sent in, but I did not make it out—it stood in the name of Fletcher as in the first invoice up to the end of July, and I believe it was turned over to Blacklock on 1st August.

CHARLES WILLIAM BLACKLOCK I carry on business as H. Blacklock and Co. in Manchester and in Farringdon Road—I have no partner—I often attend at Manchester—in November, 1883, Partridge was my general manager and Fletcher was in the warehouse—I had no knowledge up to the time of their leaving that either of them had anything to do with Robinson, Stacey, and Co.—after they left I found out about the circulars and the illustrated catalogue—if any catalogues were printed for me there ought to be an entry in the order-book—I had no knowledge of the order till after they were dismissed, or of the cancelling, or of the order for the 5,000 keys, or of the circulars being sent out and posted on 4th July—I am not aware of any such entries in the books—when Mr. Searle was appointed I received these three letters and two delivery tickets from Partridge, and I afterwards had an interview with Partridge in consequence of his letter, but he said nothing about the 2,000 circulars and cards being done up, posted, and dispatched on July 4th—I cannot recollect any interview with Fletcher after his dismissal—Mr. Searle reported to me that Fletcher had requested not to be prosecuted—I afterward took proceedings against Fletcher and Partridge.

Cross-examined. I did not know that the defendants were carrying on business of their own, or I should have dismissed them.

GUILTY of making false entries for the purpose of obtaining goods. PARTRIDGE— Two Months' Hard Labour. FLETCHER— Six Months' Hard Labour.

THIRD COURT.—Friday, January 16th, 1885.

Before Mr. Common Serjeant.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-204
VerdictGuilty > lesser offence
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

204. ALFRED ANDLAW (45) , Feloniously forging and uttering an order for the payment to 45l., with intent to defraud.

MESSRS. POLAND and GORE Prosecuted.

WILLIAM JOHN HANNA . I am a commissionaire, 268, living at 2k, Victoria Dwellings, Battersea Park Road—I have previously been in the Army—on Saturday, 13th December, about 2.30, I was in King Street, St. James's, the prisoner came up, tapped me on the shoulder, and said "Are you doing anything?" I said "Nothing particular"—he said "Can you go a message for me?" I said "If it is not too far"—he said "Scott's Bank"—"I said "You mean Sir Samuel Scott's"—he said "Yes, I want you to get a cheque cashed for 45l., 5l. in gold and two 20l. notes, and take it to the Naval and Military, Piccadilly; if I am not there wait; I am sure to be there, I am only going to Charing Cross"—he gave me 2s. and this unfastened envelope, with the cheque enclosed—he said "Look sharp, it is nearly 3 o'clock"—I said "I had better take a cab"—I did so and drove to the bank—when I got into the cab I took

the cheque out of the envelope to see if it was payable over the counter and all right; there was nothing in the envelope but the cheque, it was payable to bearer—I presented it over the counter at the bank—I think the cashier had some consultation with somebody, and after that he returned me the cheque with the words written at the bottom "Requires another signature"—he declined to cash it—I brought the envelope and cheque away and went to the Vine Street Police-station, where I saw an officer, made a communication to him, and left Vine Street with two officers in plain clothes following me at some distance—I went to the Naval and Military Club, waited outside for some time, but could not find the prisoner—a boy then came up to me and gave me a message, in consequence of which I went to Swan and Edgar's, where I waited some little time and then the prisoner came up; he said "Have you got it?"—I said "No, it requires another signature"—I delayed a little taking it out of my pocket to allow the detectives to come up, and then I took it out and gave it to him with the envelope, with the cheque uppermost—he seemed very much surprised, and said "Where?"—I pointed out to him where it was written that it required another signature, he said "Is that all they said?"—I said "Yes"—the detectives then came up and took him away to the station—I had a full opportunity of seeing Him at King Street, and have not the least doubt that the prisoner is the man who gave me the cheque in the envelope—at the station I saw a constable pick up a piece of paper from the floor by him while he was being searched.

Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I recognise you by your beard, face, and dress and voice; the man-did not wear glasses—I have not been by the bank, and do not expect to be, I am doing my duty an in this—I did not hesitate at the police-court as to whether the piece of paper fell out of your pocket or was at after feet—I went from the bank to the police-station on my own responsibility; I thought it was a forgery seeing the cashier compare it with other signatures and taking my name and address—if the cheque had been correct I should have had to answer for it.

WALTER FLOOK . I am a cashier at Sir Samuel Scott's Bank, 1, Cavendish Square—we have a customer Thomas Richardson and Son, pawnbrokers and jewellers, Upper George Street, Portland Square—it is necessary that their cheques should be signed by both Mr. Richardson and his son—we have no other Thomas Richardson as a customer—on 13th December the last witness presented this cheque at the counter—from its appearance I made some inquiries, and then wrote on it "Requires another signature," and handed it back to the commissionaire, taking his name and address—he asked for the money in a particular way—I gave him the cheque back and he left the bank—I have examined the forged cheque, and find the form of the cheque does not come out of Mr. Richardson's book, but out of an old book of a customer whose account was closed in 1867—we don't get old forms returned when the account is closed; we ask for them.

THOMAS RICHARDSON . I am a pawnbroker, and carry on business in partnership with my son as Thomas Richardson and son at 1, Upper George Street, Bryanston Square—we keep an account at Sir Samuel Scotts Bank, I and my son sign the cheques—this cheque is not written by me, or by my authority, or by the authority of our firm, or by either, of us.

Cross-examined. I consider it a good imitation of my writing—I do not know you at all—you might have seen my signature on a contract note, I very seldom sign them myself, they would be signed by both of us in the same way as the cheques.

WILLIAM PUGSLEY (Police Sergeant C). On Saturday afternoon, 13th December, a commissionaire came to Vine Street Police-station close to the Quadrant and made a statement to me—I gave him instructions and went with Fox, both of us in plain clothes—we followed the commissionaire to the Naval and Military Club—after waiting there about half an hour a boy spoke to him and we went to Piccadilly Circus, by Swan and Edgar's—after waiting about seven or eight minutes I saw the prisoner speaking to the commissionaire—we came across the road, the prisoner had this cheque and envelope in his hand—I went up and said to the commissionairs "Is this the man who gave you the cheque?"—he said "Yes"—I said to the prisoner "I am a detective sergeant, you have attempted to obtain 45l. by means of a false cheque, you will have to come to the station with me;" at the same time I laid hold of the prisoner with one hand, took the paper and envelope out of his left hand with my right hand; I put them in my coat pocket—as we were going to Vine Street Police-station he said I never gave him any cheque, I don't know him"—at the station he said "I never saw him before"—I there requested him to show what he had in his pockets—he pulled out two or three handkerchiefs and other things—I saw Sergeant Fox pick up this piece of blotting-paper from near the prisoner's feet—Fox showed, it to. me, nothing was said about it at that time—at that time the envelope and cheque were still in my coat pocket—the charge was read to the prisoner by the inspector—he said "I deny it, I never saw the commissionaire before I was taken into custody"—the prisoner gave his name—I asked his address—he said "I decline to give my address"—the inspector asked me what property was found in the prisoner's possession—I said "Three pieces of paper"—the prisoner asked what papers—the inspector showed him the three—the prisoner said "Where did the blotting-paper come from?"—the inspector said "From your pocket"—the prisoner said "Impossible"—the blotting-paper was first mentioned to the prisoner about two hours after the charge had been taken, I went to make inquiries in the meantime—I have compared the blotting-paper with the envelope—on 19th December I went to 15, College Street, Greenwich—the landlady pointed out two boxes to me, which I searched, and took possession of 48 pawntickets and some other papers—some of the tickets were in the name of Alfred Audlan, Gordon, and other names—one is a contract note signed by the pawnbroker—the prisoner's wife was there.

Cross-examined. I did not consider it necessary to call your attention to the blotting-paper till within two hours afterwards—I went to Mr. Pandort, your employer—he said he knew you, that he had expected you there that afternoon, that he did not know the reason why you had not been there to attend to your duties, you ought to have been there three hours during the day, I believe he said he expected you at 2 o'clock—there was no extra crowd round us at Swan and Edgar's—I do not think I said in my deposition that there was a crowd. (In the deposition these words occurred "There was a crowd around us.) I expected to find some one at Swan and Edgar's—I did not try to stop the boy, I saw him come up, I did not want him to see me—I did not say I would give 20l.

out of my pocket if I could find him—I hare brought a forgery case to a successful issue before this—there was one person in the last, I can't say bow many there were before.

By the JURY. I took the envelope from the prisoner in Piccadilly Circus—I had shown the cheque and envelope to the inspector during the two hours before I spoke to the prisoner about the blotting paper.

FREDERICK FOX (Police Sergeant). I went with Pugsley on this day—I have heard his statement, it is correct—I took the prisoner to the station—I had seen Pugpley take the cheque and envelope from the prisoner after the commissionaire had given them to him at Piccadilly Circus—Pugsley put them into his pocket—at the station Pugsley, who was standing in front of the prisoner, asked him to show him what he had in his pockets—I was standing at his side looking on, and I saw that when he pulled a pocket-handkerchief out of his right-hand coat pocket, a piece of paper fell to the ground in front of the prisoner's feet—I stooped down and picked it up, it was this piece of blotting-paper—I held it up to the gas light, having previously seen the envelope, and said in the prisoner's and Pugsley's hearing "This is important"—we compared it with the envelope, the prisoner being close to us, and I then gave it to Pugsley.

Cross-examined. I saw the paper fall from your pocket.

ANNIE MARTIN . I live wife my husband at College Place, Green-wich—the prisoner and his wife are intimate friends of ours—she came to my house some time in December, and I afterwards showed Pugsley the box she brought.

The Prisoner Statement before the Magistrate. "I say that I neither forged nor uttered the cheque given to me by the commissionaire; that I shall be able to prove that between 2 and 3 o'clock I was in Wellington Street, Strand; that at 3 o'clock I was going to my work at a gentleman's house in Craven Hill Gardens, where I have been employed for the last four years as private tutor to a daughter and two sons; that I have lately had the teaching of Mr. Justice Penman's prandson, and also for one year the son of Mr. J. E. Matheson, of Mildmay Park, in whose house I resided; that I think the geutlemen I have mentioned would not have employed me if I was a forger and utterer of forged documents, and that I think that on the testimony of either a stupid or cunning commissionaire I ought not to be thrown into prison."

The prisoner in his defence repeated in substance his statement, and asserted that the prosecutor had failed to prove the case against him and that he was innocent.

GUILTY of uttering. Twelve Months' Hard Labour.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-205
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

205. THOMAS FOX (26) , Robbery with violence on Richard Hartley, and stealing 47l.

MR. GREENFIELD Prosecuted.

RICHARD HARTLEY . I live at 51, Sidmouth-Street, St. Pancras, and am a printer—on 11th September, 1883, about 8 o'clock p.m., I was in the Crown, St. Pancras Road—a man in another compartment, whom I have not seen since, called on me to stand some beer; I paid for some—two of them came from their compartment into mine and I paid for beer, which we drank—shortly afterwards I left the house and crossed the road; and when I reached the other side I was struck violently on the

back of the head from behind and stunned, and fell—there were two men, the prisoner was one—my trousers pockets were torn out and 37l., a purse, and 10l. in gold and silver were taken, 47l. altogether—I went to the station, gave information and a description of the two men—I have not seen either of the men since, till I saw the prisoner at the station on 17th December.

Cross-examined. I did not come into the public-house with five others—I put down a sovereign in payment for drink for five—two men did not go out of the public-house with me, one on each side.

By the COURT. I was conversing with the prisoner and another man in the public-house, and when I crossed the road to the urinal, the prisoner and another followed me behind—I saw him as I was going across the road—I could not tell where the prisoner was when I felt the blow.

JOHN TAYLOR . On the 11th September, 1883, I was at Platt Street Station about 9 o'clock when the prosecutor came and made a complaint, and gave a description of certain men—he was smothered in mud, one of his trousers pockets was torn out—I afterwards saw George Hines, who gave me certain information—from that date in September, 1883, till the 17th December, 1884, I did not see the prisoner—I then saw him in the same public-house, the Grown, and said I should take him into charge on suspicion of the robbery on this date—he said "you have made a mistake"—on the way to the station I said "I traced you to the Dials after the robbery"—he said "I did not go to the Dials then, I have been living at Holloway"—I brought the prosecutor to the station, and he picked the prisoner out from seven others.

By the COURT. It was a year and three months afterwards—the prosecutor had been drinking but knew what he was about.

Cross-examined. You did not say you had bean working at Holloway. George Hines. I am potman at the Greyhound, Sydenham—on 11th September, 1883, I was living in St. pancras Road, and about 5 o'clock went into the Crown, where I saw the prisoner with other men and the prosecutor in the same compartment—I came out, and about three hours afterwards went in again—I came out, and about 9 o'clock was walking past when I saw the prisoner and another man following the prosecutor across the road, and when they were over the other side, the prisoner knocked the prosecutor down and tore his pocket out and robbed him—another man picked the prosecutor up and took him away a few yards, and said he would go to the station and tell them—I went away then—I gave information next morning at the station—I had seen the prisoner before, and knew him—when the prisoner struck this blow he was behind the prosecutor.

Cross-examined. I did not see you in the tap-room till 12—I was not there playing at dominoes with you.

The Prisoner's Statement before the Magistrate. "I am not guilty."

The prisoner in his defence argued that it was impossible for the prosecutor to recognise him after 16 months, this robbery having occurred on a dark night and where there were no lights.

JOHN TAYLOR (Re-examined by the COURT). It was just opposite the public-house, where there is a row of lights—it is a road 35 feet across; there is no recess, it is as light as day there.

RICHARD HARTLEY (Re-examined). I went into the public-house about

6 o'clock, the robbery took place at 8—I felt pain some weeks' afterwards down the neck and back, and across my neck—I was treated by my club doctor.

GEORGE HINES (Re-examined). I went away because the gentleman by my side said he was going to the station—I did not go to the prosecutor—enter's assistance—I saw the prisoner strike him with his fist.

GUILTY .— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-206
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude; Corporal > whipping

Related Material

206. ALEXANDER MCCARTHY (25) , Robbery with violence on Charles Richardson, and stealing a watch-chain and 25l.


CHARLES RICHARDSON . I live at 38, South Bank-Street, St. John's Wood—about 5 o'clock p.m. on Wednesday, 17th December, I was near the Dock-wall, Whitechapel—five men came up to me; one in front and two in the flank began to pull me about—I had no chance of escape; two of them felt in my pockets and took my tortoiseshell puree inlaid with gold and a gold chain; they did not take either of my two watches—I offered them money, but instead of an answer I got a double fist, which floored me, cut my head open and stunned me for some time—I had not seen the men before—there were four five-pound notes, two sovereigns and a half-sovereign in the purse, 25l. altogether—I had got the notes that day from my bankers, Barclay's, in change for a cheque—I had only just received them—I did not take the numbers.

Cress-examined. You were taken to Leman Street Station and placed between eight or nine others—I was fetched, and I looked amongst the men three times—the sergeant said "Are any of the men amongst them?"—I said "To the best of my belief, but I could not swear to them."

Re-examined. I could not identify the prisoner—I am still in pain in the arm.

By the COURT. I am 80 years old; this was nearly the death of my aster, who is about 90.

ELIZABETH VICTORIA . I live at 222, St. Georges Street East—on this afternoon I was standing on the steps of the Sailors' Reading Room, by the dock wall—McCarthy came up and stood on the pavement in front of me, under a lamp; he stood for a minute, and then went down in the direction of Highway again, and a second or so after I looked to where lie had gone, and I saw McCarthy and five or six others around some man who had fallen—I called on Nathan; they were pulling Mr. Richardson about—when I looked again he pulled himself up and they pinned him against the wall—I saw the prisoner pick the money up which had fallen on the ground—they were pulling the gentleman's pockets out, and I heard a jingling as of money falling; the prisoner picked it up—McCarthy pulled the prosecutor up by the collar, and held him with the others—I am certain he is the man; I know him by sight—we began to halloa for the police.

By the COURT. I am a bottle washer.

Cross-examined. I saw you pin the gentleman against the wall—a man picked up something after you had made off; he said it was a farthing.

EDWARD NATHAN . I am a contractor, and live at High Street, Sutton, Surrey—on Wednesday, 17th December, about five or a quarter past, I was coming along East Smithfield, facing the dock wall—I saw three men handing the prosecutor; they had got him down on the wall, forcing

his head against the brickwork—I seized my umbrella and rushed at them, and received a blow which sent me rolling in the road—I lost my speech for a moment, and while recovering I heard the last witness say "Oh, they are robbing the old gentleman"—they ran off; I saw the prisoner tearing the old gentleman's waistcoat open as they were dragging him up against the wall.

Cross-examined. I said at Harper Square Police-station that I could tell you by the back of your coat—it was dark when this happened—I followed you some distance—when before the Magistrate I said I could detect you by your speech, because when I came to you I heard you say "Go on, you s—."

WILLIAM REED (Policeman H 390). About 12.30 on 19th December I arrested the prisoner in company with another constable in St. George's Street, Ratcliff Highway, and charged him with being concerned with others in custody in assaulting the old gentleman and robbing him of 25l. in gold and 5l. worth of property—in answer to the charge he said "You are getting it up for me; I suppose you have got the old gentleman there, I know nothing about it; if I had done anything I would have a go for it, and neither of you should take me"—he was placed among eight others at the station, and Mrs. Victoria identified him—in answer to the charge he said "I suppose I know best myself"—I read his statement to him, and he said "I suppose that is so"—when searched at the station 1l. 2s. 6 1/2 d. was found on him, a farthing, and his seaman's discharge.

CHARLES JOHN WILLIAMS . I am a clerk in the Bank of England—I produce four notes, 592, 593, 594, and 595—there are no two notes of same number in circulation at one time.

WILLIAM MOLYNEUX . I am a cashier in Barclay, Bevan, and Co.'s bank in Lombard Street—on 17th December I cashed a cheque for 25l. for Mr. Richardson, and paid him with four 51. notes, numbers 592 to 595, and 5l. in gold—593 and 594 are produced here—he is a customer of ours.

HENRY ALLEN . I am barman at the Lord Clyde public-house, East—on 17th December I changed a 5l. note for the prisoner—the prisoner pat his name, McCarthy, on it; I see it on this, No. 594—that was 6 o'clock p.m.—I identify this note by the signature, "A. McCarthy."

Cross-examined by the Prisoner. There was one person with you.

ALFRED BINLEY . I am barman at the Lord Nelson public-home, Watney Street, Commercial Road—on the evening of 22nd December I changed a 5l. note for the prisoner—I passed it to the booking-clerk at the Shadwell Railway Station the same evening, I am sure.

Cross-examined. I didn't notice who was with you—I recognised you at the House of Detention; I don't recognise the note.

HARRY NEWNHAM . I am booking-clerk at the Shadwell Railway Station—I received a 5l. note, No. 593, from Alfred Binley on 17th December, about 8 or 9, or just after 9.

CHARLES RICHARDSON (Re-examined). I was attacked about 5 o'clock.

The prisoner in his defence denied all knowledge of the robbery, or that the notes were stolen, and stated that three other men had requested him to change the notes for them.


He then PLEADED GUILTY to a previous conviction of along in October, 1882.— Five Years' Penal Servitude and 25 strokes with the cat.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-207
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

207. WALTER DENHAM (70) , Robbery with violence on Mary Keown, and stealing a purse, 15s., and a railway ticket and other articles.

MR. PURCELL Prosecuted.

MARY KEOWN . I live at 89, Tedworth Square, Chelsea—at 20 minutes past 3 p.m. on 7th January I was walking in Ranelagh Gardens, Chelsea, with my sister's two children, and passed the prisoner carrying a largesized stone—he came directly behind me with the stone raised as if to strike me—I at once turned and faced him—he then raised a stick—I did not notice what became of the stone—I caught hold of the stick, and both he and I had hold of it together—then he let go the stick and drew an open knife similar to this (produced) and said "Your money or your life"—I preferred to give the money; I let go the stick and gave him my purse, which I took from my dress pocket—he took it and walked away; I did not follow him—my purse contained half-a-sovereign, two florins, and a shilling, half a railway ticket from Sloane Square to Aldersgate Street or Sloane Square to Portland Road, a receipt with my address, 39, Ted worth Square, on it, and some postage-stamps—I found a constable and sent him after the prisoner.

Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I have no aboubt about you being the man.

Re-examined. At the police-court I said I was sure he was the man.

MARY ANN COKEHAM . I am an unfortunate, and live at 8, Turk's Road, Chelsea—about 5 minutes to 4 on the afternoon of 7th June I was in the Snow Shoes public-house, Pimlioo Road, and saw the prisoner there—he showed me a brown leather purse with a shield clasp; I saw inside two two-shilling pieces, a shilling, half a railway ticket, a paper, and three stamps—he wanted me to buy the purse for 6d.; I would not—he paid for my drink, two pints of beer, and he treated another lady too to two half-quarterns of rum—he remained there till half-past 9 or a little more.

Cross-examined. I never had the pocket-book—you offered it to the landlady previously—I never left the house with it—it was a purse, not a pocket-book—I saw the things in it in the afternoon, afterwards I saw it was empty.

Re-examined. I saw the prisoner give a two-shilling place to a woman in the Snow Shoes.

MARY MAUD BULLIMORE . I was the wife of Foster Bullimore, the landlord of the Snow Shoes—on Wednesday evening, 7th January, about half-past 8, I saw the prisoner in our public-house—he wished me to look at a purse; I did so; it was brown leather, lined with cream, with a silver shield outside; inside it I saw a farthing, half a return ticket from Portland Road to Sloane Square, and an ironmonger's bill with "39, Tedworth Square" on the wrong side—the prisoner wished me to buy it; I said I did not do such things—he only had two half-pints of ale in the house.

TIMOTHY TURNER . I am a staff-sergeant of pensioners at West Prompton Pension District—about 2.30 on 7th January the prisoner came to our office and asked me if I had got a transfer from Liverpool for him—I asked his name; he said Renham, I thought—I told him we had not got any transfer at all—he told me he had got no money, and asked me if I could give him some till he got the pension transfer—I told him I could not.

THOMAS WILSON (Policeman B). On the night of 7th January, about 9.30, I went with Scott to the Snow Shoes, and found the prisoner there with several ladies—I said, "I will take you into custody for stealing a purse from a lady in Chelsea College Gardens by threats"—he said, "I know nothing about it, I have not been in College Gardens, I don't know where they are"—College Gardens is the lower part of Ranelagh Gardens towards the Thames Embankment—I saw Cokeham at the public-house—I found on the prisoner this knife and 4d.

MARY KEOWN (Re-examined). My purse was a dark brown or red leather colour with a shield-shaped fastening, and I think yellow inside—cream colour would be a description—it was a new purse.

The Prisoner's Statement before the Magistrate. "I had a purse, and offered it to the landlady for sale; she refused to buy it. The young girl who gave evidence against me is a prostitute; she asked me to let her look at the purse; she took it away to sell, and never gave me any money afterwards. I saw her and asked for my purse; she laughed at me and said I did not give it to her."

The prisoner in his defence stated that he had been in the Army, and bess wounded in the head, shoulder, and abdomen, and that he could not move his right hand or arm, nor hold a knife in it.

MARY KEOWN (Re-examined). I cannot say which hand he held the stone in; the stick he held in both, and the knife in his left hand.

GUILTY .— Twelve Months' hard Labour.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-208
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

208. WILLIAM DENMEAD (20) PLEADED GUILTY to stealing from the person of George Appleton a handkerchief and 17l.; also* to a previous conviction of felony in April, 1883, at this Court.— Two Years' Hard Labour .

OLD COURT.—Saturday, January 7th, 1885.

Before Mr. Recorder.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-209
VerdictsNot Guilty > fault; Not Guilty > no evidence

Related Material

209. JAMES LUCAS , Stealing 4999 skins, the property of Theodor Apfel and another.

MR. GRAIN Prosecuted; MR. KEMP, Q.C., with WILDEY WRIGHT Defended.

In this case the skins in question were delivered to the prisoner to make up, subject to certain allowances. BARON HUDDLESTON, after hearing the evidence for the prosecution, expressed an opinion that although the matter might be the subject of an action for trover, the evidence of larceny was scarcely established. The JURY expressing the same opinion found the prisoner.


There was another indictment against the Defendant, for converting the same articles to his own use, being entrusted to him to make up. Upon this no evidence was offered.


29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-210
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

210. JAMES REID (32) , Robbery with violence on Thomas Foster, and stealing his watch.

MR. BAYLISS Prosecuted; MR. PURCELL Defended.

THOMAS FOSTER . I am a labourer and live at 2, Carlton Street, Shore-ditch—on 27th December, between 1 and 2 in the morning, I was in Shoreditch, near the church—the prisoner stopped me, and asked the

time—I told him he did not want to know the time, if he did he could see the church clock—he came up to me and shuffled round me and pushed me—with that I knocked him down—two more men then came up and held my arms behind me—the prisoner got up and closed with me; we both fell together, and while on the ground he got my finger in his mouth and bit it, not very hard, I did not give him the chance—I held his nose—while on the ground I felt myself kicked by the other two men, and felt my watch being wrenched from my pocket—I saw it in the prisoner's hand while I was on the ground—he passed it to another man—a policeman came up and took the prisoner; the other two ran away in different directions—I ran after one of them, but could not catch him—I came back and found the prisoner in charge of the policeman—I gave him into custody—he did not say anything.

Cross-examined. I had come from Hoxton and had just left a young I lady—I had had some refreshment at the Hare'at Hoxton—I was in there about four hours, not in any other house—this was on Boxing—night—I walked out when the house closed—the prisoner did not call oat when I knocked him down—I let go of his nose after he let go of my finger—it was while I was on the ground that my watch was torn from my pocket; it was attached to a chain—I saw it taken—I could not swear to the hand of the person that took it—I saw two hands together; there were three together—I think the prisoner had been drinking.

GEORGE SEWARD (Policeman G 405). On the night in question about 1.15 I heard cries of "Police"—I ran to the spot in High Street, and saw the proseuctor and prisoner on the ground—the prosecutor said he had lost his watch, and the prisoner had taken it—I took him to the station—nothing was found on him but two pawn tickets and a knife—he said "You have got the wrong man."

Cross-examined. I did not see anything the matter with the prisoner's nose; if there had been I should have seen it.


He then PLEADED GUILTY to a previous conviction at this Court on 7th January, 1875, in the name of James Hand, of robbery with violence, and two other summary convictions were proved against him.— Five Years' Penal Servitude .

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-211
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

211. JOSEPH BELL (39) , Feloniously forging and uttering an order for 10l., with intent to defraud.


JOHN STEAD . I keep the Tiger public-house in Wells Street, Oxford Street—in April last year the prisoner was introduced to me by a customer And stayed with me till the 14th—he paid me ten shillings deposit, and showed me a letter from Messrs. Withall, Oompton, and Co., relating to some money that was supposed to be coming to him from an estate in South Africa; and if I would advance him a little he would square me up—I advanced him at different times 9l. 2s. in cash—on the 14th he gave me this cheque for 10l.—he said the signature to it was Mr. Alexander Giifard's, a solicitor at Londsdale Chambers, Chancery Lane—I said "It is Bank-holiday, it is impossible that Mr. Giffard would be in business to-day"—he said "I went and saw his chief clerk, and he wrote out the cheque; and that is his private mark in the confer"—he

asked me to lend him a sovereign—I gave him 1l. in silver, and he gave me an I O U—I did not see him again till the 9th December, when I received this telegram—"Stead, old fellow, will you put me up; I wish to stay with you; wire immediately; Joseph."—I did not know who Joseph was, but about 10 o'clock that evening the prisoner oame in—he said he wanted to stay with me, and wanted a little friendly advice—I did not give him any, but sent for an officer next morning—I said to him "How about that dishououred cheque?"—he said "Oh, that is a mere fleabite, tear it up"—he offered to give me an I O U, and he showed me a letter from Messrs. Jones, solicitors, and one from Witht all and Compton—he said he would not speak about it that night, he would see me in the morning—I let him have this money believing his statement to be true—I took the cheque to the Whitechapel Branch of the London and Westminster Bank the day after I received it, and the cashier marked it "Account not known"—I went to Mr. Ginard's office, he was out of town—I saw his clerk, and in consequence of what he told me I did not go there again—the prisoner owed me thirty—eight shillings besides the board and lodging—when arrested he said he thought it was rather rough on him, and if he gave me the 10l. he supposed it would be all right—I said it was in the hands of the police, and I could not interfere.

WALTER DREW . I am cashier at the Whitechapel Branch of the London and Westminster Bank, and have been so for many years—I know all those who have accounts there—no Alexander Giffard has any account there.

CHARLES RALPH I am housekeeper at Londsdale Chambers, Chanoery Lane, and have been for two years—no gentleman named Giffard has had an office there since I have been housekeeper.

WILLIAM COOPER (Detective E). I took the prisoner into custody—I read the warrant to him—he made no reply at first; after a few moments he said "Jones and Co. are my solicitors"—I stopped him and said any statement he made I should take in writing, and perhaps it might be used and in evidence against him—he said nothing more then—when we got near the station he said "If my solicitors pay him I suppose it would be all right; he won't go on with, it"—I made no reply—I found 2l. 11 3/4 d. on him—I have made inquiry in the whole of Chancery Lane, and have not been able to find Mr. Giffard.

Prisoner's Defence. The cheque was given to me by a person who owed me the amount, outside Lonsdale Chambers.


He then PLEADED GUILTY to a previous conviction at Cherken-well in December, 1883.— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-212
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

212. CHRISTOPHER CARROLL Feloniously forging and uttering an endorsement on an order for 30l., with intent to defraud.

MR. CARNSTOUN Prosecuted.

ALFRED JAMES BELL . I am a surgeon, of 1a, Cavendish Boad, St. John's Wood—on 1st March the prisoner came to me and said he had called for the rent that was due—I am a tenant of property for which Mr. C. W. Miller is agent—a quarter's rent was due—I gave the prisoner this cheque for 30l., payablo to Mr. Miller's order, and he gave me this receipt—he asked me not to cross the cheque, as he wished to got some money for the office.

Cross-examined by the Prisoner. This cheque was for the rent due at Christmas—I believe I gave you a cheque for the previous quarter, which you asked me not to cross.

CHARLES WILLIAM MILLER . I am an auctioneer and surveyor, of 8, Wellington Road, St. John's Wood—the prisoner was in my employment as managing clerk and cashier up to 7th July, 1884, when he absconded, and never returned—Dr. Bell is tenant of a Company for whom I am agent, and as such he had to pay rent to me—it was the prisoner's duty to receive money and give receipts from a printed form in a book, with counterfoils—this receipt, "C. Carroll," is the prisoner's writing but the receipt is not on the proper form—the endorsement, "Chas. W. Miller," on this cheque, is also the prisoner's writing—I did not authorise it—I think he accounted for this particular 30l., on a subsequent date, in the week ending March 29th—he kept a cash-book, in which it was his duty to make all entries of moneys received, and to account to me for any balance that he had in hand every Monday morning—any cheque that he collected should have been paid in to my bank account; he did not do so with the cheque, nor did he account I me for it on the Monday, as was his duty.

ROBERT WOOD . I am clerk to the prosecutor—the endorsement on this cheque is the prisoner's writing.

Cross-examined. I am not aware that your predecessor was in the habit of endorsing cheques to Mr. Miller's order; I did so on one or two occasions at the bank—I did not consider that was wrong—when I was paying them in I never tried to copy the prosecutor's signature—this is an attempt to copy it—the receipt is in your natural handwriting.


29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-213
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

213. CHRISTOPHER CARROLL was again indicted for feloniously forging and uttering an order for 8l. 9s. 7s., with intent to defraud.

GEORGE RUBARDT . I am a builder, of 2, Well Street, Regent's Park—on 26th April the prisoner came and taked for the quarter's rent of 48, Charles Street—I was not at home—I raid the cheque at the prosecutor's office, and the prisoner gave me this receipt—the cheque was crossed, payable at the St. John's Wood branch of the London and south-Western Bank.

CHARLES WILLIAM MILLER . The endorsement on this cheque is the prisoner's writing—I did not authorise him to endorse it—it was his duty to put cheques to order before me for endorsement—he has not accounted to me for the proceeds of this cheque.

Cross-examined by the Prisoner. The receipt is on the official form—the counterfoil would be open to any one in the office—it is in your handwriting.

WILLIAM JAMES DYSON . I am landlord of the Portland Arms, St. John's Wood—I have cashed cheques for the prisoner—this cheque is not endorsed by me—I can't speak to cashing this particular cheque; it am passed through my account with the—London and South Western Bank—I can't swear that I paid it in.

Cross-examined. I was in the habit of cashing cheques for prisoner's immediate predecessor—he never endorsed them in my presence.

WILLIAM ALFRED PITT . I am chief cashier at the St. John's Wood branch of the London and South-Western Bank—Mr. Dyson's firm

have an account there—this cheque for 8l. 9s. 7d. was paid into their account on 10th May.

Cross-examined. It is usual for a chief clerk or cashier to endorse cheques payable to the order of his employer; they have authority to do so when paying them in to the account.

WILLIAM HENRY HUDSON . I am chief cashier of the Hanover Square branch of the London and County Bank—Messrs. Robart have an account there—this cheque for 8l. 9s. 7d. was paid by us on 12th May to the London and South-Western Bank.

WILLIAM LEONARD (Policeman). On 23rd December prisoner was handed over to me by the police at Hove—I had a warrant for his arrest—I read it to him; it was for embezzlement—I told him he would probably be charged with forgery; if he had anything to say he might put it down in writing, as it would be used in evidence for or against him, so he had better be careful—he said "I have nothing to say here"—I asked him if he had any books or papers belonging to Mr. Miller—he said "No, I have not, I lost them in Antwerp."

MR. MILLER (Re-examined by the Prisoner). Your salary was 30s. a week, and a commission of 10 per cent.—you have never settled up your commission; you would have been entitled to something, but not to 300l., which you have taken.

Prisoner's Defence. I simply want to point out the fact that my salary was not sufficient for my requirements. I hoped to settle up at Christmas with my employer. I found I could not keep on at that salary and keep my house and my wife in a good position.


There was another indictment against the prisoner for a like offence. His defalcations in the nine months he was in the prosecutor's employ were stated to amount to 348l.— Fifteen Month's Hard Labour .

NEW COURT.Saturday, January 17th, 1885.

For the case of ROBERT BUNTON RALPH, tried this day, see Surrey Cases.

OLD COURT.—Monday, January 19th 1885.

Before Mr. Recorder.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-214
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown; Miscellaneous > no agreement

Related Material

214. CHARLES JOHNSON (24), THOMAS PICTON (25), JOSEPH LEE (20), and HENRY LUXFORD (20) , Robbery with violent on George Henry Pain, and stealing 17l. 10s. from his person.

MR. WARBURTON Prosecuted; MR. GEOGHEGAN appeared for Johnson, MR. BROUN for Picton, MR. MOYSES for Lee.

GEORGE HENRY PAIN . I live in Devonshire—about midnight on 8th December I was in Dunstan Street, Kingsland Road—previous to that I had been in the Acton Arms with three companions, where I changed a 5l. note—I received five sovereigns, which I put in my left-hand pocket, and I had sundry gold and some old silver coins in my pocket—when I came out and got to the corner of Dunstan Street, two men came behind me; one got his arm round my neck, the other hustled me against the wall; who they were I don't know—I thought at the moment it was one of my associates—they robbed me of 17l. 10s. in gold and nine silver coins—they rifled my left-hand trousers pocket—they ran away immediately

—I cannot identify any of the prisoners—I was shown some old coins at the station, and immediately identified them as those I had lost.

Cross-examined by MR. MOYSES. I had been in the public-house about three-quarters of an hour, with three friends, Carter, Mahoney, and Manning—I happened to meet them there promiscuously—I had known them 12 or 15 months—they were lodging in the same house with me in Dunstan Street.

GEORGE MANNING live at 28, Dunstan-Street, Shoreditch—I was at the Acton Arms with the prosecutor, Carter, and Mahoney—I saw Picton and Johnson there—they came out juet after us—I asked Carter to go on with Mr. Fain—we met a policeman; Johnson spoke to him and then went away—when I came to the corner of Dunstan Street I saw these men run round the corner—Johnson caught hold of Carter, and Picton caught hold of Pain—I ran into the house to get assistance, and when I came back I caught hold of one of them, and somebody knocked me down—I would not swear who it was, I believe it was Picton—I would not swear to any others—they ran away.

Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN Johnson remained behind—he took off his coat to fight with me—I did not hear what he said when he spoke to the policeman—there was no larking going on.

Cross-examined by MR. BROUN. I had had two half-pints of stout-andmild in the Acton Arms, and I had had two or three half-pints before—I swear to Picton being there.

FRANCIS CARTER . I am a clerk, and live at 28, Dunstan Street—I was in the Acton Arms with the prosecutor—I saw the four prisoners in there, I was in the same bar with them, drinking—I was called into the other bar to see Mr. Pain—I asked him if he would allow me to escort him home—we walked to the corner of Dunstan Street; when we got there I was seized from behind by Johnson and Picton, and at the same time, before I could recover myself, found that Mr. Fain was seized by Picton and Lee up against the wall, with his money taken; he said he had lost all he had—immediately after that Johnson was outside the door with his coat off, offering to fight Manning—between 3 and 4 o'clock that morning I saw Johnson and Picton at the station, and picked them out from a group, and on the morning of the 11th I identified the other two in the same way—this happened about 250 yards from the Acton Anns—I don't think Pain was hurt, it was done so quickly.

WILLIAM MAHONEY . I am a tailor, and live at 28, Dunstan Street—I was with Pain and Manning in the public-house—I saw him change a 5l. note—I noticed Johnson taking notice of it—I saw Picton there—after that Carter came in—I spoke to him, and he and Fain went out together—I and Manning went out a little while after, Johnson and Picton followed—Johnson spoke to a policeman and said "These fellows are" going to rob that old gentleman, I am going to see about it—when I got towards Dunstan Street I saw a scuffle or bother had taken place—I went up as quickly as possible, and I received a blow in the eye from Lee—Pain at that time was held up against the wall by Picton, with his pocket turned inside out, and he said to me, "Good God, Mahoney, every farthing is gone"—at this time Johnson was having a kind of street row with Manning—he had his coat off, and was having a scuffle with Manning—Picton and Lee had gone away—I afterwards picked up a sovereign—I did not see any other money about.

HENRY BLIGHT (Policeman N 88). From information I went to Hert—

ford Road, and there found Johnson—I took him in charge—he made no answer—later on I went to 15, Frederick Place, and there found Picton—I told him the charge; he made no reply—I took them to the station and they were identified—I took Luxton on the evening of the 11th—he said that he was in bed on the evening of the robbery—on the way to the station he said that Lee had been sleeping in the stables in Hertford Road—they wore identified by Carter and Mahoney—Johnson had been drinking.

Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN. I took Johnson about 250 or 300 yards from the Acton Arms, he was lying on the floor asleep; I shook him and told him the charge—he said nothing—he knew me—I believe that he gave information about two ottar men who were convicted of highway robbery in May, 1883.

Cross-examined by MR. MOYSES. The prosecutor and his witnesses, except Carter, were the worse for drink.

GEORGE MIDDLETON (Policeman N 157). I took Picton into custody—I told him the charge, he said nothing—I found on him three very old shillings and a sixpence with a hole in it, with some other silver—they were identified by Mr. Pain, who described them before they were produced—on the 11th I took Lee at some stables—I told him the charge, he made no answer at the time, but at the Court he said "I was there, I thought it was a fight, I did not know who it was"—I found no money on him.

JOHNSON, LEE, and LUXFORD— NOT GUILTY . As to PICTON, the Jury being unable to agree were discharged from returning any verdict.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-215
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

215. THOMAS PICTON was then charged before another Jury with the same offence. The same evidence was given.GUILTY of robbery without violence.

He PLEADED GUILTY to a previous conviction in June, 1880, at Clerkenwell.— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-216
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

216. JAMES GEORGE HUMPHRIES (38) , Unlawfully obtaining by false pretences from Thomas Lynforth Spiller 75l., with intent to defraud; also other sums from other persons.

MR. JARVIS Prosecuted; MR. LYNE Defended.

THOMAS LYNFORTH SPILLER . I live at 27, Sheldon Street, Bryanston Square—in June last I saw an advertisement in—the Daily Telegraph for a collector—I replied to it, and received this letter in the prisoner's writing—I have seen him write. (This requested witness to state his age, and if prepared with a deposit and references.) In consequence of that letter I went to see the prisoner at 3, Queen Victoria Street, in a room on the top floor, partitioned off; a Mr. Bennett was present—the prisoner said I should have to collect large sums of money, and he should require 75l. security—I said that it, was a large sum—he gave me an agreement to read over—I agreed to sign it, which I did at a second interview, and Mr. Bennett witnessed it and paid the 75l. in seven 10l. notes and 5l. in gold, and he gave me this promissory note, promising to return the amount at five per cent, interest in case of leaving—he gave me a list of persons to call upon—I entered upon my duties on the Monday—I called upon the persons, with the result that about three names were there and all the others were gone—I was collecting for six weeks or more; I had continual lists given me—I found about five persons—I found the houses with one

exception in Book Church Lane, that had, been pulled down—some said they would send—some denied owing anything; one promised to pay—I never got any money—I was doing this for nearly three months—I received my first month's salary, 6l. 6s. 3d., with interest on the amount, and I afterwards received some small amounts after continually pressing—I received numerous letters from the prisoner, and he gave me a written notice to terminate the agreement—I never got book my deposit.

Cross-examined. I have received altogether about 108l. 11s.—he gave me a promissory note for the amount—he showed me his books and I saw several accounts in them written out, and told me that these represented ready money tickets—he said that part of my duty would be tracing absconding debtors—I called on several parties who had gone away without giving addresses—I went to Back Church Lane, and the house had been pulled down but I did not ask when—I went back and told Mr. Humphries—I have seen this book (produced) in the office, but it was not shown to me at the time, it was not kept by any person in the office—two or three persons were afterwards in the same situation which I filled—I have heard of Messrs. Tulloch, this is their account—I called on Mr. Van. Bragg, but did not get any money from him—I cannot say whether I called again; there are two Van Braggs—I called on a Van Ossory of King Street two or three times; he told me not to call again, he would pay the money—this is my entry in the diary: "Paid messenger out of pocket, 1s."—the prisoner was employed by Mr. Noble, a cheesemonger of Essex Road, who was liquidating his affairs, and I was employed by the prisoner to assist in arranging them—No. 3, Victoria Street, is partitioned off into two offices on one side, and one on the other—I have never been into any of the others; one on each side was locked up—Humphries led me to believe that he was doing a large business—I had no reason to doubt that the entries in this book were false—I saw the names of some leading firms in the City of London in it—I did not call on any of them—the balance owing to me is 81l. 7s., 75l. deposit and my salary and interest—I have only received 6s. 6d. interest.

Re-examined. Having seen this circular of 1878, with branches all over the place, I imagined it was correct, and on the faith of that statement I parted with my money—I found that two or three persons were living entities, and the rest were all gone, and no one paid a halfpenny—some of the amounts were over and some under 10l.

By the COURT. I do not know Mr. Buce the solicitor; I have been there for Mr. Humphries for letters, and he has invariably been out—I wrote to the London and South-Western Bonk, and they declined to answer my letter; that was immediately after I went into the service—I do not know of my own knowledge that there was an account with the London and South-Western Bank—I saw bank booke, in the office, but I do not know what bank, they were not shown to me—Russell was not there while I was there, or Bell or Dixon; there were several others, but they have not appeared here—two others were collecting at the same time that I was.

By MR. LYNE. I have seen this pass-book (produced) lying in the office, or one similar to it—I cannot say that I have seen that other book, but I have seen books lying about—I never saw any register which was available for subscribers—I do not know whether any persons on this lift subscribed at all; I never saw it to my knowledge.

JAMES WILLIAM RUSSELL . I live at 87, Mason Street, Hammersmith—in October last I saw an advertisement in the Daily Chronicle—I replied and received this letter. (Requesting him to call at 32, Victoria Street next day and bring one reference and 15l. cash deposit.) I called there and saw the prisoner—he told me he was the manager of the City Mercantile Association, and wanted a clerk and collector, and as the duty was to collect large sums he should want a deposit of 15l., and to secure the situation I must deposit 5l., which I did—the prospectus said that the Association was established in 1878—I left, and on 4th October I receded this letter. (From J. Humphries to the witness, stating that he would call on him on Monday morning with the agreement for signature.) He brought this agreement; we both signed it—he told me my duties—I paid him the extra 10l., and he gave me this promissory note for 15l. (At 14 days after date)—he gave me this list of names to call upon, and sent me these other two lists—I called on all the people, but they had gone years ago, and at most of the places they did not know the name—I found no individual at the address in the list—he told me on Wednesday to call on a person at Turnham Green, who would give me 6l., and said that he had come all the way from Windsor without money, and could I let him have some to get some bill stamps—he got 1l. out of me, and I never saw him again till he was at the Mansion House—I had deposited this certificate with him as security. (A certificate of 30 shares in the state Consols Company, 10s. per share paid)—that Company no longer exists—I spent a lot of money, but never collected a penny—I waited at the office all day one day to see him, but it was never open—it was furnished with an old chair with the back off it—I never saw a table, only what was fixed to the wall, belonging to the office—I saw a large book which I took to be a ledger, I never saw the inside—I never got any salary—I wrote him several letters, and received this: "Dear Sir,—Mrs. Humphries is so ill I am afraid to leave her at present. I will send on my servant with your money that she may bring back letters and papers"—he did not send, but I received this letter from Mrs. Humphries stating that Mr. Humphries was very ill—I never got my money back or any salary.

Cross-examined. There were no other clerks at the same time that I know of—there might have been another clerk without my knowledge—I stayed a fortnight, and then gave a fortnight's notice—I took his promissory note because I thought he was a gentleman.

By the COURT. I parted with my money because I believed he was manager of the Society, which was a genuine commercial enterprise, and required a clerk and collector at 6l. a week.

ROBERT WALTON . I live at 173, Carlton Road, Kilbura—in October last I advertised in the Daily Telegraph for a situation of trust, and received this reply: "Dear Sir,—We want a gentleman who knows town well to collect. Will have to find 20l. to deposit and one reference. Salary 7l. and expenses. Reply at once. Douglas, 4, Adelaide Square, October 16th"—I went there and saw the prisoner; I said, "Are you Mr. Douglas?"—he never answered, but went downstairs and sent my letter in—I afterwards saw the prisoner and asked him if he was Mr. Douglas—he said, "No, my name is Humphries"—I asked why he advertised in another name—he said, "You have done the same thing; you have advertised in initials not your own"—he said that he was the

secretary of the City Mercantile Association, 32, Victoria Street, and wanted a young man as clerk and to collect debts, and he wanted 20l. security—I said that I could not part with 20l. as I had lost a large amount just before, and asked if he would take 10l.—he said yes, and asked if I would wire him to Windsor that night that I would go on Monday—I went on the Monday, and he asked if I had brought the money—I said "No"—he said, "I know the part of the country you belong to, and I will do you a favour by taking 6l. 12s., and you will take no wages for three weeks"—I gave him 6l. 12s.—he gave me a promissory note for 10l., and I signed this agreement—he gave me a list of persons to call on—I called on every one, but most of them had gone away—I got one amount of 6s., which I paid to him—I got no salary, and have not received my deposit back—I never saw Russell till after my time expired—I went to the office, but it was always closed.

Cross-examined. I have been inside the office—the furniture was a chair and a desk, no table, but I only just looked inside the door—I made no inquiries before I paid him my money because I thought he was a gentleman—I saw no prospectus.

GEORGE BELL . On October 31st I answered an advertisement in the Standard, "Occupation in a London business, capital 30l., &c."—I wrote to the address, Bow Lane, Spital, Windsor, got a reply, and went to see the defendant—he said he was very glad to see me, told me what the business was, and I parted with 30l. on the faith of his being the bond fide manager—he gave me the name of Jonathan Smith, of Bristol, as a reference—I signed an agreement—he gave me this list of names to collect—I called on them, but only found three of the lot—I got no money from them—I never got any salary or my 30l. back, but I got 10s. towards my expenses—I had numerous letters promising to pay.

Cross-examined. I am not aware that the prisoner was apprenticed to Jonathan Smith of Bristol—you will find a letter here from one of their travellers, saying that Humphries had not been in their employ unless it was many years ago (produced).

GUILTY .— Five Years' Penal Servitude

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-217
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

217. EDWARD CHUTER (23) , Stealing four tame fowls, the property of Frederick Taylor.

MR. BRUN Prosecuted; MR. MOYSES Defended.

FREDERICK TAYLOR . I live at Brentford and keep fowls—I saw them safely bolted up on 23rd December and missed four next morning—I found feathers and blood at the spot where they had been killed; this (produced) is the head of one, I know it by the head; it is half Brahma, half Dorking, and this was the only one of the four which had feathers on its legs—the left wings of all were cut.

ELIZABETH GREGORY . I am in Mr. Taylor's service—I missed some fowls on 24th December and told him—I identified a fowl at the police-court by the head, feet, and wings, the left wing had been cut.

Cross-examined. They were the Brahma and Dorking breed, which is very common—the wings had been cut six or eight weeks—I Identify this head.

WALTER CHESTER (Policeman). On 24th December, at 7.10 a.m. I saw the prisoner in Boston Road, Hanwell—his pockets were bulky—I asked him what he had got—he said "Nothing"—another man was with him—they bolted; I chased him and lost sight of him—he Chucked

a fowl away—I picked it up, and Mr. Taylor identities it—there are feathers still on it.

Cross-examined. It was just light—I knew him and the other man also—the prisoner had a black coat on, not blue—I got about six yards from him—this coat was brought to the station by the woman he lives with and his brother—he was taken on the 31st.

JOHN RICHARDSON . I went to the prisoner's house several times on December 31st, but only saw the woman he lives with—I met him that night at 11 o'clock in Ealing Road, Brentford, he turned down a court—I said "What is your name?"—he said "Smith"—I said "Where do you live?"—he said "Here, at No. 1"—I said "Can you refer me to any one who knows you?"—he said" Yes"—a woman came out, and I said "What is this man's name? Smith, is it not?"—she said "No, Chuter"—I said "I shall take you for stealing fowls at Brentford"—he said "You make a mistake, it is not me"—he lives at Hanwell, not at Brentford.

Cross-examined. He was in the neighbourhood, and he told me all the people there knew him.

WALTER CHUTER (Re-examined). He was between two and three miles from the prosecutor's house when I saw him—I knew him well—I did not find him for a week, as he went away from his house—the man who was with him has not been seen since.


He then PLEADED GUILTY** to a conviction at this Court in May, 1880.— Six Months' Hard Labour.

NEW COURT.—Monday, January 19th, 1885, and

OLD COURT.—Tuesday, January 20, 1885.

Before Mr. Common Serjeant.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-218
VerdictsGuilty > lesser offence; Not Guilty > no evidence
SentencesImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

218. WILLIAM FFOLLIOTT REGAN (28) and FRANK STEWART BASTOW (30) , Unlawfully obtaining by false pretences from Henry Bligh and other persons a polo cart, and from John Godfrey 19 cows and four horses, and from Eugene John Arnold six cows, with intent to defraud. Other Counts for conspiracy and alleging an intent to steal.

MESSRS. MONTAGU WILLIAMS and MEAD Prosecuted; MR. BESLEY defended Bastow, and MR. GRAIN defended Regan.

HENRY BLIGH . I am a member of the firm of Bligh Brothers, carriage builders of Canterbury—in October, 1883, I was introduced to Bastow and received this letter from him in the same month. (This was dated, Hugh Kraal, 46, Queen Victoria Street, and requested him to send drawings and prices of village carts, stating that he had come to live in England and might require two or three traps if the one suited him.) Negotiations took place, and ultimately I supplied a polo cart to Bastow of the value of 34l. 18s.—he wanted short credit, and I gave him three weeks or more—at the expiration of the time I wrote for payment and received several letters making excuses, dated from 3, Lawrence Lane, Cheapside, in November, 1883—ultimately I drew on him a bill at three months. (This bill was dated January 16, 1884, drawn by Bligh Brothers on F. Bastew, 3, Lawrence Lane, Cheapside, for 34l. 18s., at three months, and accepted payable at Messrs. Cooper, Son, and Co., 3, Lawrence Lane.) The bill was presented when it became due; and dishonoured—I did not see Bast of for some little time after that; when I first saw him after it, it was at the

Westminster Chambers, Victoria Street—the names on take door then were Ffolliott, Nephew, and Co., and the Alberta Land and Cattle Ranche Company, Limited—Bastow then told me he was hard up, but that he could get me some shares in the New Victoria Colliery Company—I did not accept that offer—I did not call again there—I saw Regan on that day, which was about the end of October, 1884, before I saw Bastow—I asked him if I could see Bastow—Regan said "Bastow was only employed there as clerk and manager"—he seemed to think it impertinence of me coming there to see Bastow, he did not say so—previous to that I had discovered the address, The Poplars, Beulah Hill, Norwood, and had been there—I saw there Mrs. Bastow and had a conversation with her, in consequence of which I went and looked in the coach-house, where I saw the cart I had sold—when I saw Bastow I asked him how he accounted for the cart being in the coach-house, as he had told us it was previously sold—he said it was sold to his friend Regan by auction—I told him Mrs. Bastow said it had been sold—he said Regan lived at the same house, The Poplars—we afterwards put the matter in our solicitor's hands—a writ was issued, I understood—we never got any money—in January, 1885, I saw this case in the papers and wrote to Marshall and was brought to the police-court as a witness. (A letter dated 29th July, 1884, Liedenberg, Lower Norwood, from Bastow to Blyth Brothers, was read, stating that circumstances had compelled him to sell the cart by auction, and that if they wished they could write to the auctioneer's for the gentleman's name who had purchased it; and that proceedings would he of no use, as he could not pay. Also a letter of 3rd November, 1884, stating that he had been compelled by pressure to sell the trap he had purchased to a gentleman living with him, and that he should be glad if the matter could be arranged through his solicitor.) They failed to settle it—I never had any money.

Cross-examined by MR. BESLEY. The actual parting with the property was in October, 1883; the first time I saw Regan was October, 1884—his name was never mentioned to me and I had no transactions with him at all—my carts were exhibited at the Agricultural Hall, and it was in reference to one of my carts seen there that Bastow wrote to me—we could have refused to deliver the cart till the money was paid—he was introduced through Mr. Dears, whom we knew, and took as a reference, asking for no other—the police have not told me he had just come to England from the Cape of Good Hope; I don't suggest he had not, I have only his word for it—Bastow's house, the Poplars, was a detached house with a small garden and paddocks; I don't know the rents in that neighbourhood, I should think it was not over 100l. a year—I understood we could not touch the furniture because there was a marriage settlement—Bastow did not tell me that when my solicitor sued him he offered to pay 5l. down and 5l. a month, he offered me 10l.—I did not say I would never put anything in that solicitor's hands again—I don't think I have said that all I wanted was my money, I might have said so—Mrs. Bastow said she would pay me out of her own income.—I said at the police-court that I had been asked to attend by Marshall, and "I don't charge Bastow with anything"—I will take the responsibility of charging him—Marshall has not coached me up to say that—I saw him three times last week while waiting here, we have not talked about it—I believe the police have the cart—I have not heard that if we gained the prosecution I should get the cart back.

Re-examined. Mrs. Bastow offered me 5l. with a promise that we should not lose a penny—that was after the prosecution had commenced, and when the cart was at Westminster—I refused to withdraw—I received these letters of November 15th and 21st.

JOHN MOUNTFORD GODFREY . I live at Milltown, County Kerry, and am a farmer—in July last a friend called my attention to an advertisement in a Dublin paper, in consequence of which I communicated with Ffolliot, Nephew, and Company, 1, Westminster Chambers—I received an answer on paper headed "1, Westminster Chambers, cable address Ffolliot, London, in writing Ffolliot, Nephew and Company. The Alberta Land and Cattle Ranche Company, Limited"—it was signed Ffolliot, Nephew, and Co.—I afterwards received the letter (marked 30) headed in the same way. (Stating that three first-class fine Kerry cows in calf at 14l. were required, requesting a wire if they were shipped that day, and adding that a man need not be sent with them, that if successful they could depend on further orders.) We sent the three Kerry cows—the price was 36l. 1s. altogether—we were paid for those by cheque—we received this letter of August 26th. (Stating that the cattle had arrived yesterday, and that they were more than pleased with them; that they discharged their accounts by cheque on the first of each month, that this would be their rule in future, but that on this occasion they would at onct send a cheque if desired.) After that we received a cheque which was duly honoured, and we received a letter with the same heading ordering more cattle, and consequently we sent eight more, amounting in all to 116l., about the middle of September—we did not receive a cheque on 1st October, the date when it should have been sent according to the arrangement—we received another order, in consequence of which I came to London with eleven cows at 160l., making 276l. due to us—I arrived in London on 4th October, and on the 6th, Monday, I went to the Westminster Chambers, where I saw Regan, and told him the cows were coming to Paddington, and ought to have arrived at this time—I gave him the order for them that he might get them—I asked if he had sent a cheque for 116l. for the former lot—he said "No"—I pressed him for the cheque for 116l.—he said that when he had my telegram from Dublin to say that I was coming he did not send the cheque—he said he could not give it to me then, as his partner was away on the Continent, and that he could not write me a cheque without his name being on it as well—he said he expected him back in a few days, and that his partner was his uncle, and that he was awaiting a telegram from him, Ffolliott—I said I could not adhere to the old arrangement, that I must have cash on delivery—he said "That is business, I will see what I can do for you on Wednesday"—I called on Wednesday, and other days up to Monday the 8th, when I saw Regan—he said his uncle had not returned; that he would give me an acceptance; and that if I was anxious for the money I could discount it; and that if a cheque was sent I could return the acceptance—the acceptance was dated the 7th—I took it, and at the same time he gave me 15l. for present expenses, which I wanted—I told him I had some horses coming acrosi to Weyhill, and I wanted money. (The bill was drawn by Godfrey on W. F. Regan for 261l. 5s. 6d., at three months, dated 7th October, 1884.) 261l. 5s. 6d. with 15l.; makes up the 276l.—I sent that bill to my agent in

Ireland, Mr. Huggard—I had telegraphed for some horses before that, I and expected them on that day—I mentioned to Regan they were coming to Weyhill Fair, near Andover in Hampshire—he said perhaps he might buy them—he spoke to his clerk and sent for Mr. Bastow; and Mr. Bastow was then introduced to me as his friend—nothing was said about his being his partner—he asked Bastow to go to Bristol to see the horses, and said "If they suit perhaps I will buy them"—he did not say for what purpose he wanted them—it was arranged that Bastow I should go to Bristol, and that I should meet him there next morning, when I expected the horses to arrive by boat—I met him, he saw the five horses, and ultimately I agreed to sell them for 115l. for the lot—I delivered him the horses—he said "You know the position, Mr. Regan is away, and he cannot give you a cheque; and Mr. Regan has given me this bill to give you, filled up except the amount"—I took it—I gave it back to him afterwards—it was drawn in the same way as the other one on Regan personally, dated about the 9th at three months—about that time, after I received the second bill, I received a telegram from my agent, Huggard, to whom I had sent the first—in consequence I went to London with the bill to see Regan—I said to him "The bill I sent to Ireland is no use, the telegram I received says, Regan's bill no use, cannot possibly be negotiated, I want the money"—he said "I cannot give it until my partner arrives," and that he was short enough himself till he came back, "I cannot issue a cheque without his signature"—he named a day on which he said he would give me some money—I telegraphed to Huggard, he came across, and I consulted him—before that I saw Began again, he asked me to take a seat in the waiting-room at Westminster Chambers—he said he was going to see a friend who he thought, would purchase some of the cattle, and he could let me have some money then—that was 11 o'clock, I waited two or three hours, he did not return—before I returned to Ireland I went to the office with Huggard and saw Regan—he said, "I did not see my friend, and I thought the office would be shut, so I did not come back—he said he expected a telegram from his partner, and it had not arrived he thought, and he thought he must have gone farther into the country—he made an appointment, and the following day I went to see him with Haggard at two o'clock—he said he could not pay, as his partner was away then, and that if I would go home it would be all right, a cheque would follow me—that day or another day (I think we called again) he said he would not pay except into a Court of Justice—I asked him to pay me for the first lot of cattle and the horses, and said that he could let the second lot of cattle lie over till another month—he at first said that was fair—I asked for the horses and cattle back—he would not give them—back he said we could have the cattle valued, I to find one valuer and he another, as we disputed the value, he saying they were too dear—I said I did not know a man here to do it—I did not get my cattle nor my money back—I don't think the horses were ever offered back, he did not dispute their value, but said he liked them very much—he asked me to take the cattle to Croydon Fair, and see what I could get for them—I declined to go there—when I supplied the cows and horses I thought they were a very good company, and that I had done very good dealings with them—I was led to believe from the letters that the cattle were to be shipped to America—those letters I have destroyed or mislaid—two of the eleven cattle I have

since seen in the green-yard, Lower Norwood—the police showed me them—four I have Been at Torquay in Miss Wright's possession—if they were sold at 14l. each that would be about the value I put on them, and what I sold them for—some of Miss Wright's were not of the eight—four of them were from the batch of eleven—I have only seen one of the batch of eight, that was at the greenyard—out of the eleven, besides these five, I have identified five in Mr. Blade's possession—these five are 14l. each—I can't exactly swear that they would be under value at 13l.—I bought a great many of them separately—I saw four of the horses in the possession of Mr. Leppard at Caterham, one in the possession of Mr. Jayne which the police showed me.

Cross-examined by MR. GRAIN. He told me that he sold some of the first lot of cattle in England—I delivered the second lot before I knew where he sold them—he told me shortly afterwards that he was going to sell them in England—I supposed he wanted the horses for sale in England—he said nothing to the contrary—I know that neither Bastow nor Regan had sold any of the horses, they had them in their possession and the police have them now—I have actually got them back, they were sent to Caterham Junction to grass at 4s. a week, I did not get them back in fair condition—one of Regan's bills was due on 1 0th January and the other the day after that—I don't know if Regan was taken in custody on 27th November, from about that time till the present he has been in prison—I had purchased these horses, I was not selling them on commission.

Cross-examined by MR. BESLEY. I first mentioned the horses, and it was on the proposal about six horses that Regan told the clerk to call Bastow in, and I saw Bastow for the first time; that was 8th October—the horses were my own property—I had bought some of them in August as a speculation to sell—I used my own judgment in bringiig them to England—Regan asked Bastow if he would go and look at the horses—the first consignment of cattle was to Ffolliott, Nephew, and Co., for which we got a cheque, the other consignment of eight and eleven were to Ffolliott, Nephew, and Co.—I did not see Bastow in connection with this—I asked him first about 140l. or 150l. for the horses, and came down from that to 115l.—some of them were small cobs, none of them were 15 hands high; one of them was dose to 15, two of them were a little over 12—they were a rough breed, and I told him they had suffered from the voyage—the proprietor of the yard said they were not worth more than 15l.—we came in, and each put down in writing what he thought—I had put 115l., and he put 100l.; I would not give way, and he took the horses at my price, 115l.—he said before he started Regan had given him a bill of exchange in blank, and he would fill it up for the amount—we dined together at Bristol—I took the horses to the railway, they were booked for Paddington I think; he booked them—Bastow gave me no money for my trouble and expenses; he asked me what I was going to stand him—I said I was rather short—he said "Don't shorten yourself for me"—I said "I can give it to you when Mr. Regan gives me the cheque; I could give you a cheque, but I am overdrawn at the bank, and perhaps it won't be cashed"—I gave him a cheque for 5l., which was dishonoured—the next time I saw Bastow he was in custody, and has been locked up ever since—when committed for trial Marshall asked the Magistrate for an order to take possession of

these cattle and horses—Bastow said he had nothing to do with them, he might do what he pleased with them, and Regan's Counsel said that if I took an account of what the cattle and horses were sold for, and put it against the 276l. bill, he would not object—that was some time before the bill had matured—it was understood at the police-court that the bill would be dealt with at that time—I have since sold two of the cows for 10l. each, they were two little ones, and three horses; one sold for 26l., another for 17l., the greenyard had injured that—there would hare been more chance of making profit by waiting; one would have been worth 50l. in the Row next year—Bastow said nothing to me about sending the cattle to Canada.

Re-examined. The offer with reference to selling cattle only applied to those not sold to other persons—the condition of this in the greenyard would not improve—the one sold for 26l. was well taken care of in the greenyard at Norwood, the others did not look well.

JOHN FAYRBROTHER . I am clerk to Messrs. Vickers advertising agents—I have seen Mr. Bastow in the Victoria office—this letter came by past. (JOHN CLEMENT WASHBOURNE, who had formerly been in the prisoner's service, stated that he wrote the letter produced at Bastow's directions. The letter was dated December 11th, 1884, from 1, Westminster Chambers, addressed J. W. Vickers, requesting that the enclosed advertisement should have six insertions in the "Times" during two consecutive weeks, and two insertions in the "Live Stock Journal." The advertisement was to the effect that a gentleman going abroad wished to sell four pure Kerry cows, three in calf, at 14l. each; also four shorthorns, two in calf at 17l. each.) I inserted the advertisements.

SAMUEL ARTHUR STANBURY . I am manager of the London and Southwestern Bank, Wimbledon—Mrs. Bastow, the prisoner's wife, has an account there—on 17th October there was paid into that account this cheque drawn by Blanche L. Wright on Messrs. Wright and Co., Nottingham, in favour of Mr. F. Began or order, 56l., and it is endorsed "F. Began."

JAMES ANDREW SLATTER . I live at Ilbury House, Deddington, between Oxford and Banbury, and keep Park Farm there—I purchased 10 cows from Bastow on 10th October, for 138l.—having seen the advertisement in the Live Stock Journal, I went to The Poplars, Norwood, where Bastow showed me the cows in a paddock there—he said he was going to reside in America, that he had been keeping them for a hobby, but that he was giving his farm up on 29th September, and that he wanted to get rid of his cows in the paddock immediately, and that they would calve at Christmas—I would not have bought them if I had known they would not—Godfrey has picked five of them out.

Cross-examined by MR. BESLEY. All 10 were to calve at Christmas—I don't know if it is a common trick amongst Irish drovers to say that cows are going to calve more quickly—they are not going to calve; some of them are barren, some will calve some day.

Re-examined. My cheque was drawn in favour of his London agent, Mr. Regan.

GEORGE LEPPARD . I am a farmer at Colsdon, Osterham, Surrey—on 25th October Bastow, whom I had not known before, came and said he had been recommended to me, and "I want to put four colts here for the winter to keep them"—I agreed to take them in for 4s. a week each—

two came in Bastow's name and two in Regan's that night—I received these letters, one signed Regan and one Bastow, but both in the same writing—I kept the horses till they were taken by the police.

(J.C. WASHBOURNE was re-examined, and stated that in his opinion the letter of the 25th was in Boston's writing; it said that he sent two horses by bearer, describing them, to be kept at 4s. a week, and was signed "W. F. Regan.")

Cross-examined by MR. BESLEY. Mrs. Bastow came to me after Bastow was in custody and asked me to make out the bill to Regan for the four horses, and he would pay me; it was on 6th December.

Re-examined. Mr. Godfrey had seen the horses and identified all four.

ABRAHAM BURTON JAYNE . I am a job master at 43, Church Road, Upper Norwood—on 21st November I received this letter, signed "A. Bastow, The Poplars, Beulah Hill, Upper Norwood." (Asking his terms for breaking-in a young mare half broken.) I went to the Poplars and saw Bastow—he said he wanted it broken to ride and drive; it was his own property, he got it at Bristol—I took it home and kept it—Mr. Godfrey has identified it.

Cross-examined by MR. BESLEY. It has been sold for 26l.; it would have been worth about 50l. if it had been kept till May—it was knocked down by the police, and being in the greenyard its value was depreciated.

EUGENE JOHN ARNOLD . I live at Jersey, and am a breeder and exporter of Jersey cattle—shortly after 2nd October last year I saw an advertisement in the Jersey Times with reference to some cattle required to purchase; address, Ffoiliott Nephew—I wrote to Regan inconsequence to the address, 1, Westminster Chambers, given in the advertisement, and received this answer, signed "W. F. Regan." (This was dated 21st October, and stated that he would buy six Jersey cows in good condition at 20l. each; that if pleased with the six he might enter into a contract for a weekly supply, as he was shipping weekly to the States, being the owner of 100,000 acres, and that if he could not send weekly he had better not send at all.) I telegraphed on receiving that on the Tuesday, and shipped six cattle on the Thursday morning, 23rd October, of the value of 30l. a head, 180l. for the six—I sent my man Tarrant with them, with certain instructions and a letter to W. F. Regan, and an invoice. (This was "23rd October. Bought of E. J. Arnold," with a description of the cattle; "terms each." Amount 180l. Paid by draft, and there was a receipt signed by Tarrant.) When Tarrant came back to Jersey, after some delay, he gave me a bill signed by Regan, not made payable at a bank. (This was dated 27th October, 1884. I, Westminster Chambers. Fourteen days after date I promise to pay to the order of E. J. Arnold, Jersey, 180l. for value received" and signed "W. F. Regan" and endorsed "Pay to the order of John Miller: E. J. Arnold") I received four letters and wrote five. (One of them received stated that he had not yet received the pedigree, and requested it should be sent.) That was after I had received the promissory note, and while it was current—I wrote this letter. (Enclosing four pedigrees, and saying that the fifth should be sent the next day, but that he should not deliver the certificates until the draft was honoured; that their terms, with strangers especially, were cash, as the demand for the cows was three times greater than the supply.) I have never received the 180l.—when the note was presented it was dishonoured—my London agent was Mr. Miller; I authorised

him to make inquiries in the matter—he is here—I have not seen my cattle since.

Cross-examined by MR. GRAIN. I never saw Regan before I saw him at the police-court; I never heard of him before this.

HENRY TARRANT . I am employed by Arnold as a travelling cattle Agent—I live at Jersey—on 24th October I came over with six of Mr. Arnold's cows with rugs and halters—I arrived at Waterloo about ten minutes past two on Friday 24th October—Mr. Arnold had given me verbal instructions what to do, and a letter addressed to Regan—I saw Regan at Waterloo—when I arrived he was standing in the booking-office—after I had signed for the cattle Regan said "Have you come with these cattle? Mr. Arnold had no occasion to send a man with them"—I said it was Mr. Arnold's rule to send a man to receive the cash and to take charge of the cattle across the water—the cattle were brought to the Waterloo office by the porters, and I said "Here they are, Sir"—Regan said "We cannot remove them till seven o'clock at night through the streets of London: you had better send them round to the Waterloo stables, and in the meantime you had better jump up with me and come to the office for a settlement"—there was a Hansom's cab there—I suggested that I should give the animals some hay and water as they had had nothing in the train—I went to his office after I had attended to the cows—I got to 1, Westminster Chambers, about three; the name up was Ffolliott, Nephew, and Company; Alberta Cattle Ranche Company—I waited there till about ten minutes past four in the waiting room; he appeared to have other gentlemen doing business with him—I wanted to get back to Jersey that night—I was called in; he said "You will be too late for the bank to-night if I give you a cheque, you had better come in the morning and I will settle with you, and you will get back to Jersey on Sunday morning"—I asked him what time the office would be open—he said 11, but that he might not be there before 11.30—I gave him the order for the delivery of the cows, by means of which he could obtain them, on the condition I was paid the next morning—the next morning, Saturday, the 25th, I was there at 11; I found a boy at the door—I think Mr. Regan came just before 12—I had to wait till about 1 before I was called in—I demanded cash for the cattle—the prisoner told me he could not do it, their conditions were 14 days, by bill; he said "If my partners in the firm were here I might be able to pay you," but that they were out buying Herefords, that they were going to make a great shipment to America—I asked him what line they were going by—he said he had not exactly arranged yet—I asked him if my six little Jerseys were going with them—he said "Yes"—I said "When are you going to ship them?"—he told me the latter end of next week, but that he could not tell me the line—I asked him the line; he said he had not yet decided—I demanded to know where the cattle were, but he said "I will give you this bill; I cannot pay you before 14 days"—I said "I cannot take this, Sir; my instructions are to receive cash from my employer"—he said "You must have this promissory note"—I thought it was a bad job then—I demanded the cattle or cash—he told me I was a very stupid fellow, or pretended to be one, if I did not understand a bill of that kind—I said "Who are your bankers?"—he told me the Imperial Banking Company—I said "It is of no use, I must have my cattle back," and I wanted to know where he had put them to—he began to go off, and told

me to go to hell and look for them—I thought he was a gentleman previous to that—he said "Mr. Arnold must be d—hard up if he cannot wait 14 days for cash," and I was to take the bill or nothing—I did not know what to do—I handed the letter I had brought, and this invoice to Regan—the prisoner opened it—he would only give me this bill, he said; I must take that, and I receipted the invoice—I told Mr. Regan I was going back to Jersey that night, but I went to consult with Mr. Miller, to see if he could help me—I looked for the cows all day Sunday—I have seen none of them since—I went to Waterloo the first thing on Sunday, and found they were gone.

Cross-examined by MR. GRAIN. I have brought a good many cattle over for shows, and to America—when I saw Regan at Waterloo and said I wanted cash, he said "Not a word has been said about cash up to this time"—he did not ask me for the cows' pedigrees on Friday, he did on Saturday night—I can't remember if I said at the police-court that on Friday he asked me for them at the station, and that I said they would follow—he asked me on Saturday morning for them—I took the promissory note of my own accord—I had got the cows at the station, they could not be got from the train till I had signed for then—I gave him the paper on the condition that I was going to the office to receive the money that night—I did not say at the police-court that it was on my suggestion on the Friday that he took the order to receive the cows in the morning—I can't remember if I said so—he said he was going to remove them at 7 o'clock—I asked him if he had any stables ready for them—he said "We must put them round the Waterloo stables, we can't remove them before 7 this evening"—I said "You had better take them over at once," because I wanted my cash, and I wanted to be back at Jersey by the Sunday—I telegraphed to Mr. Arnold on Friday, saying I should have the money to-morrow, and I telegraphed asking if I should take a bill—I took the bill just before the answer came back—I showed the telegram to the prisoner—he said "I can't sit here, I must close my office; I can't be badgered by you," and I said as I had no reply I would take the bill—I got the reply as I was coming out of the office—I took a sovereign from him as a present for bringing the cattle over, and went away, expressing myself satisfied with everything—I thought I was going to get my cash in the morning, he had promised me the cash—I have kept the sovereign.

Re-examined. The sovereign was given me on Friday night—the telegram on the Saturday which I showed to Regan said "My terms are not Regan's terms; if a banker's draft accept"—I had then taken the bill and gone out, and he had closed the place.

JOHN MILLER . I live at Black Horse Yard, Clement Street, Whitechapel, and am a cattle shipper, and Mr. Arnold's agent—on the 25th October I saw Tarrant, he showed me a promissory note and made a statement to me—on the 29th October I accompanied him to 1, Westminster Chambers—we waited about an hour in the middle of the day—Regan got out of a cab, Tarrant pointed him out to me, and we both followed him upstairs into the office—Regan said "What do you want?"—I said "I have come on behalf of Mr. Arnold about that worthless piece of paper," alluding to the promissory note—he said "You ain't going to be such a thick-headed fellow as this fellow sitting here," referring to Tarrant, "you b——thick-headed Britishers are all alike"—I said

"You will find me thick-headed too before I have done with you; give us the money or the cows"—he said "I shall give you neither"—I Said "This bill is no use"—he said "It is not a bill, it is a draft"—I said "Where are you going to pay this draft?"—he said "This office, let Mr. Arnold send the bill here the night before it becomes due and I will pay it on the Jersey Banking Company"—I said "If you intend to pay it, it is very likely you will have to pay it through the London and Westminster Bank"—he said "Suppose I don't pay it through the London and Westminster Bank, I suppose you will put it in the hands of your solicitor?"—I said "I shall do nothing of the kind, I shall take a different course, what you little think for"—I again asked for the cows or the money—he said "You will have neither," and told me to go to hell, and I left—after the bill was returned dishonoured I went again on the 14th November—I saw Regan, he had a piece of paper in his hand; he said "Look here," holding it up, I could not see it—he said "I paid it into the London and Westminster Bank"—I said "What branch"—he said "St. James's-Square; if you have power to take it up, you can take it up"—I said "Don't let me go there if you have not paid it in"—he said "I have paid it in"—I went to St. James's Square, where I am well known—I did not get the money, I went back to the office and Regan was gone—I went on Saturday and saw Regan, he gave me an envelope with two yellow stamps on it; he said "I have a half-draft for you, will you wait here, I will send out and get you the money"—I waited nearly two hours, and then said "I can't wait any longer"—he said "If you will come on Monday I will pay it"—I saw Bastow there, Regan referred to him as his clerk—on Thursday I went and saw Bastow and Regan there—Bastow said, "What is it about?"—I said, "It is about a bill dishonoured"—he said, "I suppose it is a private account of Regan's"—I then put myself in communication with the police—on 18th November I went to 1, Westminster Chambers and saw Bastow, who sat in an outer office—he came into the office—I asked him where Regan was—he said he was at home ill—I asked him where Regan lived—he said, "He lives in lodgings"—I said, "Where?"—he said, "I cant tell you"—I said "Surely you can tell me where he lives"—he said, "I cannot"—we went again next day in company with Inspector Marshall—I went up first—I saw Bastow, and asked him where Regan was—he said he was at home, he would not tell me where—I came down, and Marshall went up with me—I asked again to see Regan—he said, "It is more than I dare do to tell you, it is more than my place is worth"—I said, "Who is the nephew of Ffolliott and Co.?"—he said, "Regan"—I said, "Who is Regan?"—he said, "Nephew to Ffolliott and Co."—I said, "Who are you?"—he said, "I am the manager"—I said, "Surely you can tell us where he lives"—he said, "I cannot tell you, I will let you know to-morrow by 12 o'clock whether Regan will see you"—I went next day at 12 o'clock, I saw nobody—the boy gave me a letter, which I gave to Marshall—I think this is it; there is no address on the top of it. (This letter, dated Tuesday night, stated that Regan was very unwell, and unable to be at his office before Friday; that he was sorry the witness had spoken about the account to his clerks; that Arnold should have the money, and would have had it before but that he himself had been disappointed.) I went with Marshall to Lower Norwood, and we were directed to the Poplars—we went to the stables, saw a man at work

there, and went to the house—the servant went in, and Regan came down—he had been in his bedroom; it was the afternoon—I told him I had come about what he meant to do, as some one from Jersey wanted to take the message back; that was Marshall—he said, "I don't want to see anybody"—I said, "You had better see them"—he said, "All right"—I fetched Marshall in, and he was taken into custody—the first time I saw Regan I asked him what he intended to do with the cows—he said, "I have got other consignments, I am going to ship them to America"—I did not ask him when—I attempted to trace the cattle—I got an order from the Board of Works—I traced them to Dunt's Livery Stables, Eccleston Square, Pimlico.

Cross-examined by MR. BESLEY. I saw Bastow once before I saw him in Marshall's presence; that was when he said Regan was seriously ill—I did not press him much for the address then—in Marshall's presence I pressed him, and he said I should have the answer next morning—I believe he did not know Marshall—I did not have a note on that occasion—Bastow did not say he would get a letter saying whether Regan would see us next morning or not, nothing was said about a letter being brought next morning—Marshall only went with me to the office on Tuesday for not many minutes—at two other interviews with Bastow I pressed for the address, and he said, "Surely you would not go to see a man who is ill"—that I think was on Tuesday—he did not add, "I will bring a letter to-morrow morning to say whether he will see you or not."

THOMAS FOSTER . I live at 74, Ebury Mews East, and am foreman to Mr. Dunt—he keeps the livery stables in Eccleston Street—on 24th October I removed six cows from Waterloo Station to Mr. Dunt's from instructions given by Bastow—he came to me between 9 and 10 o'clock, and I, he, and two others went in a cab directly—Bastow walked on the pavement the whole way while we led them along the road; they had halters on—we took them to 1, Ebury Mews East, and kept them there from the Friday night to the Monday night—they went to Norwood.

HENRY ROBINSON . I live at the Poplars, Beulah Hill, Norwood, and was groom to Bastow, whose service I left a month ago—one evening when Bastow came home at 5 o'clock he said I was to go to Victoria, and from there to Waterloo—I met Bastow at Victoria—we went to Dunt's, and from there in a cab to Waterloo—I assisted in bringing the cattle from Waterloo to Dunt's, Bastow walking on the pavement alongside—I assisted on a Monday to remove two of the cows to Bastow's, and four to Mr. Greening's, handing them over to his man Best—Bastow gave me orders to do so—the two remained at Bastow's about two or three weeks, and then went to Greening's—Regan lived in the same house, the Poplars, and there was a Mrs. Bastow there—on the 18th I took a cow to Croydon Station, I do not know where it was sent to.

Cross-examined by MR. BESLEY. I went into the service in June, 1884, and was there nearly six months—Regan was there when I went there, and for the whole six months—there was a paddock around the house and fields adjoining—two of the Jersey cows were put at the bottom of the garden, and were there two or three weeks before they were taken to Greening's—Regan made me a present for removing the cows—Regan was queer just before Marshall came there and was confined to his bedroom.

By the JURY. He gave me and the driver coming home half-a-crown to get, drink with.

Cross-examined by MR. GRAIN. Regan put his foot into a hole 8 feet deep in the garden and sprained his ankle, I pulled him out of it, a little while before.

Re-examined. Bastow paid me 8s. a week and when I had been there a little time 10s. and I slept in the house.

GEORGE BEVERLEY . I am a coachman living at Glasgow Terrace, Pimlico—I assisted in taking these animals from Dunt's stables to the Poplars—Dunt's foreman asked me to—I saw Regan at Dunt's on the Monday evening, he asked me if I would mind leading down two cows to Lower Norwood—Bastow paid me 3s. for it when I got down in the evening.

Cross-examined by MR. BESLEY. Bastow was the only gentleman I saw at the Poplars—he asked me if Regan had paid me, I said "No," and then he paid me—I know nothing about the calving.

GREENING. I am a farmer at Beulah Hill, Upper Norwood—on 27th October I received four cows to grass, Robinson having previously called and arranged for their reception—on 18th November I received two more, one of which Robinson took away on the 19th, and he took two more away on the 21st—that left one with me, which has gone to Clacton-on-Sea, some one who had bought it served me with a writ to give it up—about 22nd Oct. Regan called on me and said he had bought these cows for exportation, but they were not the class he wanted, and if I could sell them at 30l. each I was to do it, and he would give me a good commission—I did not sell them.

Cross-examined by MR. BESLEY. I tried to sell them and could not—I did the whole of the business for Regan.

RICHARD BEST . I am in Mr. Greening's employment—on 21st November I and Hollis took four of these cows mentioned to East Croydon Station, where we met Regan—one was fetched away on the 18th.

EDWIN GARDNER . I am a booking clerk at East Croydon Station—on 21st November four cows were booked in the name of Regan—three to Llandogo, Hereford, and one to Mr. Tows at Clacton-on-Sea, that latter I did not myself book.

JOHN SELBY . I am a booking clerk at East Croydon Station—on 21st November I booked a cow in the name of Regan to Mr. Tows of Clacton-on-Sea.

ANNIE WILLIS . I am a booking clerk at East Croydon Station—in to Col. Salkeld, Cumberland.

RICHARD BEST (Re-examined by MR. BESLEY). Mrs. Bastow had a cow was bought at Croydon Fall?—she handed it to me when Bastow was in custody, with instructions to sell it at Croydon—I received 12l. for it—? I gave her 2l., and kept the 10l. and spent it—she said she would not give me into custody.

By the JURY. No money was due to me for wages—I have offered to pay her so much a week and she has accepted to take it, and has given me a receipt for the 2l.

WILLIAM PITT DRAFFEN . I live at 64, Lowndes Square—I bought a cow from Regan and sent it as a present to Colonel Salkeld, in Cumberland, in November—I had seen an advertisement in the Times and wrote this letter to Regan and received these four letters. (These were from Regan, the first stating that he would send the cow for 30l. in a horse-box to Col.

Salkeld; then others saying that it had been sent and had been received, and the last requesting him to take 100 shares in the Cattle Ranche Company.)

JOHN CLEMENT W. ASHBOURNE (Re-examined). I wrote this letter at Regan's direction on October 23. (This requested the insertion of an advertisement concerning four fine Jersey cows in calf for safe in consequence of the owner leaving for India.)

JOHN FAYRBROTHER (Re-examined). In consequence of receiving that I inserted this advertisement in the Times.

WILLIAM RENCH TOWS . I live at Clacton-on-Sea—I bought two Jersey cows for 50l., and received them from Mr. Greening of Upper Norwood, and sent the cheque to Mr. Regan, The Poplars, Beulah Hill, on 12th November—at the police-court I heard the prisoners admit that the letters were in their handwriting.

ANNIE GALLINGER . I am Antonio Gallinger's wife, of Llandogo, Hereford—I purchased three Jersey cows on 21st November; they came by rail—I sent a cheque for 75l., 35l. each, to William Ffolliott Regan, The Poplars, Beulah Hill—I saw the advertisement in the Times, and received this answer. (This stated that he was leaving Europe, that he could give a reference to Sir E. H. Meredith, East Dulwich, and in another letter he stated that he had sold four animals to Mrs. Wright, who had handed her cheque before delivery, that he did not want the money, but that he would wait for any part of it, and that she could send it to his sister in London.)

Cross-examined by MR. GRAIN. They were very pretty cows, but they were not worth what I gave for them.

HENRY DEARS . I am a furniture manufacturer, of 307, Old Street—I know Bastow, and he introduced Regan as a man of considerable property, coming from America, who wanted to start an office near the Bank of England, and wanted furniture—I agreed to supply the furniture to 2, Royal Exchange Buildings, for ready cash—I thought they were partners—when the goods were in I went continually for my money—they said they expected there would be a certain credit, and asked me if I would be content with a hire note—one was drawn up for 5l. per month—I have received 25l. or 30l. altogether; the total value is 60l.—in May last year I removed the furniture to 1, Westminster Chambers, by their wish, and supplied the oilcloth and extra chairs—some of these goods have been paid for—I received this letter of June, 1884—Mr. Bastow bought some goods at an auction in my name, and I paid for them—I wrote this letter. (This gave notice that the Sheriff had removed two chairs and other things.) I did not hear of any distress for rent at Westminster Chambers.

Cross-examined by MR. GRAIN. Regan sent me some papers as part, security—I did not refuse to give them up—he took them from my son—he asked me to give them up—I have got my furniture back.

JOHN RAMSEY LIDDLE . I am housekeeper at 2, Royal Exchange Buildings—the prisoners occupied offices there from the 28th February, 1884—the name they traded under was Ffolliott, Nephew, and Co., the North Park Cattle Ranche Co., and the Wyoming Cattlee Ranche Co.—the Victoria Colliery Co. was not on their door, it was higher up—I saw no one of the name of Ffolliott there—Bastow told me he was coming from Chicago—they left about the middle of June, but kept a boy in the office to answer questions—they gave me Sir E. Meredith as one reference—they gave me no notice to quit—I could see they were going by the state of the office—they had

the office from Ellis and Lees—I know nothing about their manager absconding—Bastow told me that he was their manager and secretary—after they left a number of people came and made a number of complaints.

Cross-examined by MR. BESLEY. They got the things away before the rent was due—complaints were made by them of my conduct in the matter—I swear I did not know the agreement was with Regan.

CALDWELL ASHWORTH . I am manager of the Bank of Montreal, 22, I Abchurch Lane—I hold two documents purporting to be leases, one in favour of William Ffolliott Regan and the other Frank Stewart Bastow—they refer to land in Canada, and were sent to me by Colonel Dennis, of Canada—I hold them subject to the payment of 500 dollars on the part of each lessee—that was not paid—the leases were never taken up, I and I returned them to Canada.

Cross-examined by MR. BESLEY. I don't know if they were Government I leases—I had to collect the half-yearly rent due, 500 dollars, in advance for the Dominion of Canada—these are my instructions—on 11th September I received a telegram not to insist on 1,000 dollars, but to deliver over the two leases on the payment of 57l., the costs of cableing, and I not to insist on the 500 dollars—I never wrote to Regan or Bastow informing them that the lease would be delivered out for 57l.; I waited for them to come.

ROBERT ELLIOTT COOPER . I am a civil engineer, of 8, Broad Sanctuary, and was formerly the occupier of Westminister Chambers—in May last I they were let to Mr. Regan for ten months for 80l.—I received these two letters from Regan on the 19th May. (Asking the rent of the office, and wishing there were four instead of two rooms.) Bastow called with Regan on one occasion, and wrote references in the office, Ainsworth and Barnes, of Cannon Street. (Two letters were read, one from Barnes saying that he had known Regan for some time, and that he considered him straightforward and respectable, and that he would satisfactorily carry out any agreement he entered into for taking any offices; and the other from Ainsworth, stating that he believed Regan to be a gentleman of means, and that he would find him a desirable tenant.) The first instalment of rent was due on the 29th September—I could not get payment, and put in a distress—I then got payment—I have received no payment since.

JOHN MORRIS . I am housekeeper at 1, Westminster Chambers—the two prisoners came to the office in the beginning of June last year—the name of Ffolliott; Nephew, and Co. was put up within a few days—I saw Regan, Bastow, and the clerk Washbourne there—I neither saw nor heard of any other partner there—Regan told me he had been in London five weeks, that he had come over in consequence of the manager, as I understood him, having got the Company into debt, that he had received money for rent, coals, gas, and wages, and gone away without paying anything—that was at Royal Exchange Buildings—the first day they were there almost I told Bastow people were coming and saying that they had left their late office and had not paid the rent, and making a good many complaints, and giving them a very indifferent character, and wanting to be paid—Bastow took me to Regan to repeat it, and I told him the same story—he said "I have no doubt there will be several come, perhaps eight or ten, but the debts are not ours; we are not going to pay them, they are the book debts contracted by the man

who has gone off and run the Company into debt, and Mr. Regan came over from Chicago on that account to put things straight—on another occasion Regan said he was selling 100,000 acres of land to the Company.

SAMUEL WALLACE CLARK . I am ledger-keeper at the City office of the National Provincial Bank—on 3rd September, 1884, Ffolliott, Nephew, and Co. opened an account at our place and operated upon it. (The letter for opening the account was read, stating that Regan and Bastow would each sign as Ffolliott, Nephew, and Co., and a later letter stating that in future the cheques would bear their joint signature.)

Cross-examined by MR. BESLEY. The account has been inoperative since August—a small balance of a few shillings remains—I do not know if Mr. Fraser, our chief cashier, introduced Bastow—the amount was fed by credit to 540l. on 4th July—then there was a balance of 248/. in the bank—cheques were drawn out for Colonel Dennis, 25l.

JAMES WOODS . I am cashier at the Imperial Bank, Westminster—the prisoners had a joint account there in the name of Ffolliott, Nephew, and Co., and I saw them from time to time—when that account was opened I only knew Bastow by the name of Bird—Regan was to sign as "W. F. Regan," and Bastow as "F. S. Bird"—I never heard of any other partner who was to sign, those were the only two signatures—on 7th October, 1884, the balance was 2l. or 3l.

Cross-examined by MR. BESLEY. The manager would be the proper person to see on opening an account—he was attending to his duties on that day; I cannot say if he was there when that account was opened—between 13th August and 18th November the credit was swollen by payments to 557l. 5s., that is the total credit—on 18th August there is a payment to Barnes, the solicitor, of 78l.—I did not see the deed poll or advertisement of Bastow's taking his mother's name of Bird—the manager is not here.

Re-examined. 130l. was paid in to open the account, and then were paid in on 1st May 20l., on the 3rd, 5l.; 5th, 5l.; 6th, 5l.; 13th, 200l.

HARRY FREDRICK CHIDDOCK . I am an officer of the Registry of Joint-Stock Companies—I produce a Memorandum of Association of the Alberta Land and Cattle Eanche Company, Limited—the certificate is dated 3rd November, 1884—it is a syndicate, not a company—the solicitor on the memorandum is Mr. R. Barnes, Finsbury Pavement—I found no company was registered in that name.

Cross-examined by MR. BESLEY. It is a joint-stock company—the persons subscribing are Naysmith, Washbourn, Barrow, Paul, Neplastia.

JOHN CLEMENT WASHBOURN (Re-examined). I was clerk in October, 1883, to Bastow, who was then trading at 3, Lawrence Lane as Cooper, Sons, and Co., accountants and partnership negotiators—during the latter part of the time Bastow was there he was visited by Regan, who had an office at 11, Clement's Lane, I understood, and who always said, I understood, that he came from America to float the North Park Cattle Ranche Company—I do not think that was registered—in March or April last year Bastow and Regan went together to Royal Exchange Buildings, and I went with them as clerk—the name of "Ffolliott and Nephew' was adopted there, and "The North Park Company" and "Wyoming Company" were put up—I have heard a Mr. Ffolliott who lived at Chicago spoken of there, and I have seen a photograph of him; I never

saw him there—I always understood Bastow was a partner—about June last year we moved to the Westminster Chambers, where "The Alberta Company" was first put up—I never heard of a manager at Royal Exchange Buildings who absconded—I wrote this letter to Messrs. Bligh at Bastow's direction on 1st November; he was not on the Continent then—I also wrote this of 21st November saying that the period of credit had not yet expired—I cannot swear that the endorsement on Mrs. Wright's cheque is in Regan's writing.

Cross-examined by MR. GRAIN. I believe letters were received from President Sturges—I did not hear he had come over from America about one of these Ranche Companies—he was written to about this Irish business to Mr. Chilton's office, Chicago, and came over in negotiation about the ranches—I do not think the vendors of the North Park Company came over, some one did.

Cross-examined by MR. BESLEY. Bastow told me to write something untrue to Mr. Bligh, and five days afterwards pointed out that the term of credit had not expired—Regan was not then in the same office as Bastow—a girl many letters were written and received from Colonel Dennis in respect to the leases—I do not know of two 25l. cheques sent to him; I believe they were to be delivered up on payment of another 50/.—the plan was for a syndicate to buy from Regan and Bastow, but I don't know for what amount; it was only being floated at that time that the company might be formed to buy from the syndicate—many gentlemen entered into that syndicate and paid several hundred pounds.

Re-examined. I have seen a copy of the lease myself.

HENRY MARSHALL (Police Inspector). About 4 o'clock on 26th Nov. I went with Arnold and Miller to The Poplars, Lower Norwood, and after Miller had gone in and come out I went in and found Regan in the dining-room—I said "I am Inspector Marshall; Mr. Arnold has decided to give you into my custody for stealing his cows, and you will have to go with me to the police-station, Norwood"—he said "How do you make it stealing?"—I said "It is useless to argue that point with me, because it will have to be argued out elsewhere; I have had many complaints about you, one from the Healtheries, where I understand you have obtained a cart, value nearly 100l."—I found on him some keys, which opened No. 1, Westminster Chambers, which I had been to the day before with Miller—I have heard Miller's account of that interview, it is correct—I asked a few more questions, then Miller stated Bastow stated he was the manager, and declined to give Regan's address—I called next day with Miller by appointment, and did not see the prisoners.

Cross-examined by MR. GRAIN. I found a mass of papers at the office; I selected what appeared to have reference to this Company, I did not seize them all—I did not only select what appeared to tell against the prisoners; what I left behind was prospectuses, writing-paper, newspapers, and so on; all telegrams and books I brought away—these files were brought away by Cousins—I saw several like them there—they have been in my and Mr. Wontner's custody ever since the 26th Nov., 1884, when Regan was arrested—the prisoners have not had an opportunity themselves of looking at the papers, their solicitor has—I should not think the papers would pass out of the hands of the police—he could tell his solicitor about the papers—the prisoners have not seen them.

Cross-examined by MR. BESLEY. I know nothing of Bastow as an

accountant—I believe he acted as one for years—there appeared to be plenty of proof in the papers that he had so acted. (An Order in Council of a memoranda of leases to Regan and Bastow were read, dated 30th Sept., 1884, Ottawa Department of Canada, authorising the grant of a lease of grazing land, area 100,000 acres.)

Re-examined. Every facility has been given to Mr. Barnes, the prisoner's solicitor, to inspect the papers—I don't know whether they availed themselves of it.

WILLIAM COUSINS (Sergeant B). At 9.30 on the evening of 3rd Sept. I was in Beulah Hill, Norwood—I met Bastow and said "I believe your name is Bastow"—he said "Yes"—I said "I am a sergeant of police, I shall take you in custody for being concerned with Regan in stealing six cows on 24th October, from Mr. Arnold, of Jersey"—he replied "Oh dear, I had nothing to do with it; Regan brought two of the cows to my place, and he paid me 10s. a week each for their keep, which I can show in black and white, so that I can wash my hands clean of having any transaction; you do surprise me"—going to the Lower Norwood railway-station, he said "I will tell you this, I don't care who knows it, the night the cows arrived at Waterloo Station Regan came home ill, and asked me if I would go to the station and fetch them for him, which I did, and had them conveyed to Pimlico; I wished I had never had the two at my place; Regan lodged with me, and paid me two quid a week"—on 1st December I went with Marshall to a cowshed on Bastow's premises. The Poplars, and took possession of two rugs, which Arnold identified as having been his and sent with the cows.

WILLIAM MORLEY FRENCH . I am clerk to Messrs. Wontner and Sons, solicitors, and agents to the Public Prosecutor in this matter—Marshall handed me a large bundle of papers, books and documents—I have found no leases of land in America—Mr. Barnes's (the solicitor for both prisoners) clerk has had an inspection of the documents—I found a diary there, (The witness read several pages of this diary, in which were entries as to Godfrey's and Arnold's cattle, the entries being to the same effect as the evidence given by witnesses. MR. MEAD read two letters from Colonel Dennis concerning the ranches.)

GUILTY on fourth, fifth, sixth, and seventh Counts (the Conspiracy Counts other than those relating to Bligh's case).

MARSHALL stated that he had had complaints of about 40 cases.— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour.

There was another indictment for stealing six cows belonging to E.J. Arnold. As this case had formed part of the other indictment, the prosecution offered no evidence upon it.



Before Mr. Common Serjeant.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-219
VerdictNot Guilty > no evidence; Not Guilty > unknown; Guilty > with recommendation
SentenceNo Punishment > sentence respited

Related Material

219. SARAH KEEBLE, WILLIAM KEEBLE , and ELIZABETH KEEBLE , Stealing two rings, the goods of John Manton. Second Count, receiving the same.

MR. CULPEPER Prosecuted.

ELIZA MANTON . I live at 33, Victoria Terrace, West Ham Lane, Stratford—Elizabeth Keeble was in my service at the beginning of December, 1884, as domestic servant—I then had two wedding rings which I kept

in a box in a drawer in a big box in my bedroom—she saw me take them out of a sugar case and put them in this box, no one else was there—the box was not locked or secured in any way—on the 26th December I went to look for the rings and did not find them, but found these two brass rings instead—Elizabeth Keeble was there—I said "Some one has taken away my two gold rings and put these two brass ones, no stranger could do it"—she cried bitterly, and said "I have not taken them, I have never seen them since I saw you put them away"—I gave information to the police, and on the 30th December I went to several pawnbrokers' shops—at Mr. Withers I saw the smallest of my rings—it was only by the weight I could tell the difference between them and the brass ones—they are valued at 2l. 10s.—there are no children in my house—I have three single men lodgers that work with my husband at Voelcker's, and they only come in to meals with my husband, and go back at the same time—they never have access to my bedroom—I do not look it, but they could not open the door without my hearing them, because the door makes a noise when you open it—Elizabeth Keeble sleeps at home with her mother, right opposite No. 24, not at my place—Mrs. Keeble has only been in my house once after the rings had gone—William Keeble was never in my house that I know of.

JANE CLAYDON . I live at 17, Angel Lane, Stratford, and keep a fancy shop—on the 22nd December a boy between 10 and 11, I do not know him, came in for a 9d. ring—about 20 minutes after that he came again and wanted two other shilling ones like a gold ring which he produced—I had not then got them—I got them, and he came again a third time in the evening and took them away—I swear these (produced) are the rings I sold him—there is a mark stamped on the outside.

CAROLINE GOLDSTONE . I am Thomas Goldstone's wife of 48, Langthorne Road—on the 22nd December, about 12, William Keeble came to me and said "If you please, my mother says will you be good enough to take this for her?"—I said "What is it Bill, the watch?"—he said, "No, Mrs. Goldstone, a ring"—I said "Let's look"—I took it out of his hand and undid the paper, and said to my neighbour, who was sitting in my house at the time, "Oh, this is a fine one, this isn't your mother's"—he said "Well, my mother has borrowed it, she cannot send father's watch till after Christmas"—I said "Run on, Cocky, and I will meet you at the top"—he said "Mother says don't leave it for less than 1l., it came out of Mr. Bressay's for 24s."—Bressay is another pawnbroker—I went to Mr. Withers with it, this is the nigh—I pawned it about 12, and got 1l. and a ticket which I gave to William Keeble against Mr. Withers' door—I have pawned a watch for Mrs. Keeble for months, Monday after Monday—I am a poor woman and go round among families in the neighbourhood—I pawn things.

Cross-examined by Sarah Keeble. Sometimes a dozen children come to, my house on Monday morning—I should not take things from them to pawn unless I knew the parents well—the boy has been constantly to me backwards and forwards, he would not tell me a story in that way.

CHARLES TITUS . I am assistant to Mr. Joseph Withers, pawnbroker, West Ham Lane—I produce a gold ring pawned on the 22nd December by Mrs. Goldstone, about 11 o'clock I think; I did not notice anybody with her—I have seen William Keeble bring a watch round for Mrs. Goldstone to pledge for his mother—Mrs. Goldstone has pawned a watch on different occasions, and once I saw William Keeble with her.

By the COURT. I have known Goldstone for twenty years—it is partly her occupation bringing things for people she knows—I suppose the people have an objection to coming themselves—I have known her about two years since I have been in the employment.

GEORGE MELLISH (Detective Serjeant K). I am stationed at West Ham—in December, 1884, I received information and went to Mrs. Manton's, where I saw Elizabeth Keeble—I asked her "Have you seen anything of the rings since the day that Mrs. Manton spoke of she put the rings away?"—she said "No, sir, I haven't"—on the 29th December I ascertained that the two brass rings had been sold by Miss Clayton, and I then arrested William Keeble, and asked his father to accompany me to the station—he was there placed among several other boys, but Miss Claydon failed to identify him, and he was not detained—on the 30th December I found a gold ring pawned at Mr. Withers', and I then apprehended the three prisoners—Mrs. Keeble said "I know nothing about the rings, I never took them nor my children either. If they only brought a sweet into the house, I always wanted to know where they got it from"—Elizabeth Keeble said "I never took the rings, I don't know anything about them"—the boy was placed among other boys, and Mrs. Goldstone at once identified him—he said "I know nothing about the rings, I never took them"—on searching the woman we found the pawn ticket of the husband's watch and chain, pledged on the 29th December.

ELIZA MANTON (Re-examined by the COURT). It was about the first week in December I changed the rings from one box to the other—I had not looked into the box between the 22nd and 26th.

The COMMON SERJEANT considered that there was no evidence against SARAH KEEBLE and the Jury accordingly returned a verdict respecting her of

NOT GUILTY . William Keeble then catted her as a witness.

Witness for the Defence.

SARAH KEEBLE . I was a tailor, but my eyes are affected, and I have done no work for 11 years—I live at 22, Victoria Street—Mrs. Manton first accused a servant Adelaide she had—she came across to my house and said she accused that girl of taking two rings, that she had keys to fit the door—that was on the Saturday after Christmas—she said she knew the size of the rings, and that she would have some one prosecuted if she did not find the right one—I told the detective what she said when he came to me.

Cross-examined. My daughter was a month or five weeks in Mrs. Manton's service; she went there three weeks or a month before Christmas—Mrs. Manton had no other servant while my daughter was there—Adelaide left before my girl went there—I did not know she was gone till Mrs. Manton told me—I do not know if she left before the rings were lost—I did not give my son the rings to pawn, I know nothing about them—I used to send a suit of clothes; I could not get them out one week, my husband was ill, and I had not a penny at Christmas, and I sent the boy's coat and waistcoat to be pawned about the 22nd, and he went without any—my husband gave me 5s. at Christmas, and after I had spent that I had not a penny—he had nothing extra at Christmas.

Witness in Reply.

ELIZA MANTON (Re-examined). I did not go to Mrs. Keeble's to say I suspected another girl—Elizabeth Keeble was with me six weeks, and the other went away three or four weeks previously, and I had my rings—I said Adelaide had the same key as Elizabeth Keeble had to let herself

in in the morning, and that she could tell the weight of one ring because she had pledged it for me at Mr. Withers's once, and she had had them many times to play with, she was an honest girl—I never thought for a moment Adelaide had taken the rings, and never said so—I did not say I was determined to prosecute some one—Adelaide has been gone 11 or 12 weeks—I had the rings a long time after she left, and that was before I changed them into the box—she took no key away; Elizabeth Keeble had the same key that she had had.

William Keeble in his defence stated that Mrs. Manton had accused the other girl of taking them, as she knew their weight and had the key of the front door.


ELIZABETH KEEBLE— GUILTY. Strongly recommended to mercy.—Judgment respited.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-220
VerdictMiscellaneous > no agreement

Related Material

220. JOHN SOMAN , Wilful and corrupt perjury at Bow; County Court.

MR. CRANSTOUN Prosecuted; MR. CRISP Defended.

The Jury were unable to agree upon a verdict; they were therefore discharged, and the case postponed to next Sessions.


Before Mr. Recorder.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-221
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty

Related Material

221. LEONARD CROUCH (32) PLEADED GUILTY to marrying Sarah Ann Henley, his wife being then alive. The prosecution recommended him to mercy.— One Day's Imprisonment.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-222
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

222. TIMOTHY DRISCOLL (20) to stealing two dead turkeys, the goods of David Rollings; also** to a previous conviction of felony at Greenwich in September, 1881. The prisoner had been nine times previously convicted.— Fifteen Months' Hard Labour. And [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-223
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

223. WILLIAM JENKINS **†(26) to burglary in the dwelling-house of William Wood and stealing two cruets and other articles and 1l.; also to a previous conviction of felony at this Court in November, 1875.— Ten Years' Penal Servitude. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]

Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-224
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

224. RICHARD HASKEY (21) , Unlawfully and indecently assaulting Annie Georgina Hanks. Second Count, occasioning her actual bodily harm.

MR. WARBURTON Prosecuted.

GUILTY Two Years' Hard Labour.


Before Baron Huddleston.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-225
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

225. JOHN ROYLE (36) , Feloniously killing and slaying Elizabeth Boyle. He was also charged on the Coroner's Inquisition with the like offence.


JANE KELLY . I am the wife of William Kelly, who is a drummer in the 1st Battalion of the East Surrey Regiment—I know the prisoner,

John Royle—he lived with his wife in the barracks next door to us—his wife's name was Elizabeth, and her age was—on Wednesday, the 31st December last, I heard Royle and his wife quarrelling about 9.30 at night—I heard him swearing and heard him say "There, there," and he said "Go to b——"—he said that three times, and after that I heard something fall—I mean that something went on the floor as if somebody had fallen down, and I heard the prisoner's wife say "Oh, Johnny"—the next thing I heard was that they were still quarrelling, but not so loud—I heard the prisoner say "I will let you know that I am your master, and the master of this house"—our rooms are separated from the prisoner's by a brick wall only, and I should say that it is a single brick—I knew the deceased woman quite well—on Saturday, January 3rd, I went in to see her about 9 o'clock in the evening, and she complained of pains in her head and stomach—I did not notice her eyes that night, but on the Sunday morning I saw that she had a black eye—she died on Monday, January 5th, about half-past 11—before she died, in consequence of what she told me, I spoke to the prisoner and said "If she gets over this it will be a caution to you not to hit her again"—he made no reply whatever to that—I have known the woman since March last year; she was a sober woman and a very hard-working woman.

Cross-examined by the Prisoner. When I spoke to you on the Sunday you were at the side of the fireplace, in the front of me.

By the COURT. I should say that he could hear what I said; I was close to him.

The Prisoner. I did not hear, or else I should have answered.

LOUISA WEST . I am the wife of Edmund West, a sergeant in the East Surrey Regiment—my husband and I occupy a room in the barracks underneath the prisoner's room—on the night of Wednesday, December 31st, I was in my room at about half-past 9, and heard rowing in the room above, and heard something fall which I supposed to be a chair or Mrs. Royle falling, and I heard a cry of "Oh, don't, Johnny"—I heard them still quarrelling, but I could not hear what they said—I heard nothing more—next day I saw the prisoner with Mrs. Royle—I cannot say in what state her face was; I did not notice it then, but on the Friday or Saturday afterwards, I cannot be sure which of the two days, I noticed that she had a black eye.

CATHERINE ORAM . My husband's Christian name is William; he is a sergeant in the 4th Battalion of the East Surrey Regiment—I have known the prisoner and his wife as neighbours for about three years—on Saturday, the 3rd of January, I saw the deceased woman, and noticed one of her eyes; it was black—she complained to me of pain—I saw her again on the 4th, and in consequence of the state she was in I remained up with her all night—the prisoner asked me how she was—I said "She is very bad, and I do not think she will get off of the bed any more"—I also said to him "You gave her a black eye"—he said "Yes, and I am very sorry for it"—that was all that passed.

Cross-examined. When I said that, you were sitting in the front room on a chair—I spoke to you when you were in the front sitting room on a chair close to the window.

WILLIAM KITTLE . I am the hospital sergeant at the Kingston depot—on Thursday, the 6th of January, about 6 in the evening, the prisoner spoke to me about his wife—he came to me and told me that she was

complaining of pains in her stomach, and asked me what I thought it was best to do—I told him I thought the best thing to do would be to give her some hot fomentation over the part—about 11 o'clock the same night he came to me and asked me to go to his wife, and I went to her and saw her in her room—she was in bed—she complained of pains in her stomach, and I put her name on the medical report—it appeared there next morning, and the medical officer saw her.

JOHN RIGGS LEWIS . I am a member of the Royal College of Physicians, and medical officer of the 31st Regimental district—on the 2nd of January I went to the deceased Elizabeth Royle; she complained of pain in her abdomen—I asked her if she could account for it—I noticed the next day that she had a black eye, her left eye, and I put certain questions to the prisoner upon that—I asked him how his wife came by. That black-eye; he said that he did not know—next day, the 4th, she appeared to be considerably worse; she complained of pain in her abdomen stilly especially on the left side; she complained of her left side all through—I continued to attend her, and she died on the 5th—I made a post-mortem examination on the 6th, and found the peritoneum exceedingly inflamed; that is the serous membrane of the abdomen—there was a livid mark about 3 inches long by 2 1/2 inches, on the outside of the abdomen, corresponding with a mark on the stomach—the lungs were somewhat congested and adherent to the chest—that was not significant of the cause of death—the cause of death was peritonitis, that is inflammation of the peritoneum—the heart was healthy.

By the COURT. In my judgment some violence or concussion of some kind, either a blow or a fall from a height, caused the inflammation of the peritoneum—I say "from a height" because she was not a heavy woman, and an ordinary fall would not do it—I also found a dark, discoloration about the size of my hand, corresponding pretty nearly with the dark mark externally—I mean the livid discoloration outside, corresponding very nearly with the discoloration inside, from which I draw the conclusion that both came from the same cause.

By MR. WILLIAMS. It could not be caused by a cold—I also found an injury of the right kidney, a contusion—that would be caused either from a fall from some height, or a blow, that would not be the result of the same cause which caused the discoloration, as it was the right kidney—the injuries in my opinion could not have bean caused by cold or by the use of a wringing machine.

APPLETON BRAXTON HICKS . I am a barrister, and Deputy, Coronet for the Kingston division of Surrey—I held an inquest on the body of pi Elizabeth Royle—after the witnesses Mrs. Kelly, Mrs. West, Mr. Kettle, and the doctor had been examined, the prisoner tendered himself. as a witness—he wished to make a statement—I told him he was not obliged to do so, if he did it would be taken down in writing, and might be used against him—he said "Yes"—I swore him, and he made the statement without being examined by me at all—I took it down in writing, and after the Jury had found their verdict it was read over to him and he signed it—this is it. (Read: "John Royle, after being duly cautioned, makes oath and states as follows: 'I am a private in the 1st Battalion East Surrey Regiment. The deceased woman is my wife. On the 21st ult. Mrs. Royle complained to me about being unwell. I asked what was the matter with her; she told me it was a sore throat and a stiffness in

the neck, as she thought. I told her to go to see the medical officer Dr. Lewis. She said she would not go. I told her she had better get a drop of brandy. She said she would, but I don't know whether she did or not. I left her about 10 o'clock in the morning and mounted guard, and did not see her till 1 o'clock, when she said she was no better. She was going out to work that afternoon. I told her not to go as she did not feel well. She went to work, and came home about 6 o'clock in the evening. I saw her again about 7 o'clock, and she went down to the dispensary in the town, where she had medical treatment. I saw her again about 9 o'clock, when she said she was no better. I did not see her again before 8.30 a.m. on the 28th ultimo. She brought me my breakfast. She was no better then. I did not see her again until 10.50 a.m., when I dismounted guard. About 1.50 she went to bed, and remained there that day. I gave her the medicine as directed. About 8 p.m. she asked for some brandy, which I gave her. She went to rest and I did not see her until about 8.30 a.m on the 29th ultimo. She then asked for a cup of cocoa, which I gave her. I was with her during the morning, and she asked for some brandy, which I gave her. I told Mrs. Rogers, and Mrs. Herbert, and Mrs. Thomas, that my wife was ill in bed, and they asked what was the matter, and I said I could not tell them unless it was a cold. She was in bed all day on Monday, the 29th, and on the next day (Tuesday) she got up about 1 o'clock. She went to bed about 9.30 p.m., got up on Wednesday (31st ultimo), and she was a little better. She went down to the washhouse to do a day's washing. I asked if she could not put it out for some other person to do, but she would do it herself. In the evening she complained to the people in the washhouse that she could hardly stand, and I used some rather hasty words to her at about 9.30 p.m. Afterwards, as she was getting up out of her chair, she caught her foot in the wringing machine and that caused her to fall. When I went to pick her up she said "Oh, Johnny!" We went to bed, and in the morning she complained of her cold being had again; she remained in bed all day on the 1st January, and about 10 a.m. I asked her if she would see the medical officer; she said "No," but asked me for a little more brandy, and I got it for her and gave it to her hot. On the Friday, 2nd January, the medical officer came to see her. I was up all night with her on the 1st January. About 10 a.m. on the 2nd I had to leave to mount guard. I left a little girl with her until Mrs. Gee could go to her. I saw no more of her till about 5 minutes past 10 on the 3rd January. I did not give my wife the black eye, and what the witnesses have said is incorrect. I noticed the black-eye on the morning of the 3rd, when I came off guard. I cannot account for how she got the black eye. I deny using any violence to my wife.—J. Royle.'"

Prisoner's Defence. When I made use of the word "There," I had a shilling belonging to my wife; she asked me for it and I said, "There, there is your shilling," and chucked it towards her—she got up and picked it up and caught her foot against the wringing machine, and called out "Oh, Johnny."

The Prisoner. I am not guilty of the charge. She had a sister who dropped down dead, and a brother who died after three days' illness, it is a family complaint.

GUILTY .— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-226
VerdictGuilty > lesser offence
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

226. JOHN ROBBINS (17) , For an abominable crime.

MR. RIBTON Prosecuted.

GUILTY of the attempt. Two Years' Hard Labour.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-227
VerdictGuilty > unknown; Not Guilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

227. THOMAS LONG (42), GEORGE FLETCHER WALKER , and WILLIAM JONES (28) , Feloniously conspiring to murder the infant male child of Adelaide Louisa Gay.

MESSRS. POLAND and LLOYD Prosecuted; MR. WARBURTON appeared for Long; MR. BESLEY for Walker; and MR. M. WILLIAMS for Jones.

ARTHUR RAYNES GAY . I am an assistant to a dressing case maker and live at 29, Tynemouth Road, Tottenham—my wife is Adelaide Louisa Gay—we have two children—in August, 1882, I went to Australia for my health, and returned on June 25, 1884—when I saw my wife she was very stout, and I learned that she was in the family way—she showed me some letters, and I learned that Jones was the father of the child—I then wrote this letter to Jones dated 22nd August: "Dear Sir,—Having read the letters received by Mrs. Gay from you, I am much surprised at your refusing to have an interview with me as asked, and further at your making a proposal to see my wife to-morrow afternoon when you suppose that I shall be at business. I shall make it my business to call and see you on Monday morning about ten o'clock or soon after, as this matter has gone far enough, and you seem to think it very lightly, and expect Mrs. Gay to square the whole thing up without you having the trouble not to say annoyance of seeing me. Awaiting your early reply, &c.—ARTHUR R. GAY. P.S.—Mrs. Gay was answering your letter when I arrived home this evening, and I destroyed it, and have forbidden her to either receive or write letters to you again, as from the tone of yours there it seems as though there was a great deal of affection still going on.—A. R. Q"—I saw Jones on the Sunday morning, but I was going out to dinner, and merely had a short conversation with him—we made an appointment for Monday or Tuesday, when I met him outside the Holborn Restaurant and told him I would not have the child in the house after it was born, and he must make some provision for it and take it away—he said that he would try and find somebody to adopt it—his brother Frederick came to see me once or twice, and we went to the Holborn Restaurant and had a conversation, and on 12th October I wrote this letter to Jones. (Dated 12/10/84, and commencing "Dear Sir" it stated that the witness had informed Frederick Jones that he knew of a woman who would take the child for 100l., and keep it and bring it up as her own, which would be cheaper than paying 5s. a week for its support till it was 12 or 14 year of age. Signed, ARTHUR R. GAY.) After that I saw Jones in front of the Holborn Restaurant about the end of October—he said that he could not pay the amount, it was too much money; he was hard up, but he thought he could get somebody to take it for less money—I saw him several times afterwards, and then wrote him this letter. (Dated October 29, 1884, 113, High Holborn, stating that he had placed the matter in the hands of his solicitor, and was in possession of all the letters written by Jones to Mrs. Gay, which he should use against Jones on a charge of attempting to procure abortion.) I then wrote this letter. (Dated October 29, commencing "Dear Sir" stating that he had been obliged to call in a nurse and pay her four guineas, for which he requested a P.O. order, and stated that to wife's illness was greatly in consequence of the stuff which he, Jones, had give her.) I saw him again on 28th November, and afterwards received

this letter from him. (Dated 28.11.84, appointing a meeting outside Holburn Restaurant at 9.39 that night.) I met him there and he said that he had found somebody to adopt the child for 50l., and should have to borrow the money from his father-in-law—I asked him for the nurse's fee he said he could not pay me till after Christmas, he was so hard up—on 7th December I wrote this letter to him. (Insisting upon the nurse for being sent by return of post, and the doctor's fee as soon as the confinement took place, or the matter would be laid before Jones's father by 2 o'clock on Monday afternoon.) I received this answer, "Yours just to hand, and if you write to the governor I shall certainly let the matter take its chance, and you may take what proceedings you like, which I find upon advice your chances upon recovering anything are very small. W. Jones." The child was born on the 9th, and I wrote this letter: "Dear Sir,—The child is born and alive. I must see you to-morrow morning, the first thing, to arrange for its immediate removal. ARTHUR R. GAY. P.S.—If You cannot come, send your brother or some one." Jones did not come; but on 10th December the prisoner Walker came—that was the first time that I had seen him—he said that Jones would not come, and had sent him, and he or Jones would meet me at Liverpool Street Station at 8 or 8.15 the next evening to receive the child—on the next evening Mrs. Barnes the nurse took the child to Liverpool Street Station, and I met them there—about 8.10 Jones and Kate Day arrived, the nurse was in the waiting—room with the child—Jones asked me if the child was registered—I said "No, you had better get it registered in the name of the woman who is to adopt it"—I asked him to give me the address of the woman that I was to send the box of clothes to; he said he could not give it to me then, but he would send it next morning—he never sent it—the child was handed to Kate Day by the nurse, with a bottle of food and a parcel containing a change of clothes—on the 13th Jones's brother came to see me, and showed me an account in a newspaper of the other prisoner and Kate Day being arrested, in consequence of which I went and saw Jones at Denmark Hill that afternoon, Saturday—I asked him if he had any idea that the child was going to be done away with; he said no, he would sooner have paid hundreds of pounds than the matter should have been exposed, and he thought of running down to Brighton for a day or two—I told him he had better not—he said that Walker was to have 5l., Long 5l., and Barnard 10l.—I am not certain about the amounts, but there were two fives, and Walker was to have 5l.—Jones told me that the cab was to drive to the Station Hotel, Camberwell New Road, and that he should have been a fool to have done such a thing in the light if he wanted to get rid of the child, that he introduced Kate Day to Walker outside the Station Hotel, and they went to the place of meeting with the child; but previous to that Jones told me that Barnard's wife was confined to her bed, and could not take the child, and Barnard would do so—I said that somebody ought to go and see the prisoner Walker; Jones said he had been advised not to go near them—on the following Monday Jones and his brother came to my business address, and I told them that I should go and see Walker on Tuesday morning: Jones said, "Very well," and he said that he could not very well go, as it would seem as if he came from Walker's friends.

Cross-examined by MR. BESLEY. I read Morris's and Long's statements before the Magistrate in a newspaper—Long's statement was that he had

no intention of committing the offence of conspiracy to murder—the Station Hotel is close to the Camberwell Road station of the London, Chatham, and Dover Railway—Jones told me that he and Walker had been at school together, and he vouched for Walker that he had no more idea of murder than himself—I did not go to see Walker.

Cross-examined by MR. WILLIAMS. It was my suggestion from first to last that the child should be taken away, and I not only discontinued the acquaintance with Jones, but with his brother—I did intend to send a box of clothes for the child, and if the address had not been sent I should have made further inquiries—I had no idea that the child was not going to be properly treated.

ADELAIDE LOUISE GAY . I am the wife of the last witness—about six months after he left England in 1882 I became acquainted with the prisoner Jones—an improper intimacy took place between us, and I was pregnant by him on my husband's return—I communicated with my husband, and afterwards wrote and posted this letter to Jones. (Addressing him as "My dear Will" informing him that her husband had found out all about it, and asking him to run over on Sunday morning, and to be sure and burn the letter.) I afterwards wrote him this letter. (Stating that Mr. Gay did not know she was writing, and that she was very ill and wanted something settled, and suggesting that the 50l. should be paid in four instalments, so tliat if the child did not live twelve months the money need not all be paid, and requesting him if he wrote to address her at Mrs. Underhills, Cunningham Road, Tottenham.) Mrs. Underhill was the person who was to adopt the child—I had spoken to her about it some time before—she was to have 100l.—on 9th December I wai delivered of a female child, and on the night of December 11th it was clothed and wrapped up, and given to Mrs. Barnes, the nurse, to be taken away.

Cross-examined by MR. WARBURTON. She would only take the child on the 100l. being paid down, or in four instalments—I know nothing of Long.

KATE DAY . I live at 3, Cleveland Terrace, East Dulwich, and was an assistant at Shoolbred's, the drapers—I went by the name of Dalton, which was given me as there was another person there named Day—I made the acquaintance of Jones last August at Margate—he gave his name Will Crawley—I met him several times after I returned to London, and used to write to him at Royal Court Chambers, Temple Bar, and afterwards at 22, Burton Road, Brixton—he told me he had got into trouble with a married woman, and the husband was going to get a divorce—I received this letter from him the day I went to the station. (This was marked confidential, and requested the witness to meet him at Liverpool Street Station at 7.30, to meet a nurse and child, and to take the child to a woman who was ready for it.) I had heard nothing about a child—I met him on December 11th, about 7.35, outside my business place—he said we were to go to Liverpool Street to meet the husband—we got into a cab, and he told me the nurse was going to bring the child, and he had got some one to take it from me at Brixton—we went in the cab to Liverpool Street Station, and met Mr. Gay there at 8.15—I had never seen him before—Jones spoke to him and brought the nurse from the waiting room with the baby—I took it from her, and a parcel and feeding bottle were given to me—I got into the cab with Jones and the child, and as we went along Jones said "The husband is going to get some one

to adopt the child for 100l., but I can get it done for about 30l.—we got out of the cab at the corner of Station Road, Camberwell, the cab was discharged and we walked under a railway arch—Jones then told me that he had to meet a friend at 9 o'clock, at the public-house at the corner—I waited there with the baby, and Jones came back with the prisoner Walker, who I had not seen before—Jones introduced me, saying, "A friend of mine, Miss Dalton"—Walker said he was going to see if the woman was ready to take the child—he went across the road for a few minutes and came back and said that the woman was confined to her bed, but a man was waiting and he went with me to show me where he was—Jones gave me a bag of money in the road and told me to have the child registered in the woman's name—going across the road I dropped the bottle and the child began to cry—Walker pointed out the spot, and I gave the the child and money and parcel to the man, whom I now know as Barnard, and told him I had dropped the bottle—Jones was 200 or 300 yards off, out of sight—I was arrested as I was leaving and Long also—I did not see Long till he was actually in custody—I was taken before a Magistrate, remanded, discharged, and examined as a witness.

Cross-examined by MR. WARBURTON. It is a broad street and there are plenty of lamps, but it is rather a quiet place.

Cross-examined by MR. BESLEY. I do not remember Walker's name being mentioned.

WILLIAM BARNARD . I am a cowman, of 44, Chapel Street, Brixton Road—I have known Long two years, he is a working carpenter and lives at 26, Crawshay Road, Brixton—he gave me to understand that he was a widower—I have known Walker about twelve months, I first saw him in the Sugar Loaf Tavern in the City—a do not know what he is or where he lives—I met Long at the corner of Commercial New Road, he had asked me before I left work to do so, he said that he had a very funny story to tell me and said "The fact of the matter is, there is a kid to be got rid of"—I asked what he meant—he said "A party has spoken to me and asked me to dispose of a baby; I cannot tell you who the parties are, but that does not matter, as I do not think they care what becomes of it; I am supposed to have a woman in the matter, but I think we can manage to do the job ourselves, as I do not like trusting to a woman; I must arrange about a place of meeting and also a password of some kind, as the woman who brings the child will not know the parties that are to receive it"—he asked me what they used for passwords—I said "People use any words for that purpose"—he said "There is a good deal of talk about Egypt now, we will ask them if they come from Egypt, you can write it down on a little piece of paper for me," and I wrote "Are you from Egypt?" and under that the answer, "Weare"—he put the paper in his pocket-book—he told me not to say anything about it to any one, or we might get into trouble over it—he said "There is a good sum of money attached to it and we might as well have it, because if we do not do it somebody else would"—I told him I should have to seriously consider over the matter—that was about a fortnight after I went to work with Walker, it was a week or a fortnight before Nov. 9, I went into my present service, Mr. Ford's, on the 10th—he is a cowkeeper at Horne Hill Road—I saw Long a week after that every day and Walker also, but I only saw them together while they were on the job we were working at—Walker was superintending the painting which Long and

myself were working at—Long spoke to me on several occasions, and said that he hoped the job would soon come off—he said "I may as well tell you that Walker is the first one who mentioned it to me, and I am puzzled to know what he has to do with it"—on the 10th December about 6.30, when I left work I saw Long outside the gate—he said "Are you ready to do that job to-night?"—I said "No, I am not, I have an appointment to keep"—he said "Never mind, it is to come off to-morrow night at 9.30 in the Burton Road, exactly as the clock is on the strike of the half-hour, we shall stand under one lamp post on one side of the way, and the woman who brings the child under the other, and exactly at that time we shall cross over and meet each other, she will then hand you the child and a bag or parcel containing ten sovereigns; I have made a capital arrangement for disposing of it, and that is to take it to Lewisham "Waterworks"—I said "I know nothing about Lewisham"—he said "I do, I know every inch of the ground, you turn down a narrow passage out of the main street, where there are not many people about as a rule, so that you can easily throw it over; no one will hear a splash, there is such a noise with the fall of the water that it will drown any sound of the splash being heard; we shall have to take a cab from the Peckham Road way, but we must keep it quiet before we get there"—that is, keep the child quiet—"I have also thought of a good plan for an excuse for not bringing a woman into the matter; I have told them that the woman I engaged is likely to be confined, so had to let her husband into the secret, so you can tell them when they bring the child that your missus is a bed just confined, and so you have come; I have seen a third party, so I know it will be all right; I shall be outside your place to-morrow night waiting for you when you leave work, as I don't want to lose sight of you"—I told him I should have to consider over it again, and we parted—I saw Mr. Ford next morning and told him, and the policemen called on me at 10 o'clock, he having sent for them—I told them and acted under their orders—I left work at 6.30 and found Long making for me—I went down the road with him, he said the arrangement about Lewisham was the best he could make, that he had some newspaper in his pocket, but he thought it was hardly large enough to wrap a child in—he said "As soon as we get the money we can buy some canvas at a shop and make a neat bundle, and there we can change one of the sovereigns; I will show you the spot in the Burton Road where we are to meet the woman with the child, shall we walk to the place?" pointing to the exact spot where she would meet us—I said I told my wife I was going to work late to-night, we walked about, and at a few minutes to 9.30 we went to the place he had pointed out—after waiting a minute, Walker called him, saying "Is that you, Long?"—I said "Good God, that is Walker, what is he doing here?"—he said "Nevermind, you keep quiet"—they walked up the road, and after talking a minute or so Long returned, called me, and said, "You go up to about there, where you saw us stop, and you will see a woman bring the child down the road; you will have nothing to say, as I have told him that your wife is confined, and you are the husband"—Long went round the corner, I went to the spot, and after a minute or two Miss Day came down the Knatchbull Road and brought the child to me, and the parcel and this canvas bag containing ten sovereigns—she only said she had dropped the feeding bottle—she then left, and Inspector Moore jumped over the fence and

the police came up—I took the baby and the things to Castle Street Police-station—the parcel was opened there, there was a child's diaper in it, with a hole where initials might have been cut out and a nightdress.

Cross-examined by MR. WARBURTON. Between seven and eight weeks elapsed between the first conversation I had with Long and my giving information to the police—I know Mrs. Hutt, we used to have rooms in her house—all this took place at the interview—I have a wife and four children, one is 2 1/2 years old, but is not weaned yet—I have been fifteen weeks out of work—I was not dismissed for drunkenness—before I was at Mr. Low's I was at Mr. Gunhill's twelve months—I sometimes get a day's work at a brewery twice a week—there was not a talk about my drunkenness—I had a misunderstanding with the secretary, and did not return—I left Gunhill's as the money was not enough—Long did not return the paper to me—he and I often have squabbles, but I never said I would pay him out some time or other—I might have used the phrase—my share of this was to be 5l., one half.

Cross-examined by MR. BESLEY. The first time I saw Walker was on a job at Little College Street—Long paid him deference as if he was some one of importance, and he treated Long as a workman—I only worked one night with Long; he employed me again at Peckham, and told me the house belonged to Walker's father—I just told the outline of the story to Mr. Ford, and then I told it in the presence of Finch and Wethered—I was then taken to the solicitor's office at the Treasury and told it there, and then to the Magistrate—when Long said "I may as well tell you that Walker is the first person I have mentioned it to," that was the only occasion when he mentioned Walker's name—I told the Magistrate that Long said "I have found a very good spot for it, and that is Lewisham Waterworks"—when he said "The woman I have engaged is likely to be confined," he added "and expects to go to bed every day"—Walker was on the other side of the way, and called out loudly "Is that you, Long?"—I recognised his voice and spoke, and was told to be quiet—I have never said that if I had known that Walker had been there with the baby that night I would have gone and told him that the police were on the watch, or that I would have warned him—I had not heard his name for some weeks before that.

Cross-examined by MR. WILLIAMS. I never saw Jones till he was taken in custody—Long also said "You know we both want money bad enough."

By the COURT. I had been out of employ for 15 weeks—Long knew that—I received no information from Long that Walker knew that Long was in communication with me—he always gave me to understand that whatever the amount was to receive, I was to have half of it, but it was not till the night before that I knew that 10l. was the amount.

HENRY MOORE (Police Inspector). On 11th December, about 6 p.m., in consequence of a statement from Barnard, I went with Sergeants Finch, Weatherhead, and James to Mr. Ford's dairy in Herne Hill Road, and about 6.25 saw Long standing outside—Barnard joined him, and we followed them till 8.50—I got over a fence in Benton Road and secreted myself, and at 9.30 Long and Barnard came along Benton Road and made a stand opposite me—Long painted with his umbrella, as if directing Barnard where to go, and went back; Barnard went on about 20 yards and stood still, and in two minutes I heard a baby crying, and saw Miss

Day carrying a baby, which was immediately handed to Barnard—I ran after Miss Day and arrested her in Knatchbull Road—I was not in uniform—Walker then came up and said "What are you going to do with her?"—I said "Who are you?"—he said "Her friend; where is the man?"—I said "I have the man"—Sergeant James came up, and I directed him to take Walker in custody—Barnard took the baby and the money bag to the station by my directions, and I asked him in the prisoner's presence who gave him the bag—he pointed to Miss Day and said that she did—I searched the prisoners, and found this pocket-book on Walker—Long's address is in it, and this entry. (Read: "Exactly opposite St. James's Church. Are you from Egypt? we are 10l. Long 2s. 9d." The 2s. 9d. was struck out and 1s. put in.) Most of these cards are Walker's—this newspaper cutting was also in the pocket-book: "A lady would like to adopt a child from its birth; premium required. Apply, Mrs. Jacobs, 114, Stoke Newington Road, Kingsland"—I went to that address, and found a woman named Chadmers who had inserted it; she is here—I searched Long and found two newspapers and a memorandum book with Barnard's address—on 16th December, about 7 a.m., I went to Jones's father's, Warwick Lodge, Brixton, and saw Jones in bed—I asked his name—he said "William Jones"—I told him we were police officers, and asked if he had seen a cutting in last Saturday's newspapers where three persons were charged with conspiracy to murder a child—he said "Yes"—I said "I yesterday traced the mother of the child, Mrs. Gay, who says you are the father"—he said that he was—after the charge was read over to him at the station he made a statement which I took down in writing, and he signed it—this is it: "When Jones was charged he said 'Am I to say anything?' I said 'As you like.' He said 'I left it with my friend Walker, entirely in his hands: I am innocent of the charge of doing away with the child.' He said he had found a woman to adopt the child. I don't know Long or Barnard. I never saw them in my life to my knowledge."

Cross-examined by MR. WARBURTON. I am informed that Long has not been in regular employment lately; it is rather precarious.

Cross-examined by MR. BESLEY. Here are several entries in Long's pocket-book of his time every day, and a memorandum, "7.30, Thursday, A. R. Gay, 29, Tynemouth Road—Walker came up to me voluntarily 70 yards from where the baby had gone into Barnard's arms—I said at once that I was a police officer.

Cross-examined by MR. WILLIAMS. Walker, Long, and Day were taken on December 11th, taken before the Magistrate on the 12th, the matter appeared in the papers on the 13th, and it was not till the 16th that I searched Jones's premises and found Mrs. Gay's letter.

SARAH JANE CHALMERS . I am the wife of Arthur John Chalmers, of 56, Culver Road, Stoke Newington—about the middle of November I advertised in the Morning Advertiser in the name of Mrs. Jacobs, but did not receive an answer from either of the prisoners—I wanted to take care of a child, having no child of my own.

EMMA LOUISA HUNT . I am a widow, of 24, Crawshay Road, Brixton—Long resided with me there.

Cross-examined by MR. BESLEY. The subject of adopting a child was never mentioned to me, but a wet nurse was mentioned.

Cross-examined by MR. WARBURTON. I gave Mrs. Barnard's name to

Long, but I did that in innocence because she is a good-natured woman—I gave as a reason that Mrs. Barnard had a child which would soon be weaned—that was about five weeks ago, and about two weeks before they were arrested.

ROBERT CRAWLEY . I live at 23, Burton Street, Brixton; I have also an address at 1, Court Chambers, Temple Bar—Jones is an acquaintance of mine—I used to take in letters for him in my name—he gave my name—he told me not long ago that he had got into a scrape with a married woman.

Cross-examined by MR. WILLIAMS. I heard Walker tell Jones that he had found a woman to take the child.

Re-examined. That was about five weeks before we were at Lambeth—I was examined there—the conversation was at Jones's place at Denmark Hill; I was there one afternoon, and Walker came in and told Jones he had found a woman who was going to adopt the child, and she lived somewhere about Stockwell—I did not wait to hear what Jones said to that, I said good-bye and left—the woman's name was not given.

HENRY MOORE (Re-examined). This place is about three miles from Lewisham Waterworks—I have been down there—I have had this plan made (produced), it is correct—there is a footpath with a fence 6 feet 10 inches high on each side; that leads up to a waterfall, and there the fence is 4 feet 10 inches high—it is a regular waterfall, it runs off a table and makes a noise.

Cross-examined by MR. WARBURTON. I know the neighbourhood fairly well—I do not know of any other piece of water where there is a watefall.

This being the case for the prosecution, MR. BESLEY proposed to examine a witness whose name was on the bill, but who had not been called; but MR. POLAND contended that that would give him the right to reply.

MR. BARON HUDDLESTON . A determination was come to at a meeting of the Judges that unless the Attorney-General was personally present, his deputy was not to be allowed to reply. This question arose in a celebrated case, when Mr. Charles represented the Attorney-General, and claimed the right to reply, although witnesses were not called for the defendant; that was permitted, in accordance with several decisions by individual Judges. The matter was brought before a Council of Judges, and a very large majority of the Judges held that it was inexpedient, therefore for the future the Attorney-General's deputy will not have the right of reply where no witnesses are called for the defence.

HENRY MOORE (Re-examined by MR. BESLEY). I found among Walker's papers on the night of the 11th the address of Louisa Harris, 72, Middle Street, Camberwell, and I saw her after the arrest, but cannot give you the date—she told me that an application had been made to her about a child—that was after Walker was in custody—I saw her father at the same time.

MR. BESLEY did not call any witnesses.

BARON HUDDLESTON . Although my opinion is very strong in favour of one general reply, understand that I have not decided anything; but if called upon, I should have decided that where one Counsel calls witnesses, the Counsel for the prosecution has a right to a general reply.

Walker received a good character.

LONG— GUILTY .— Eight Years' Penal Servitude.


29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-228
VerdictsNot Guilty > unknown; Not Guilty > no evidence

Related Material

228. ERNEST CLEMENTS (26) was indicted for, and charged on the Coroner's Inquisition with, the manslaughter of Mary Smalley.

MR. BAGGALLAY Prosecuted.

WILLIAM HENRY ANDREWS . I am a carman, and live at 74, St. Mark's Road, Kennington—on Monday evening, 22nd December, about half-past 8, I was at Camberwell Green, and saw the prisoner driving a butcher's cart from Peckham towards Camberwell Road, about 10 or 12 miles an hour—he was on his off side of the road; his wrong side—he crossed the corner instead of going round it, crossing the metals of the tramcar on to his near side and in front of a butcher's shop, there he Knocked the deceased down and the wheel passed over her—he passed two tramcars before knocking her down—he drove on, turned into Waterloo Street, and I lost sight of him—I did not know him before.

Cross-examined by the Prisoner. There was one tramcar there—there was room enough for two carts to pass on the turn of the corner—you drove between the tramcar and the Green, and crossed the metals—the woman was on the metals when she was run over.

FRANCIS BOSWELL (Detective L). I was at Camberwell Green on the evening of 22nd December—I saw the cart which the prisoner was driving, I was alighting from a tramcar at the time, on the side of the Green—I could not form an estimate of the pace at which he was going, but it was very fast, a furious pace I should call it—he was 40 yards from the corner, as near the middle of the road as possible—I saw the woman knocked down and apparently run over by the cart; she was crossing the road on the tram line—the prisoner stood up in the cart, whether he was actually whipping the horse or not I could not swear, but his action was suggestive of it, it conveyed that impression to my mind—he drove off at a very furious pace; I ran after him, and shouted after him, as did a number of other people—I could not keep up with him—he turned out of the main road—I don't know where his employer lived.

Cross-examined. Your cart was laden with the carcases of sheep, I believe, and there was something more—I must have been less than 10 yards from the place of the accident—you were on your proper side when I saw you—I think you were sober.

CHARLES VINCENT (Policeman P 492). About 8 on the evening of 22nd December I was with Constable Smith at Camberwell Green—I heard a woman scream, turned round, and saw her lying in the middle of the road and the cart driving away about 20 yards from her—I ran after it and called out for him to stop, and so did others—he turned into Waterloo Street and was stopped in about 230 yards; he was going very fast—he appeared to slacken his pace just before he was stopped—his master's shop is in the main road, about 50 yards ahead—by turning into Waterloo Street he went out of his way—there were 10 carcases of sheep and a dead calf in the cart—he had the reins in one hand and the whip in the other—I could not swear that he used the whip.

HENRY HEER . I am 12 years old, I live at Camberwell Green—about 8 on this evening I was standing at the corner of Camberwell Green and Church Street—I saw the prisoner in a cart come round the corner on his wrong side; he knocked the woman down and drove away—he was coming at a sharp pace, a furious pace—I ran to the woman's assistance, some others came up and took her into Dr. Pindar's surgery.

Cross-examined. She was crossing from the police-station—she was dressed in black—there was a tramcar and one or two busses there, you cut across between them instead of going round on your proper side.

JOSEPH CRACKNELL (Police Sergeant P 71). I was on duty inside the station at Camberwell Green, I was called out to the deceased; she was taken into Dr. Pindar's surgery, and from there to the station, and Dr. Owthwaite saw her.

WILLIAM OWTHWAITE . I am a surgeon at Denmark Hill—on the night of 22nd December I was called to see Mrs. Smalley at the station, she was in a state of collapse—I had her removed to her house, and attended her till she died at midnight on the 24th from the injuries she had received.

The prisoner in his defence stated that the deceased being in black, and the place dark, he did not see her, that he felt the wheel go over something and did his best to pull up.


There was another indictment for furious driving, upon which no evidence was offered, and an acquittal was taken.

Before Mr. Recorder.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-229
VerdictGuilty > with recommendation

Related Material

229. THOMAS BARNABUS BALDWIN (15) , Burglariously breaking and entering the dwelling-house of Frederick Payne, with intent to steal.

MR. McNAUGHTEN Prosecuted; MR. MOYSES Defended.

WILLIAM KNOTT (Policeman). On the night of 17th December, about 20 minutes to 12, I was in a street running out of New Street, Kennington—on passing the side door of 4, New Street, I heard a grating noise—I concealed myself for a few minutes and heard the smashing of glass—I at once went to the side door and caught the prisoner coming out—I said "What are you doing here?"—he said "I was making my way to the back belonging to Mr. James's, I climbed over the wall and accidentally broke two panes of glass"—I called Mr. Payne up and searched the premises—I found two panes of glass broken in the back parlour window, part of the frame-work was also broken, and about a dozen tiles were removed from the top of the roof of the wash-house, which is a portion of the same building and gives access to the house—I took the prisoner to the station—in answer to the charge he said "I was making my way to the stables to sleep there for the night"—I found on him three keys, an iron wedge, a plated pencil case, and a small piece of glass in his waistcoat pocket, which he said must have fallen there, it was similar to the glass of the window.

Cross-examined. There is a yard at the back of the wash-house—I don't know whether Mr. James lives there, he has stables, but they are in a different direction; they do not adjoin the wash-house—the roof of the wash-house slopes towards the window, he might have fallen from the roof and so have broken the window, but I don't think so, because the glass was broken outwards—his whole dress was very dirty.

JOHN TILL (Police Sergeant 93). I examined these premises—two large flower-pots containing ferns had been lifted from the sill and placed on the ground, and on the sill was this pocket-knife, lying open, and this box of matches—the centre pane of glass in the upper sash of the window had been removed in three pieces, and stood od the ground leaning against the wall—the pane of glass adjoining was broken and the sash-bar between the two panes was also broken—inside the window were

several burnt matches, and on the shutter, inside, which was a new painted one, there were muddy marks of either feet or hands, but no indentation—I heard the charge read over to the prisoner—he replied "Not entering, I did not enter, I only put my arm in."

Cross-examined. He said nothing about falling—it would be impossible. for him to slide down the roof and so break the glass—the prisoner said the keys belonged to his father, but his father afterwards denied that.

FREDERICK PAYNE . I am a general dealer of 4, New Street—on the night of 17th December I went to bed at a quarter past 10 o'clock; I saw that all the windows were secured—no panes of glass were broken in the back parlour windows—about half-past 11 o'clock I heard glass breaking and I got up and came downstairs and found the prisoner in custody—I saw that two squares of glass were broken in the back parlour window and some tiles taken off the roof of the wash-house—this knife and these matches do not belong to me or to any one in the house.

Cross-examined. I do not know the prisoner—there are no stables in the yard adjoining mine, there are in the next yard but one, I do not know the name of the occupier.

The prisoner received a good character, and his employer undertook to take him on again.

GUILTY.—Recommended to mercy by the Jury. Six Days' Imprisonment.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-230
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

230. ANDREW QUAIL (36) and RICHARD TUBBS (60) ; Unlawfully obtaining two bales of silk from Arthur Gosling by false pretences. Second Count, feloniously receiving the same. Third Count, for a conspiracy to obtain the goods from the South-Western Railway Company.

MR. HORACE AVORY Prosecuted; MR. BRUME appeared for Quail, and MR. GEOGHEGAN for Tubbs.

ARTHUR SHELDER . I am a silk merchant, of Union Court, City—on 21st August I consigned two bales of silk, value 115l. to Mr. Hannan, of Gillingham, Dorset—I sent them by my porter to the Four Swans booking-office, Camomile Street—I did not authorise any one to take delivery of them next morning from the South-Western Railway—I never saw this delivery order (produced) before—I knew Quail slightly about twelve years ago as a silk trimming manufacturer.

WILLIAM SPOTT . I am clerk to Mr. Collinson, proprietor of the Four Swans booking-office—his son Leonard was also in the service on August 24th, when I received two bales of silk consigned to Mr. Hannan, of Gillingham, by Mr. Sheldon—I forwarded them the same evening by South-Western Railway cart to Nine Elms Station—these (produced) are the original way-bill and copy, the porter takes one with him and keeps the other—I knew nothing of those goods being stopped the same night, or of this delivery order—it is similar to one of our forms, but it is not one of them.

Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN. Leonard Collinson pleaded guilty two Sessions ago to stealing the silk (See page 224)—he was not called as a witness at the police-court while I was there.

WILLIAM BROOKER . I am a porter at Nine Elms Station—on August 21st I received the two bales of silk mentioned in this way-bill—it Was my business to forward them, but in the course of the evening I received

a stop order and held them back—I sent the order to the office in the shed, I gave it to Mr. Morris, the head porter.

JOHN ANTIN . I am am a porter at Nine Elms—on August 21st I was on duty in the shed and received a stop order referring to the two bales of silk in this way-bill—I made an entry in this book from the order and the way bill—I attached the stop order to my report, enclosed them in an envelope addressed to Mr. Jones, and left them at the letter sorting office—the stop order should be found in Mr. Jones's office after it had been taken out of the envelope—I have searched for it, but cannot find it—this is my book, it contains the entry I made at the time from the stop order.

Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN. I do not think Mr. Jones is here, either he or the lad Mason would open it.

ARTHUR GOSLING . I am a porter at Nine Elms—on the morning of August 22nd a carman who I now know as Green brought me this delivery order, it is on a printed form purporting to be from Collinson, of the Four Swans booking-office: "Hannam Gillingham, two bales, please deliver to bearer the above-mentioned articles:—sender thinks they have sent the wrong sort" (Not signed)—I referred to this book of Antin's, and finding the entry corresponded I handed over the two bales of silk to Green—the number of the van corresponded.

ALFRED DUCKFIELD . I am a printer, of 182, Bow Road, about 200 yards from the Bird-in-Hand—on August 13th, 1884, I printed 25 of these delivery orders for a stranger, who I have not seen since—they were paid for and taken away the next morning.

JOHN COLLINSON . I am proprietor of the Four Swans booking-office—I know nothing of this delivery order—I never authorised any one to stop these two bales of silk or to get them next day.

JAMES GREEN . I am a carman of Bird-in-Hand Yard, Bow, behind the Bird-in-Hand public-house, of which Quail is manager—on 21st August about mid-day young Collinson, who gave the name of Hyde, came to me with a tall man who I have heard called Williams—that is Collinson (In custody)—they asked me if I could do a job next day for Vauxhall with a light cart or a van—I said "Yes," and on the morning of the 22nd the tall man came and asked if I was ready, and I went and hired a horse and cart, because mine was out—Williams got into the cart, we had a glass of ale at Vauxhall, and he gave me this order to go to Nine Elms, saying that he had some business to do, which would take about the same time—I was to meet him at the same public-house—I fetched the goods and met him there, he jumped into the cart, and told me to drive to Camden House, Bishopsgate, where we delivered the two bales into a large cart—young Mr. Collinson was standing at one side of it, and there was a carman—it was said that my cart was not large enough to collect other goods, or I could have had the job—Collinson handed five shillings to Williams, who gave it to me—I left them there and went home, and two or three hours afterwards Quail came and asked if I could run over to Green Street with the cart to take two parcels—I said "Yes," and when I went out I put the two parcels in my cart like the two bales, but if they were the same they were in different wrappers; they were about the size and weight and shape, and felt like the same sort of goods; they were very soft—Quail told me to take them to Bethnal Green—I started alone, but he joined me not many hundred

yards off and rode with me to the farther end of Bethnal Green, where he told me to go down a street with them opposite the Salmon and Ball, which is no thoroughfare, and there would be a man at the door—I did so and saw Tubbs at a door, who said "This is all right," and Mrs. Tubbs called out from the first-floor window "This is all right"—I took one bale upstairs to the first-floor room where she was, and Tubbs carried the other up—I then went into the Salmon and Ball and met Quail and Williams, and we drank together—I knew Quail as the manager there—I only received the 5s.—I have done jobs for him before, and not charged him, as if I wanted a fiver he was always ready to lend it—on August 28th I was apprehended on this charge and went before a Magistrate—the Grand Jury threw out the bill, and I made a statement of the circumstances.

Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN. These goods were removed from one cart to another in the public street at one o'clock in the day—they were wrapped in something like meat covers, not so neat as those I brought from the station—I did not see Williams at the Bird-in-Hand, but he was at Bethnal Green when I got there—when I was taken I told the detective all about carting the silk, and where I took it to—I did not mention Quail's name, and I did not know he had anything to do with it—I don't think I mentioned Quail's name before the Magistrate—I was not asked—if the bales were the same, they were in different wrappers, and I never saw the inside of them—I never gave evidence on a charge of stealing meat—a man named Alfred Hicks was charged with stealing meat when he was at work for me, but I did not give evidence against him—the police once locked me up about a conspiracy about a horse, but I gave evidence at Worship Street—I was the man who found out the horse.

Re-examined. I was discharged next morning—I had only driven a man who had some dealings with the horse—I know nothing worse than that against my character—I have been a carman 25 years at Bow—I showed the constable my books; I have got them here—there is no entry in them of carrying the goods from the Bird-in-Hand to Bethnal Green.

WALTER BAGG . (Police Sergeant). After Collinson had pleaded guilty I received further information and took Quail at the Bird-in-Hand on November 22nd—I had seen Green—I read the warrant and said that whatever statement he made to me I should take down in writing—he said "I have nothing to say; I know a tenant of mine, Mr. Green, has been in trouble about it, I do not understand it"—in answer to questions whether he had employed Green to do jobs for him, he said "Never, except to draw a few tons of coal"—I asked if he employed Green to do anything on August 22nd—he said "I did not employ him to do any other jobs"—I took him to the station—he was charged, and said "All right"—his wife and daughter, who were there, asked him when he should return—he said that it might be in ten years' time—two days afterwards I took Tubbs at 41, Gale's Gardens, Bethnal Green, and Green identified him—Gale's Gardens is the first turning beyond the Salmon and Ball, it is no thoroughfare—when Green came in Tubbs said "This is the man who took the small bale from me"—Green said that Quail went with him to the Salmon and Ball with the tall man, and afterwards to Gale's Gardens, and told him he would find a man standing at a door waiting to receive them—Quail was waiting at the

top of Gale's Gardens, and he said to Tubbs "You are the man who took the small bale; you complained of being unwell at the time, and your wife was at the top window, and called to me "This is the house"—Tubbs said "I never took anything, and I have not seen Quail for two years"—Mrs. Tubbs then began to speak, and I cantioned her that I should take down in writing what she said. (MR. BRUNE objected that what Mrs. Tubbs said would not be evidence, but the RECORDER considered that it would be evidence either because Tubbs made an answer or because he was silent.) Mrs. Tubbs said "I have not seen Quail for a considerable time, and have not taken anything in from him at any time"—she afterwards said "Mr. Quail came here some time ago and asked if I could take a parcel in, as he did not want to go home. I said 'Yes,' and about half an hour afterwards this man, "pointing to Green," came with the bundles. I said 'Take them upstairs.' I don't remember whether my husband was at home or not. I won't say he was in and I won't say he was not. The bales were kept by me for a few days, when two men came to me before I was up and said that they had come for the two parcels. I told them I was glad they had. I don't know who the two men were who fetched them away out of my room; I don't think I should know them again. I was not up when they came; it was about nine in the morning."—Tubbs stood by and heard all this, but did not say a word—I took him to the station and charged him—he said "You have made a mistake."

Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN When Quail said that he might not be back for ten years he was washing himself, and said that he was only going out for a walk—I cannot say whether he was chaffing or not—I have said "I had a statement from Green, but he did not mention Quail's name before I went to Quail's house"—I cannot explain that—I have not seen young Collinson since he has been in custody, nor have any of the police to my knowledge—he is not sentenced yet—the charge made in Mrs. Tubbs's hearing was stealing two bales of silk, value 115l., and he used the terms "bales," "parcels," and "bundles."

GUILTY on the second and third Counts only. Eighteen Months' Hard Labour each.

The RECORDER considered that the country was much indebted to the police inspector and the sergeant for the pains they had taken in the case.

Before Mr. Common Serjeant.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-231
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty; Not Guilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

231. JANE ANDERSON (33) and MARY ANN LAMB (42) , Unlawfully uttering counterfeit coin.


MR. GOODRICH Prosecuted.

WILLIAM BISP . I am manager of the Queen's Head, Charlotte Street, Blackfriars Road—on 26th December the prisoners came in, and Lamb called for a pint of beer, and tendered a sixpence—I noticed that it was bad but put it underneath without making any remark, and gave her the change—they both drank out of the same pot—Lamb asked me to mind a basket offish while they went outside—they returned in two or three minutes, and Lamb asked for another pint, and tendered another bad sixpence—I kept it in my hand, went into the bar-parlour, and rang it, but Anderson then left the house—I followed her and stopped her in Charlotte Street—I said "Your friend wants you at the back of the Queen's Head"—she said "I have no friend"—I said "You had better

come back and see"—a constable came and I gave the two sixpences to him.

JOHN EWERS (Policeman M 210). I was called to the house; Anderson was outside and Lamb inside—Mr. Bisp charged them—Lamb said "I have not seen this woman for two years, I accidentally met her and we went to have a drink together; I did not know the money was bad"—I took them both to the station, and found in Anderson's purse another bad sixpence in one compartment and some good money in the other.

Cross-examined by Anderson. You gave the purse into my hand and I searched it.

WILLIAM WEBSTER . These, two sixpences uttered by Lamb are bad, and the one found in Anderson's purse is bad, and from the same mould as the other two.

Anderson's Defence. I met Lamb in Blackfriars Road; I had not seen her for two years; she gave me some calico and a sixpence to make two shirts and a chemise. I put the sixpence in my purse, and the inspector found it there.

ANDERSON— NOT GUILTY . Sentence on LAMB— Four Months' Hard Labour.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-232
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

232. ROBERT BURTON RALPH , Unlawfully falsifying certain cheques and making certain false entries in a ledger.


JOHN TOYNBEE . I am clerk to Charles Harvey and James Bourne, the executors of Messrs. Coutts and Collins, potato salesmen in the Borough Market—the defendant was the manager employed by the executors up to September 10th, when he left—I kept the books and acted under his instructions—he was allowed to sign cheques "Harvey and Bourne, R. B. Ralph"—this is the ledger—Mr. Taylor had two accounts with the firm, one for goods bought for him, and another for goods sold for him on commission—the account for goods bought extends from November, 1882, to 16th July, 1884, when the account was closed by a payment of 374l. 19s. 10d.f by cheque—among the payments made to Taylor is one of 20l., on 21st December, 1882. (The cheque was here produced, dated December 21st, on the London and. County Banking Company, "Pay W. W. Taylor or order 20l., Harvey Bourne, R. B. Ralph," "order" bring crossed out and initialled "R. B. R." and "Bearer" substituted.) The entry in the ledger on 21st December is "To cheque 20l."—on 3rd Jan., 1883, I find a cheque of 60l., with "order" scratched out and initials over it—that appears in the account "To cheque 60l."—these entries were made by me from, the counterfoils—these two cheques are both in the defendant's writing—this (produced) is Mr. Taylor's commission account for February and March, 1883—I find here a payment to Taylor on 30th March of a cheque for 267l. 17s. 5d.—I have looked for the cheque but have not been able to find it, but this is the counterfoil—I find an entry in April, 1883, of potatoes sold for 101l. 1s., in part payment of which I find on May 9th, a cheque for 87l. 3s. 11d.—the difference between that and the larger amount would be made up of freight and commission—I am unable to find the cheque, but this is the counterfoil—I also find an account of potatoes sold in May for 128l. 16s. 3d., of which 101l. 13s. 11d. is paid on account on 10th July—the difference between

the two amounts is made up by freight and commission—I cannot find the cheque or the counterfoil—here is an account of Mr. Miller of 53l. 5s. 7d. for potatoes sold for him on commission; a cheque appears to have been paid to him on 16th May, 1884, for 47l. 18s. 2d.; this is it. ("Order" was scratched out and initialled "R.B.R." and "Bearer" inserted. M) Here is an account of Mr. Circuit for goods sold on commission—I find an entry on 24th August, 1883, showing a cheque of 60l. to that account, which I have got. ("Order" was scratched out and initialled "R.B.R.," and "Bearer" inserted.) I find several other cheques paid to Mr. Circuit on that day, and the last entry is "Commission 26l. 12s. 2d." and "Commission 5l."l. on 28th September 23l. 3s. 9d. is brought over as a balance owing to Circuit—that account is extinguished by a cheque on 14th February, 1834, of 31l. 13s. 3d.—"Order" is scratched out in the same way—here is an account on 3rd October, 1882, of apples sold for Mr. Payne, "11 barrels of Ribstones sold on commission at 36s. per barrel, 19l. 16s.," and on the other side, "Railway charge 17l. 7d., commission 11s., cheque 11l. 7s. 5d."—that disposes of the account, and this is the cheque. ("Order" was scratched out and initialled.) This is Mr. Heritage's account for apples sold on commission in October, 1882; the first account is made up to Oct. 10, 57l. 15s. 6.—I find on the other side a cheque for 49l. 6s. 2d., discharging the account, the difference being made up in charge for freight and commission. ("Order" was scratched out and initialled.) I find that quantities of apples were sold for Mr. Heritage in October and November and put to his credit, but on the other side I find several entries for freight and commission, making the amount 78l. 10s. 6d.—that account is disposed of by this cheque. ("Order" was scratched out and initialled, and the cheque endorsed "R. B. Ralph.") This is Mr. Fidler's account for a purchase of potatoes for him in December, 1882, at 100s. a ton, bringing out 540l. 5s.—that is discharged by this cheque of December 7th, for 150l., and another on 19th December for 150l., and another on December 30th for 100l., leaving a balance due to him on December 30th of 140l. 5s., which was discharged by cheques for 118l. 3s. and 21l. 12s.—I posted the cheque for 118l. 13l. in the book. The 21l. 12s. cheque had "order" scratched that and initialled "R. B. R.")

Cross-examined. I have been at this business since early in April, 1881—Mr. Coutts, the last surviving partner, died on May 3rd, 1881; after his death the banking account of the firm was for some time in the defendant's name, who had a banking account of his own at the same bank, but I do not know at what date, my impression is that as soon as the directors obtained probate they opened an account—I kept the books, and all the entries I have referred to are my own—Mr. Ralph kept the cheque book, and handed it back with the counterfoils to me, and I entered them in the cash book and posted them in the ledger, I got the freight from the railway advice—there were different rates of commission for different customers, I used to get the rate to charge for customers from Mr. Ralph, but there was an average price by which we charged usually in default of special information; Mr. Payne we charge 1s. a barrel commission and Mr. Heritage 6d. a bushel—the accounts were audited quarterly, and for the last 2 1/2 years by Mr. Liddall—all the accounts I have referred to are customers' accounts, except Mr. Taylor's sale and purchase account—the money is due to Mr. Taylor, and it is Ralph's duty to draw a cheque for it, and he did so—Mr. Taylor has been a customer of the

firm since the commencement of 1882—some of these goods were received on 19th January, 1883, and some on March 9th, he has dealt very largely with the firm, to the amount of many thousands—we should received goods at the current price of the day, Mr. Ralph would attach, the price in the wharf book, and I posted my ledger from that—we have a good, many customers and a good many lots come in of the same quality in there course of a day, and there would be no a separate sale of 248 sacks of magnums, but in the commission account the credit would be given at the price of the day—so far as I know all these prices applied, to all goods of that quality on that day, the customer would be credited with the regular market price of the day, the commission would be deducted, and the cost of the goods being sent in, and the balance would be the customer's, the firm getting the commission—in Taylor's case the firm had received all the commission which was due on these goods—Mr. Circuit is, dead, and Mr. Swan manages the business—the account was made up in the same way, and in each account Mr. Ralph has received the amount of commission which would have been charged to any of our customers—a cheque is made out to Mr. Collins for 60l. in connection with Circuit's, account—I called Mr. Balph's attention to it, he said that it referred to cucumbers.

Re-examined. There is "com." in Taylor's account—that meant commission—you will see the same word written against ft portion of the goods, and "contract" against others—4 think these are in Ralph's, writing, and he would tell me to put "contract" here—in all the items of Tatlor's bought account the contracts are made by Mr. Ralph, and he reports to me, and in that way the items go to the contract part of the account, he has marked the items which are commission—with regard to this cheque of 10th January being split into two, my, impression is that I said, "What are these two cheques for?" and Mr. Ralph said, "Well, that makes up the account, don't it?"—I do not know how Ralph was, feeding his private account at the bank, it is not the subject of audit by the auditor.

WILLIAM TAYLOR . I am a potato salesman of Duke Street, London. Bridge—I have dealt with Coutts and Collins some time and had an account with them for goods sold outright, and goods sold on commission,—I sold potatoes to them, and the account was closed on 16th July, 1864, by a cheque for 374l. 19s. 10d., which I had applied for on several occasions, sometimes in writing and sometimes seeing Mr. Ratyh—I did not receive either of these cheques for 20l. or 60l. nor did I receive on the commisssion account a cheque for 267l. 17s. 5d. on 30th March—I received a cheque for 154l. 19s. 1d. on 31st March, that referred to a seed accounts a private speculation between myself and Mr. Ralph, but not all; we were instructed to post 100l. to the seed account and 54l. 19s. 1d. to the general account of Coutts and Collins—I did not receive a cheque for 87l. 3s. 11d. on May 9, or for 101l. 13s. 11d. on 10th July, 1883—on 11th July I received a cheque for 139l. 8s., drawn by Balph himself, relating to two private speculation, the seed account, I had no letter with it—I have repeatedly applied to him for money, and he has said that the firm were short of money, and he had not got money to pay me with.

Cross-examined. I have had transaction with the firm 20 years and more—Ralph has been with the firm seven years, I believe—I have no claim outstanding against the firm, I have been paid all—the transaction

I had with Ralph was for seed potatoes—they were bought in October and sold in May, June, and July, 1883—I left it to him on several occasions to give me my share of the profit—everything has been settled so far, as my books show—I received 80l. from Ralph on 14th December by his cheque, but not the 20l. on 21st December or the 60l. on 3rd January.

Re-examined. The only seed speculation was from the autumn of one year to the June of the next—he gave me a cheque for 100l. on account in March before they were delivered—the seed business is totally different, and has no connection with the ordinary trade—I told him in October that I had the offer of certain potatoes in Dunbar at a certain price, for seed—he said he would join me if I wished, and I bought them and gave him the invoice—he knew what I bought at—he returned me all my money and something over for profit—the profit was 9l.—I left it to him to give me what he chose—they were sold by Coutts and Collins.

ALBERT MILLER . I am a potato merchant at Green Street, Linstead, Kent—I have dealt with Coutts and Collins for some time; I sent them potatoes to sell on commission—they sold some for me in May, 1884, amounting to 47l. 18s. 2d.—Ralph paid me 10l. in cash in May—I remember hearing of his leaving the firm, I think I got a circular—I got my money about 20th September, 1884—I did not know that Ralph left on 12th September—he sent me the 37l. by letter; I did not see him—he had promised me a cheque when he gave me the 10l.—I could have had it before, but I told him I did not want it—I believe I tore the letter up.

Cross-examined. Mr. Ralph offered to give me the whole amount in May, but I told him I was going to Holland, and I had rather he would give me 10l. in cash and the balance afterwards, and he sent me a cheque for the balance in September—I had never asked him for it between these times.

Re-examined. Ralph went with me to Holland—we were there four or five days, and came back together—after we came back I saw him perhaps once a month—I have been subpoenaed to come here.

HENRY SWAN . I am manager to the executors of John C. Circuit, market gardener, of Rainham, in Essex—my transaction with Coutts and Collins commenced in August, 1883, when I sold them a large quantity of cucumbers amounting to 279l. 17s.—I was paid partly a cash and partly by cheques—I did not receive this cheque for 60l.; it is "Pay Collins"—no such sum was due to me at that date, August 24th, 1883—I did not receive this cheque of 14th February, 1884, for 31l. 13s. 3d.; this is "Pay J.T.C. Circuit"—no such balance as that was due to me—my transactions were sales outright.

Cross-examined. I mean sales outright to Mr. Collins; I am not the person who employed Coutts and Collins to sell on commission—Mr. Collins told me when he bought the goods that they were to be sent to Coutts and Collins, and that they would pay me—he paid me 9l. deposit—I knew there was such a firm as Coutts and Collins, but I had never done business with them—I do not know Ralph—I sold them at different prices, which I arranged with Mr. Collins—some of them were delivered by cart, but most of them by rail in our own name—Mr. Ralph had nothing to do with the bargain; I did not know him, but I saw him afterwards.

Re-examined. These were consignments to Coutts and Collins direct, and I charged them—on 18th August I received a cheque for 61l. making a total of 70l., on ten tons of cucumbers; on 23rd August, another cheque for 105l.; on 28th August a cheque for 80l.; on September 20th, a cheque for 14l. 14s., and another cheque in October for 10l. 3s., making 279l. 17s.—I had sent in an account to Coutts and Collins for the 14l. 14s., and received the cheque on September 20th—I did not have a cheque for 9l.—this cheque is to E. A. Swan, drawn to bearer, but I have never seen it, the other four cheques are endorsed by me, and are payable to order, but in this 9l. and 10l. 3s. cheque, "order" is crossed out—I have never bad the cheque for 60l. or 31l. 13s. 3d.—I did not know what Collins was, but I thought he might be one of the firm—I never came to any settlement of account with him, other than the receipt of this cheque—I was not entitled to the 60l.

NATHANIEL CROSSE PAYNE . I am a farmer of 15, Clarendon Street, Oxford—in September, 1882, Ralph came to my place, introduced by Mr. Thomas, a tradesman of Oxford, as manager to Coutts and Collins; he heard the introduction and acquiesced in it—I sold him eleven barrels of Ribstons, thirty-two bushels, but I made them thirty-three by putting in a bushel of turnips—he gave me a cheque of Coutts and Collins for 14l.—I believe this is it (produced)—I never received this cheque of Coutts and Collins for 18l. 7s. 8d.; that transaction of thirty-two bushels of apples closed that account.

WILLIAM HERITAGE . I am a market-gardener near Oxford—in September, 1882, Ralph called on me with Mr. Thomas, who introduced him; he asked me if I had any fruit to sell, and I sold him a quantity of apples at 4s. a bushel during October—I received from him during October four cheques for 20l., making 80l.; all those were sales outright—I had no transaction with him again till nearly a year afterwards—it is not true that I sold him apples at 5s., 6s. 6d., and 9s. a bushel—I never sold at any price but 4s.—I never received a cheque for 70l. 10s. 6d., or 49l. 10s. 2d.

Cross-examined. I made a bargain with him to sell my apples at an all round price, there were different sorts, some fetched more than 4s. in the market, and some less—I received 20l. on account the same day—I was always paid by cheque, I have no claim against anybody.

Re-examined. These are the cheques I received (produced)—I changed five over the bank counter and endorsed one.

CHARLES FIDLER . I am a potato salesman at Reading—in November, 1882, I sold Coutts and Collins, through Mr. Ralph, 1440 sacks of potatoes at 96s. a ton, which with an extra 5s. for straw made 518l. 13s.—I received two cheques for 150l., another for 100l., and another for 118l. 13s., that balanced the transaction—I did not receive this cheque (produced) for 21l. 12s. on that transaction, that was a sale outright.

Cross-examined. I have received all I bargained to receive—I see by my books that I sold higher that day, but not lower, no doubt there was haggling, but that was the lowest price I took that day—I have dealt with Coutts and Collins about twenty years.

Re-examined. 96s. is a low price, the contract was for 108 tons—I delivered on the 15th, 16th, 17th, and 18th—I must send a delivery order or they would not fetch the things.

HENRY HARRIS HALLIDAY . I am a clerk in the London and County Bank, Southwark Branch, High Street, Borough—these four cheques

are drawn by the defendant, and his account has been charged with them—I produce a true copy of it since he opened it—credit is given to his private account.

CHARLES HARVEY . I am one of the executors of Mr. John Coutte, who died I believe in May, 1881, my co-executor Mr. Bourne and I have been carrying on the business—Ralph was our manager at 4l. a week, he was to receive a commission on our profits, but as there have been no profits for a long time he did not have any, this was the first, and he then received a commission—on 10th September he left our service—I had no knowledge that he had a private banking account, or of it being used for the firm—I never authorised him to alter cheques from "order" to "bearer," or knew of his doing so—I believe he afterwards started in business for himself—I did not know of his carrying on private speculations, or I should have had him dismissed; he was a paid servant, and we were entitled to the whole of his time, we trusted him accordingly.

Cross-examined. I did not have much to do with the business—we had an accountant to prepare the balance sheet and look over matters—I had no more experience in it than I have as a lawyer, I have been foreman to a gun maker—if Ralph bought on account of the firm a lot of apples he would have authority to pay by cheque of the firm—all the cheques are printed crossed.

Re-examined. He had no authority to buy 100 tons at 96s. and charge the firm 100s., or to draw this cheque for 118l. 13s. and pocket 21l. 12s.

THOMAS JAMES BOURNE . I am executor to John Coutts—I have heard Mr. Harvey's evidence; it is a fact that there have been no profits for some time—I had no knowledge that the prisoner was dealing with the cheques of the firm by altering them from "bearer" to "order" and putting them into his account, or that he was engaged in private speculations, or that he had a private account, I know that when he left he started in business.

Cross-examined. I am secretary to the National Guardian Life Insurance Company—Mr. Harvey and I got a commission of five per cent each on the profits of this business, but it is so long ago that we got it that I cannot remember when it was, I possibly received 37l. 10s. commission in July, 1882.

Re-examined. I believe I had two sums paid me for commission, I don't think I have had more, and for some time there has been no profit.

THOMAS PICKLES (Police Sergeant M). On 15th December I received this warrant and went to to the prisoner's stand in the Borough Market and read it to him—he said "I suppose they have done this because I have opened a business opposite to them, I have nothing more to say."

The prisoner received a good character.

GUILTY on 20th and 25th Counts, these charging him with falsifying accounts, with intent to defraud, in the cases of Heritage and Fidler. There were other indictments against the prisoner.— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-233
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

233. THOMAS MOORE (18) , Unlawfully uttering counterfeit coin.

MR. GOODRICH Prosecuted.

FRANCES ADDISON . I am between 10 and 11 and live at 2, Running Horse Yard, Blackfriars Road—I have known the prisoner by sight, but not for long—on a Monday evening about six weeks ago I met him

in the Blackfriars Road between 6 and 7 o'clock outside a collar-dresser's shop—I ran past him—he called me back and said "Little girl, will you fetch me half a quartern of flour?"—I said "Yes"—he gave me half a crown and a penny—I went to Mr. Bedman's shop, No. 37—Miss Baker served me with the flour and gave me the change—I took them to the prisoner, who had moved from the collar-dresser's to the kerb, a few yards down—he gave me the penny for myself and went away—some days afterwards I was fetched to the police-station and picked him out from other men, I am quite sure he is the man.

Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I know you by your trousers, I did not look at your face—when I fetched the flour, or when you gave me the penny, your trousers were a brown and black stripe.

PRISCILLA BAKER . I am assistant to Mr. Redman, 87, Blackfriars Road—on 1st December, at 6 o'clock, Addison came in for half a quartern of flour and tendered a half-crown, which I noticed was a dead colour, it rang like an ordinary half-crown—I asked the child where she got it from—she said a gentleman gave it to her—I gave her 2s. 3d. change—later in the evening Redman called my attention to the half-crown I had put in the till—I am sure this is it, I recognised it again, these marks were not on it then—there were a good many half-crowns in the till.

WILLIAM REDMAN . I live at 37, Blackfriars Road—about 10 o'clock p.m. on 1st December I examined the money in my till and saw there this half-crown—I communicated with Miss Baker and it was given to Simpson in my shop—he marked it.

JOHN HENRY BURWARD . I keep the King John public-hotwe in Southwark Street—about a quarter to seven on the evening of 15th December a little boy came in—afterwards my barmaid made a communication to me—I went to my till and found a bad florin there, I put it in my pocket—I gave some instructions to my barmaid, she served the little boy, he tendered her a florin which I immediately put in my pocket—I saw it was bad directly I took it up, this is it—I instructed her to give him change and let him go, and directly he went I instructed my potman to follow him and followed him myself—outside I saw the prisoner waiting for the boy by the railway arches—he crossed the road, met the boy, and took the bottle with the half-quartern of rum which the barmaid had served him with—the little boy went away, and I have not been able to find him—I passed the prisoner and stood—he passed me and ran down Bear Lane—I tripped him up—he asked me what I wanted—I said "You will come back with me and I will tell you what I want"—he tried to get rid of the half-quartern of rum, he struggled, my potman came to my assistance—we took him back to the house—he dropped a bad florin on the way, a lad picked it up—the prisoner dropped another, which another boy picked up and ran away with—he took the bottle out of his pocket and tried to drop it, and I took hold of his hand and took it away from him—he ran about fifty yards.

GEORGE SIMPSON (Policeman L 40). On 15th December I was called to the King John's Head, Southwark Street, where I saw the prisoner—he was given into my custody by the last witness—the prisoner said "I sent a boy in with a good shilling for half a quartern of rum, and he brought me the bottle and the change back"—I asked him if he had any money on him, he produced sixpence, three shillings, three sixpences,

and three pence farthing in bronze, all good—Burward gave me the bad coin which I produce—later on I went back to the King John's Head and outside found a bad shilling—Addison identified the prisoner the day after he was taken into custody from five others—he was wearing black and brown trousers when taken into custody and when the child identified him.

WILLIAM JOHN WEBSTER . This half-crown, three florins, and one shilling are all bad, the florin found is from the same mould as one of the others.

Witness for the Defence.

MARY SMITH . I am the prisoner's mother, my husband is a carpenter at 188, Coldford Road—he did not wear the trousers he has on now for 10 weeks previous to being locked up; the trousers he had on were black and white stripes.

Cross-examined. He came home on the 2nd December—I saw him on the Monday—I had these clothes in my box for 10 weeks right off—he has never been in trouble before.

Prisoner's Defence. I was not wearing the trousers the little girl said she picked me out by.

GUILTY .— Fifteen Months' Hard Labour.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-234
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceNo Punishment > sentence respited

Related Material

234. WALTER GIBSON (38) , Unlawfully uttering counterfeit coin.

MR. POLAND Prosecuted.

MATTHEW WILLIAM MURRAY . I keep a coffee house at 19, Upper Grange Road, Bermondsey—about 7.30 p.m. on 31st December the prisoner came in for a cup of tea, an egg, and a slice of bread, which came to 3 1/2 d., giving me a half-crown in payment—it felt greasy, I cut the edge off with a knife and was sure it was bad—I told the prisoner it was bad and asked for 3 1/2 d.—he tendered a good half-crown and said he knew where he got it from and would take it back; that he was a hard working man, and I gave it to him—I gave him 2s. 2 1/2 d. change and he left—I sent my little girl after him—five or ten minutes after I was called to the police-station and there saw the prisoner—they said they had searched him and he had not got the half-crown on him—he said he went to the public-house opposite and got twopenny worth of whisky with it—I went and brought my little girl back to the station to ask where she had followed him to—I told the inspector what she said, and I and the constable then went to the urinal in Fort Road—the constable in my presence there found this half-crown which I had returned to him—to the best of my belief this is the same one, the cut is something similar to the way in which I cut it.

Cross-examined. I could not positively swear that is the coin you gave me.

LILIAN MURRAY . I am the last witness's daughter—on the night of the 31st, from what my father said to me, I followed the prisoner to the corner of South wark Park Road, where he crossed the road, went past our house again, and turned into the urinal at the corner of Fort Road—when he came out he went to Willow Walk—I then saw a constable and gave him into custody—I did not lose sight of him; he did not go into a public-house all that time—when given into custody he said "What do you want me for"—the constable said "You come in here and wait and see"—the constable took him to the station and sent for my father, who came.

Cross-examined. I spoke to a woman at the corner of Southwark Park Road—you went into no house while I was speaking to her.

By the COURT. I was not speaking to her for very long—I was looking sideways at her all the time—I pointed out the urinal to the constable.

ELIZA TALBOT (Policeman M 263). About 8 on the night of 31 December, Lillie Murray called my attention to the prisoner, whom I took in custody—he said "What do you want me for?"—I said "You have been in the coffee shop, Upper Grange Road, and tendered a bad half-crown"—he said "No, it is a mistake, it was a good one; I have just been into the public-house at the corner and changed it for twopenny worth of whisky"—I took him to the station and found on him two good florins and 3 1/2 d. in bronze—I afterwards went with the two other witnesses to the urinal in Fort Road and Orange Road, and found the half-crown lying in the left-band corner of the urinal—as soon as I picked it up Murray identified it by a cut he took off the rim—I went back to the station and told the prisoner "I have found this half-crown in the urinal that the little girl pointed out where you went in"—he said "I never had the halfcrown"—I afterwards went to the public-house and made inquiries.

Cross-examined.. I did not go straight from the station to the urinal—I searched the gardens on the way from the coffee house to the urinal.

By the COURT. It was 10 minutes after the little girl gave him in charge that I found the coin; the urinal was right opposite the station—I put my number on the coin.

WILLIAM JOHN WEBSTER . This half-crown is quite bad—bad coins generally have a smooth greasy feel—you could not make much of a niche on a good coin.

The Prisoner's Statement before the Magistrate. "I did not know it was bad."

The prisoner in his defence stated that he did not believe the coin produced was the one he tendered, but that if it was, he did not know it was bad.

GUILTY.— Judgment respited.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-235
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

235. GEORGE KADA (18) , Unlawfully uttering counterfeit coin.

MR. POLAND Prosecuted.

CLARA PUDDICOMBE . I assist my mother Caroline at her tobacconist's shop in the Waterloo Road—at a quarter to six the prisoner came in for half an ounce of tobacco, and gave me a bad half-crown—I said "This won't do for me"—he said "You are mistaken"—I said "No, I'm not; it is the third one I have had here this week"—I opened the flap of the counter to come round to the front of the shop—he said "Take it out of this, this is good," offering me a good florin—I stood by the door so that he should not get out, and sent the boy for a constable, who came and took him into custody—I gave the constable the half-crown—while standing by the door I saw a young fellow standing outside looking in between me and the doorpost, and when he saw me looking at him he ran away.

Cross-examined. I did not see you speaking to the young man outside—he was the only person outside the door—he looked in as if looking for some one, and there was only the boy besides in the shop he could look for.

JOHN MCGUIRE (Policeman L 87). I was called to this shop and saw the prisoner there—Clara said "This is a bad half-crown, this man,"

pointing to the prisoner, "has tried to pass it on me; I give him in charge"—the prisoner said "I will pay for what I have with this," producing a good florin; "that is all right"—I said "What about the halfcrown?"—he said "I will give you no satisfaction about it"—I took him into custody, taking the good florin from him and the bad half-crown from the last witness—the prisoner said nothing at the station when charged—he gave an address, 23, St. Anne's Court, Wardour Street, Soho, where I find his mother lives—at the police-court on the first hearing I said "I have been to that address, and your mother and landlady say you don't live there; will you give me your correct address?"—he said "I will give you no information"—I asked him if he was employed with any one—he said "You have got all the information you will get out of me."

Cross-examined. When I came into the shop there was no one outside; when I came out there were seven or eight children.

Re-examined. I was eight or ten yards from the shop when fetched.

WILLIAM JOHN WEBSTER . This half-crown is bad.

The prisoner in his defence stated that although he uttered the coin he did not know it teas bad.

JOHN MCGUIRE . The prisoner had nothing on him but the good florin he had previously tendered.


He then PLEADED GUILTY.** to a conviction of felony in Number, 1882, in the name of William Wren.— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.

Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-236
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

236. HERBERT HURSELL (17) PLEADED GUILTY to burglary in the dwelling-house of William Hearne, and stealing three plaid capes and other articles; also to a previous conviction of felony at Cranbrook in August, 1884.— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-237
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour; Corporal > whipping

Related Material

237. ALBERT GORING (13) , Feloniously placing an iron railway chair across a railway, with intent to obstruct an engine, carriages, and trucks then using the railway. Other Counts, for attempting to injure the engine, carriages, and trucks.

MR. HORACE AVORY Prosecuted.

OSWALD MILTON PROWSE . I am employed in the engineers' department of the South-Western Railway—I prepared this plan (produced) of Clapham Junction, showing what is called the Kensington siding—the plan is correct.

WILLIAM COTTON . I am a carriage examiner in the South-Western Railway Company's service—about ten minutes to three on the afternoon of 17th December I was crossing the line from the Windsor line to the Kensington siding—I saw the prisoner on the outside road of the Kensington siding, where goods traffic was being shunted—he placed this chair (produced) on a rail similar to this on the line nearest the embankment—I saw him do it—before I could remove it a Great Northern approached and 15 vehicles passed over it, with the driver, fireman, and 32 head—I tried to stop it, and could not—as soon as the boy had placed it there he ran down the embankment in the direction of Lothiar Street, where he lives—I was about 28 yards from the boy at the time he put it on—I saw a railway policeman, Kerb between 9 and 10 o'clock—at the time he was about 41 yards from the boy—I called to him at once—it

was a miracle the waggons did not go down the embankment—each wheel was raised off the line and came bump down afterwards—it was only two roads off the Windsor main passenger line—Kelf went after the prisoner—I took the chair to my superior—the prisoner was the only boy near thig spot on the bank.

ALFRED KELF . I am a policeman in the service of the South-Western Railway Company—about 10 minutes to 3 on the afternoon of 17th December I was near Kensington siding, and heard Cotton call out, and I saw the prisoner doing something on the line of the Kensington siding nearest the embankment—he was leaning down as if he had got something heavy—I was about 40 yards from him—I saw the Great Northern engine shunting with waggons—I could not get over at once because an up passenger train was approaching between me and him—after that had passed I went over towards where the obstruction was put on—I saw Cotton, looked at the chair, and then walked along the embankment; I knew the prisoner had gone over it—I saw Yinney 60 yards farther on, and in consequence of something he said I went to 68, Lothair Street, which is about 80 yards from where I had seen this boy—I went into his house—he was in the back room, ground floor—I brought him out to the light and told him I should charge him with placing a chair on the line—he said it was not him—the door of the house was open when I got there.

ALFRED VINNEY . I live at 9, Lothair Street, Battersea, and am 13 years old—the prisoner lives in Lothair Street, I do not know the number—on the afternoon of 17th December, about 10 minutes past 3, I saw the prisoner on the railway line nearest me; I was in my yard in Lothair Street in the swing. I could see the line from the swing—I saw the prisoner placing something on the line, I could not see what it was, and then he jumped off the bank and ran into his house—not long after that I saw a policeman.

Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I was not up there at all; I came up to the policeman on the railway and told him.

Re-examined. I had seen the prisoner five minutes before I saw him on the line near my house; he had some wood and coal in a pail; I asked him for a bit of wood, he said no, and I took a little bit—I then went indoors and made the fire up—I did not then see where he went to—I was not on the line or embankment after I had taken the piece of wood—there was not one other boy there.

FRANK WARNER (Policeman V 415). I received the prisoner into custody from the South-Western police shortly after 6 o'clock, and told him he would be charged with placing a chair on the line—he said, "I have been on the line this afternoon picking up coal, but I placed no chair on the line"—this iron chair was given me next day by Kelf.

The prisoner in his statement before the Magistrate said that he was on the line picking up coal, and Vinney came up and wanted to take his wood and coal, and that he ran down the bank to prevent him, and that there were men Maturing wood who threatened to lock them up if they did not get of the line; And that a lot of bigger boys were on the line, and that when he came off he went to get potatoes for his father.

GUILTY .— One Month's Hard Labour and to be soundly whipped.

29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-238
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

238. GEORGE CHAPMAN (19) and JOHN FREDERICK PERRY (34), Robbery with violence on David Robinson, and stealing his watch chain and 8l.

MR. MCNAUGHTEN Prosecuted.

DAVID ROBINSON . I am a carman living at 26, Wingedmore Road, Loughborough Junction—between 4 and 5 o'clock on Boxing Day I was at the Dover Castle at the corner of the New Cut having a drink—the prisoners came in—I paid for drink for them—after that I came over stupid as if something were given to me in my drink—I went to get into a cab to go home, and as I was getting in these two men and another one hustled me—after I got in the cab I missed my purse with eight sovereigns in it and my watch chain—Chapman held me behind whilst, I am almost certain, Perry took my watch chain—I did not see it in his hand, but I saw him at my pocket—I gave information to the police next day.

Cross-examined by Chapman. I went into the Dover Castle with a shoeblack and a groom.

By the COURT. Last time I said I believed Perry took it—I gave information just after 12 o'clock the following morning—they blackened my eye, loosened my teeth, and hit me in the jaw.

HILARY MARTLE . On the morning of 29th December I saw prisoner outside the Dover Castle—I told him I was a police officer and should take him into custody on suspicion of being concerned with two others in stealing a purse and eight sovereigns from a man outside the Dover Castle on the evening of the 26th—he said, "I know nothing about it, I was not drinking in the Dover Castle on Boxing morning"—I placed him between ten others at the police station—the prosecutor immediately identified him as being one of the men.

Cross-examined by Perry. He said you were dressed slightly different.

Perry's Statement before the Magistrate. "I am innocent, so help me God."

The prisoners in their defence asserted their innocence, and that they had never been in trouble before.


29th December 1884
Reference Numbert18841229-239
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

239. CHARLES CARTHY (23) , Robbery with violence on Sarah Castle, and stealing a locket and chain, the goods of Charles Castle.

MR. MCNAUGHTEN Prosecuted.

SARAH CASTLE . I live at 216, Whitecross Street, Barbican—on Sunday morning I was riding in a Hansom's cab in High Street, Borough, the wind blew my hat off, I stopped the cab, my sister got out to get the hat—the prisoner came and said "What's up?" I said "My hat"—he made a snatch at my locket and chain—I jumped out of the cab and held him tight—my husband, my sister, and her husband were in the cab—my husband jumped out and assisted me—the prisoner gave back the locket and said, "Have mercy on me for Heaven's sake, I have given you back your property, let me go"—my friend said "No, you have got my locket"—he called out "Police"—the prisoner threw the locket into the bottom of the cab, he said "I have given you your property, but have mercy on me for Heaven's sake."

Cross-examined by Prisoner. I was sitting on my husband's lap, you made a snatch at it and ran away, and I and my husband ran after you—there were five of us in the cab, but my sister had got out to get the hat—the cabman on the top did not say, "He is not the man," the cabman could see it.

SARAH LOVER . I am Charles Lover's wife, of 61, Charles Street—on this Sunday morning we were in a Hansom's cab, my friend's hat blew off my sister went to pick it up—the prisoner came up and snatched the locket and chain—Mrs. Castle went out and took hold of him—he said, "Have mercy on me," she said, "Give me my property back"—he threw the locket and chain back into the cab, and then the constable came up and took him—there were a lot of roughs standing there—I was sitting on my husband's lap.

THOMAS HAMLEN (Policeman). On the 28th December, at four minutes to 1, the prisoner was given into my custody in High Street, Borough, he was being detained when I got there by the husband of the prosecutor—I told the prisoner he would be charged with stealing a locket and chain—he made no reply—he said to the prosecutor, "You have got your property, what do you want to lock me up for?"

The prisoner in his defence asserted that he was not the man who stole it, that the women had had some drink, and were standing outside the cab.


He then PLEADED GUILTY* to a previous conviction of felony at this Court in October,1882.— Five years' Penal Servitude.


View as XML