Old Bailey Proceedings.
3rd February 1890
Reference Number: t18900203

ActionsCite this text | Print-friendly version | Report an error
Old Bailey Proceedings front matter.
3rd February 1890
Reference Numberf18900203

Related Material


Sessions Paper.








Short-hand Writers to the Court,








Law Booksellers and Publishers.



On the Queen's Commission of



The City of London,





Held on Monday, February 3rd, 1890, and following days.

BEFORE the RIGHT HON. SIR HENRY AARON ISAACS, LORD MAYOR of the City of London; the Hon. Sir JOHN CHARLES DAY , Knt., one of the Justices of Her Majesty's High Court of Justice; Sir JAMES CLARKE LAWRENCE , Bart., Sir ANDREW LUSK , Bart., and Sir REGINALD HANSON , Bart., Aldermen of the said City; Sir THOMAS CHAMBERS , Knt., Q. C., Recorder of the said City; DAVID EVANS , Esq., GEORGE ROBERT TYLER , Esq., WALTER HENRY WILKIN , Esq., GEORGE FAUDEL PHILLIPS , Esq., and HORATIO DAVID DAVIES , Esq., other of the Aldermen of the said City; and Sir WILLIAM THOMAS CHARLEY , Knt., Q. C., D. C. L., Common Serjeant of the said City; Her Majesty's Justices of Oyer and Terminer and General Gaol Delivery holden for the said City, and Judges of the Central Criminal Court.

STUART KNILL , Esq., Alderman,








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 associates of bad characters—the figures after the name in the indictment denote the prisoner's age.


OLD COURT.—Monday, February 3rd, and Tuesday, February 4th, 1890.

Before Mr. Recorder,

3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-176
VerdictNot Guilty > no evidence

Related Material

176. JACOB OTTO SCHULER was indicted for an offence under the Bankruptcy Act, by causing a gift of certain of his stock with intent to defraud his creditors.

MR. GRAIN offered no evidence for the Prosecution.


Fur the Case of Davis and Selfe, see Surrey Cases.,

NEW COURT.—Monday February 3rd,1890.

Before Mr. Common Serjeant.

3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-177
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

177. WILLIAM WEST (67) , Unlawfully having counterfeit coin in his possession, with intent to utter it.

MR. WILMOT Prosecuted.

THOMAS MANTON . I am a costermonger, of 87, Harrison Street, Gray's Inn Road—on 16th January, about 2.30 p.m., I was in an elppie shop in Gray's Inn Road—two voting men came in, called for something, and tendered a half-crown; the shopman broke it in two and gave the pieces back to them, and they paid with good money—I went out first, and they came out, overtook the prisoner sixty or seventy yards from the shop, and showed him the two pieces—he took them in his hand, and gave them back to him, and he dropped them down a gulley—the man who had tendered the bad half-crown gave the prisoner some change, and he gave him another coin out of a paper—I was two or three yarns behind them, on the same side—I spoke to a constable in uniform, and we followed the three to the corner of Elm Street—the constable took the prisoner, and the other two ran away—I went after them, but lost sight of them, as there was a great crowd—the prisoner tried to break away from the constable, who took a package from his hand five or six minutes after he was

apprehended—he had not volunteered any statement—we did not know he had got it, but I knew he had got something—I did not see him pick it up, but he said that he did.

Cross-examined by the Prisoner. You handled the broken pieces.

ERNEST HENRY SEARLE . I assist my brother at an eel-pie shop in Gray's Inn Road—on January 16th, two young men called for something and gave me a half-crown, which I broke, and gave them the pieces—they paid with good money and left—this is like one of the pieces, but it seems as if a piece was gone from it; I broke it straight.

JOSEPH LOWTON (Policeman E R 48). Manton pointed out three men to me, and we followed them 300 yards to the corner of Elm Street—one of the others looked back, and I took hold of the prisoner and said, "I shall take you in custody on suspicion of having counterfeit coin in your possession"—he said, "I hope not"—I hurried him along through two streets after Manton—from the time he was pointed out to me, I did not see him stoop and pick up anything—I took him to King's Cross Station—he tried to break away from me at the corner of Henry Street, and I saw something white in his left hand—I said, "What have you got there; give it to me?"—he held it very tightly, but with Manton's assistance I got it—it was this small paper parcel, containing five counterfeit half-crowns, with newspaper between them—he said he saw two men running, one of them dropped this, and he picked it up—I searched him at the station, and found £3 in gold, 13s. in silver, and 28. 8 3/4 d. in bronze, all good—Manton pointed out a sewer-gutter to me next morning, and I went to the parish authorities and got it opened and cleared out—this piece is the only one I could find.

WILLIAM JOHN WEBSTER . I am Inspector of Coin to H. M. Mint—this broken coin is counterfeit—these five half-crowns are counterfeit, and from different moulds—one of them corresponds with the piece thrown down the gulley—they are wrapped up in the usual way, and rubbed with some black substance, which is rubbed off as they are taken out—that is to give them tone.

The Prisoner, in his defence, staled that he was going to Mr. Wheatley's Home, that he was nearly blind, but hearing something thrown down on the stones he picked it up; that he saw two men running, and had he been in connection with them he should have run too, and as to the good money found on him he received some from his relatives, and nearly £2 from Mr. Wheatley, and some money had been returned to him from Scotland Yard, and that he had obliged a man who sold braces in the street by giving him 5s. in silver for 5s. 1d. worth of coppers; he called,

MR. WHEATLEY. I am secretary to St. Giles' Christian Mission, Brook Street; you have received nearly £2 from me in two payments, one about a month ago, and the other when you came home in November; I have still £1 to your credit.

GUILTY .—He then PLEADED GUILTY** to a conviction at this Court on March 8th, 1886, of feloniously uttering counterfeit coin.— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour.

3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-178
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

178. WILLIAM GASSIN** (21) PLEADED GUILTY to feloniously uttering counterfeit coin, after a conviction of unlawfully uttering counterfeit coin on February 27th, 1888. Mr. Wheatley promised to send him to sea.— Twenty Months' Hard Labour. And

3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-179
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material


(18), to three indictments for stealing, while employed in the Post-office, post letters and parcels, the property of H. M. Postmaster General.— Twelve Months' Hard Labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]

NEW COURT.—Tuesday, February 4th, 1890.

Before Mr. Common Serjeant.

3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-180
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

180. GEORGE WILLIAMS (61) PLEADED GUILTY to burglary in the dwelling-house of George Edward Buckle, and stealing an inkstand and other articles. Ten Months' Hard Labour.

3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-181
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

181. ELLEN LEONARD** (49) , to breaking and entering the dwelling-house of Eugene Vesse, and stealing four sets of studs, after a conviction at Liverpool in December, 1877.— Ten Months' Hard Labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.] And

3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-182
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

182. FRANK CUNNINGHAM (23) . to burglary in the dwelling-house of William Norton Perrse, and stealing three coats and an umbrella.— Six Months' Hard Labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]

3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-183
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

183. JAMES KNIGHT BUTTERS (26) , Unlawfully carnally knowing Edith Amis, aged 13 years and 10 months.

MR. RUSSELL Prosecuted, and MR. GEOGHEGAN Defended.


OLD COURT.—Wednesday, February 5th, 1890.

Before Mr. Justice Day.

3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-184
VerdictNot Guilty > no evidence

Related Material

184. HENRY EDWARD PEARSON (88) and ELIZABETH PEARSON (33) were charged on the Coroner's inquisition with the manslaughter of Thomas Edward Pearson.

MR. HORACE AVORY, for the Prosecution, offered no evidence on the inquisition, there having been no committal by the Magistrate, or any bill found by the Grand Jury


3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-185
VerdictGuilty > insane
SentenceImprisonment > insanity

Related Material

185. SARAH HANNAH CALENDER (49) was indicted for, and charged on the Coroner's inquisition with, the wilful murder of Florence Ada Banton.

MR. HORACE AVORY and MR. ELDRIDGE Prosecuted; MR. GEOGHEGAN Defended, at the request of the Court.

EDWARD ARTHUR BANTON . I am a horse-keeper, and live at 28, little Marylebone Street—on the night of 13th January I and my wife left home about half-past six and went to Drury Lane Theatre, leaving the prisoner, who is my wife's aunt, in charge of the house and the children—we returned at half-past twelve; the prisoner was not there then—we found the place had been on fire; four of the children were there, but not the baby, Florence Ada—I saw her dead body next day at the mortuary.

Cross-examined. The prisoner had been staying in the house about ten months—during that time she had sometimes taken care of the children—she always appeared very kind to them—we always had the greatest confidence in her concerning them—I never saw anything wrong about her—I was from home all day—she did not lodge with us—she had a room of her own.

JANE HANNAH BANTON . I am nine years old—the last witness is my father—I and my four sisters lived with him—the prisoner is my aunt—on the night of the fire my mother and father went out—the prisoner remained in the house with us—I went to bed at half-past nine—before I went to bed she asked me to get down the Bible; she wanted to write a text upon which she had hoard a sermon—I gave it to her, and then went to bed—I am the eldest of the children; I saw them all in bed—I and my sister Rose slept together in the living-room, the baby and Louisa slept in the bedroom, and Annie slept in another bed in the same room—I did not see Florence put to bed—I did not shut the door before going to bed—the prisoner was sitting down writing the text in the living-room—there was a handle on the door of the living-room, with one knob off; the knob was on the door inside when I went to bed—I went to sleep—I afterwards heard the landlord knocking at the door—the prisoner went and opened it, and I heard her speaking to him—she came back to the room, and I went to sleep again—I was awoke by the smoke—I got up, and found the room full of smoke—I heard the plates falling in the cupboard, which opens out of the living-room—I got up, and went to the cupboard door—I could not open it; it was burning hot—I then went to the door to get out—I found that the handle was gone, and the door was fastened—I screamed to my sister Louisa, and she came and tried to open the door, and she went up and knocked at the door of Mr. Morment, the lodger, and he came and broke open the door of the living-room, and then I and Rose went out—I saw my other two sisters outside, and we all went upstairs to the lodger's room—I did not see anything of the baby—I did not see or hear anything of the prisoner after the landlord had called.

LOUISA BANTON . I am eight years old—on the night of the fire I went to bed with the baby in the bedroom; my sitter Jane slept in the same room—I was awoke by her halloaing out to me—I went to the door of the living-room—I could not got in; the handle was off the door—I went and fetched Mr. Morment, and he burst the door in—when I awoke the baby was not in bed with me; she had gone—I do not know who took her away.

SAMUEL MORMENT . I lodged at 23, Little Marylebone Street—on the night of the 13th January I was called up about half-past eleven by Louisa Banton—I went to the door and found the room on fire; I forced it open with difficulty; there was no handle on it—I found the two children inside, the place was full of dense smoke—having got the two children out, I went to the bedroom and searched it, but could not find the baby—another lodger and the police came and searched; one policeman was overcome by the smoke; another policeman came and afterwards found the body of the child—I afterwards found the handle of the door on the table outside the living room door, it had a knob to it.

HERBERT LEE (Policeman D 172). On the night of the 13th January I was called to 23, Little Marylebone Street—I found the place on fire—I attempted to enter the living room; I could not at first, because of the smoke being so dense—I did ultimately enter the room, and endeavoured to find the child, who I heard was in the room—I did not find it at first; I became insensible through the density of the smoke, and went back, and after recovering, hearing that the child was still in the room, I rushed in again and then found the child on the floor; I at once picked it up and

took it to Dr. Mackenzie in Welbeck Street—its clothes were all saturated with blood, and on one side of the head was a clot of blood—I found this knife on the floor by the side of the child.

JOHN DOUGHTY (Police Inspector D). I made these plans—I was called to the house about twelve on this night, and examined the place—the cupboard was all burnt out, and the partition separating it from the bedroom, and some of the furniture in the bedroom—in consequence of information, I afterwards went to 12, Paul Street, Lisson Grove, and knocked at the door of the back room first floor—I got no answer; I could hear someone snoring inside; I pushed the door open and found the prisoner on the bed, dressed except her bonnet, skirt, and boots—she awoke on my entering the room—I said, "Is your name Calender?"—she said, "Yes"—I said, "What time did you leave Little Marylebone Street?"—she said, "I don't know"—I said, "There is something wrong with the children there. I shall take you into custody on suspicion of causing the death of one of them, and for wilfully setting fire to the house"—she made no reply—she took from her breast a packet of letters, which she handed to me, also a small canvas bag containing a number of other letters—she never spoke, she simply handed them to me—I have looked at the letters, they are addressed, to different people—one of them is addressed to a Police-court that does not exist, and that was returned through the Dead Letter Office three days before this occurrence; the other letters were never posted—there was a stain on the back of the prisoner's hand and between the quicks of the nails, which I thought was blood—I took her to the police station—on the way she said, "God help you; if you had done as I have done you would have been doing some good"—at the station I sent for Dr. Mackenzie to see heir—she was charged with the murder of this child—she made no remark.

Cross-examined. A great number of these letters are addressed to various Magistrates in London, Mr. Vaughan, Mr. Bridge, and one to Mrs. Gladstone—the one addressed to an unknown Police-court states that she had been under monstrous treatment for seven years, and that people had been trying to poison and murder her—all the letters are written in that strain, about persons following her by electricity, and seeing children running about with their throats out—I have made inquiry as to her antecedents, and have her sister and Mr. Amor here, who have known her almost from infancy.

JOHN INGLEBY MACKENZIE . I am a surgeon and a B. M.—the body of this child was brought to my house on the night of 13th, it was then dead—the head, neck, and shoulders were covered with blood—I made a post-mortem examination—I then found a semi-circular wound over the left collar bone, cutting deeply through all the tissues and reaching to the vertebrae—such a knife as this, if used with great violence, might have caused the wound; that was the cause of death—I afterwards saw the prisoner at the station—my attention was called to her hands; I found a splash of what appeared to be blood on the left hand; I examined it with a magnifying glass, and also in the quicks of the nails—it appeared as if the hands had been insufficiently washed.

THOMAS OLIVER (Policeman D 188). On the night of 13th January, a few minutes before eleven, I was on duty in Little Marylebone Street, and saw the prisoner leave the house, 23; she shut the door after her, looked straight across the road, then to the right where I was standing, and

then went in the direction of Weymouth Street—I did not see her again that night—I was subsequently called to the house, and found it on fire.

JOHN HUTCHINGS . I called at the house for the landlord on the night of 13th January, as near ten as possible.

JAMES CALENDER . I am a son of the prisoner; I know her handwriting; these letters are her writing.

Cross-examined. I am twenty-three years of age—I have lived with my mother some years—I remember her being taken to Han well in 1884, she was there about three months—before that she was in service as cook in Blandford Square—she was minding the house, and I was staying with her—she was in the habit of going out to cook for dinner parties—some time after that, and up to the present time, I heard her talking about electricity and people trying to kill her with electric wires; she was very vague on the point; she said you could shine on doors by electricity, and the doors would open—she accused her master of drugging her, and was possessed with the idea that people wanted to do her harm—she showed me a letter which stated that for seven years she had been under most monstrous treatment, and that people were trying to poison her; that was her main idea while I was living with her—I am a french polisher by trade.

PHILIP FRANCIS GILBERT . I have had the prisoner under observation while she has been in Holloway Prison—I nave frequently conversed with her—in my opinion she is insane, and has been for many years.

Cross-examined. I am prepared to give the reasons for that belief—I have spoken to her about this alleged murder, and the fire—she has told me that she knew nothing whatever about it—she said she had heard voices, which she could not explain, and that people, and a man named Emile, had tried to murder her; that people went about with electricity, and that certain rooms smelt of death—I should say she had been insane since 1884—I have received a letter from her since I have been here in Court; quite an incoherent one.

Re-examined. I have heard the evidence—I believe that she was mad at the time she committed this act, and not responsible.

GUILTY of the act, being insane. Ordered to be detained until Her Majesty's pleasure be known.

3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-186
VerdictsGuilty > with recommendation; Not Guilty > no evidence

Related Material

186. ISABELLA DUNCAN (18) , Unlawfully endeavouring to conceal the birth of her child.

MR. HORACE AVORY Prosecuted, and MR. PAUL TAYLOR Defended.

GUILTY. Recommended to mercy by the Jury on account of her youth. — Eighteen Months' Imprisonment.

She was further charged on the Coroner's Inquisition with the murder of the said child, upon which, no evidence being offered, she was found


3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-187
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceMiscellaneous > sureties

Related Material

187. ROBERT DIXON was indicted for, and charged on the Coroner's Inquisition with, the manslaughter of Richard Seago.

MR. KEITH FRITH Prosecuted, and MR. GBOGHEGAN Defended.

ELIZABETH SEAGO . I am the widow of Richard Seago, a labourer, and live at 30, Mendora Road, Fulham—the prisoner is my son-in-law—on Saturday afternoon, 4th January, about four, he knocked at the door; my husband opened it; he asked for me, and I went to the door—he said, "Will you pay me the half-crown you owe me?"—I said, "Not till you

have paid me for the door you have broken"—he was going to strike me, and my husband defended me, and received the blow, and fell; he became insensible, and was removed to the West London Hospital, and died on the 6th.

Cross-examined. My husband was not struck when he was on the ground—I said before the Coroner that I did not think the prisoner did this intentionally—he and his wife had lived in the same house with us; his wife left a week before him; we owed him half a crown for rent—he got up a subscription for my husband when he was not well, and got him employment at a guinea a week—I cannot tell he struck my husband one blow or more; I was too excited to notice—he struck me afterwards—he did not say, "I don't want any quarrel"—my husband did not push him—he was fifty-one years of age; he was dreadfully weak on his legs; he had a great sickness before this; it would not take much violence to knock him over.

SARAH REWTER . I live at 30, Mendora Road—I was in the kitchen; I heard a struggle in the passage, and went to the top of the stairs—I saw the prisoner strike the deceased in the face, and he fell to the ground—he was groaning from that time till Sunday morning, when he was taken to the hospital—after he fell the prisoner struck Mrs. Seago, and I said, "Oh, you brute, don't strike old people like that; you ought to know better"—I could not say how many blows were struck.

EDMUND SEATON PATTESON . I am divisional surgeon of police—about two in the afternoon of Sunday, 5th January, I was called, to see the deceased—he was lying on a bed in a semi-conscious condition—from what was said, I examined his head—there was tenderness at the back of the head, but no external mark of violence—he was suffering from concussion of the brain—he complained of tenderness in his side, near the heart—I ordered his removal to the hospital.

FREDERICK JOHN MCCANN . I am house surgeon at the West London Hospital—on 5th January, at half-past five, I saw the deceased there—he was semi-conscious—he could be roused to answer questions—there was bleeding from the mouth and ears—he said, "Oh! my head"—there was swelling at the back of the head, and pain on pressure—I made a post-mortem—he died from extensive hemorrhage into the interior of the brain—the vessels were very much diseased—a fall would accelerate that disease, and be more likely to be fatal—the disease itself would not account for death.

GEORGE RUTLEY (Police Inspector T). I arrested the prisoner—I told him I should take him into custody for assaulting his father-in-law—he said nothing—when afterwards charged with the more serious offence, he said, "I did not strike him; I pushed him, and he fell."

Cross-examined. I believe he said that when I first charged him, and afterwards, when charged with the manslaughter, he made no reply.

JOHN DUFFY (Examined by MR. GBOGHEGAN). I am a labourer—I knew the deceased—I know that the prisoner obtained a situation for him at a guinea a week—on the day this occurred I saw them together—they appeared friendly then, and all the time I knew them—I have known the prisoner fifteen months—he always appeared to be a peaceable man, in no way quarrelsome.

Another witness deposed to the prisoners good character, as a quiet, peaceable man.

GUILTY To enter into recognizances, and find sureties to appear for Judgment if called upon.

THIRD COURT.—Wednesday and Thursday, February 5th and 6th, 1890.

Before Mr. Common Serjeant.

3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-188
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

188. ANNIE LEWIS (25) and AMELIA DAVENPORT (25) , Stealing a watch from the person of Richard Johns; Second Count, Receiving the same.

MR. LYNE Prosecuted, and MR. PURCELL Defended Davenport.

CLEMENT SHEPHERD (Detective Constable City). On 17th January I was in plain clothes in Liverpool Street, at 12.30 a. m., when I saw the two prisoners escorting a drunken man, the prosecutor, one holding each of his arms—I noticed the prosecutor wearing his gold chain across his waistcoat; I followed them down Houndsditch a short distance, where they remained some short time; I kept them in sight all the time—all three returned again to Bishopsgate Street Without, the prosecutor a little in advance of the prisoners; the prosecutor had not got his chain on then—they went to Liverpool Street, Sun Street, where they all stayed a few seconds—Lewis left hurriedly, followed by Davenport—I spoke to the prosecutor, and from what he said I stopped the two prisoners together at the corner of Brushfield Street—I said, "Where is the watch you have taken?"—Lewis said, "I have not got it"—Davenport made no reply—I got the assistance of two constables, and the prosecutor and two prisoners were taken into custody, the prosecutor for being drunk and incapable—I handed over Lewis to Constable Linge, and I went a little in advance with the prosecutor and Davenport—I heard Lewis say to Linge, "I have got the watch"—Davenport said nothing when I took her into custody—I charged the prisoners with being concerned together in stealing the watch; they made no reply—this is the watch; the chain was foundinthe prosecutor's pocket.

Cross-examined by Lewis You did not tell me you had the watch, or that the gentleman gave it to you—the prosecutor said he did not wish to charge you—he did not know he had lost his watch till I told him.

Cross-examined by MR. PURCELL. Next morning, when sober, he told the Alderman he did not know whether he had given the watch to the girls—I followed him about twenty minutes, because I saw he was drunk and incapable—I had no right to interfere with him—I believe Lewis said to Linge, "I have got the watch"—that was all she said in my hearing; she might have said something else—Davenport did not say the man had given the watch to Lewis, I am sure; she was close to me—she gave her address—when the charge was taken they talked to the inspector—neither of the prisoners said the prosecutor had given them the watch—Lewis said at the station, after the charge was taken, that Davenport had given her the watch, and that Davenport had stolen it—she did not say that in the street in my hearing, to the best of my belief—I believe she said it to Linge going along, but not in my hearing; I only heard she had got the watch then—I found the chain in the prosecutor's pocket—on Lewis I found 28., and on Davenport 2s. 5d.

Re-examined. When I arrested Lewis I handed her over to Linge—I did not hear the whole of the conversation between them.

GEORGE LINGE (City Policeman 903). On the night of 17th January, Shepherd arrested Lewis, and handed her over to me—I took her by her two hands a short distance towards the station—she said, "Don't hold me like that, you have the watch there"—I took the watch, which was in her left sleeve—she said in Davenport's hearing, "She took it, and gave it to me," meaning Davenport—Davenport said nothing to me.

Cross-examined by MR. PURCELL. Lewis said nothing when I caught hold of her first of all—I and Lewis were as close behind Shepherd and Davenport as we could walk—we were going to the station before Lewis said anything; it might be a minute or two after I took her, and after I took the watch from her, that she said Davenport gave it to her—several times she said it at the station—I did not tell the Alderman anything about it, I was stopped by the clerk—I was in Court when Shepherd gave evidence—I had not seen the prisoners and prosecutor earlier that evening.

RICHARD JOHNS . I am a warehouseman, and live at Fernlea Villa, Cleveland Road, Woodford—this is my watch, and is worth about £15—I do not recollect anything of what occurred that night—I did not miss my watch before the constable came up to me.

Cross-examined by Lewis. I may have said at the station I did not wish to charge you; I have no recollection of it.

Cross-examined by MR. PURCELL. My chain was not broken in any way—the watch fastens to it by a swivel—I have not the slightest recollection as to whether I met one of the prisoners first—I cannot remember having given one of the girls the watch; I don't think it probable. Lewis, in her defence, said that Johns gave her the watch.


3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-189
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty; Not Guilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

189. CHARLES MOSS (20), JOHN BOOTH (20), and GEORGE KITCHEN (20) , Stealing four waterproof aprons, the goods of Alfred Bugden.


MR. HEDDON Prosecuted.

JOHN DAVIS (Policeman M 88). On 22nd January I was in plain clothes with Nell, in Long Lane, Bermondsey, about half-past eight—I saw the prisoners enter St. Olave's Chambers, a lodging-house—one of them, I could not say which, had a parcel—I and Nell followed them into the lodging-house, and saw them in the kitchen, without the parcel—the following morning, about ten o'clock, I saw Kitchen and Booth at Blackman Street, Borough—Kitchen had a parcel in his coat pocket—I identified them as two of those that entered the lodging-house the previous night—we stopped them, and I said to Kitchen, "What have you got in the parcel?"—he said, "Something my mother gave me"—I said, "Where does your mother live?"—he said, "In Swan Street"—I said, "What number?"—he said he did not know—Booth was within hearing—Kitchen said, "I stole them"—I took them to the station—immediately after we went to the lodging-house, where I saw Moss with a parcel under his arm—I asked him what he had in the parcel—he said nothing—we found five aprons in the parcel; that made nice aprons altogether—I told him to should take him into custody—before they were charged Booth said, "Here you are, governor," and he undid his waistcoat, and pulled out two-aprons from inside his trousers, and handed

them to me—they were all charged—Kitchen cried and said, "I stole them in a shop somewhere over London Bridge," the same statement as he had made before—the parcel was wrapped in newspaper.

FREDERICK NELL (Policeman M 191). I was with Davis on 22nd January, at half-past eight, and saw the prisoners going into the lodging-house carrying a parcel—we went in, but could not find the parcel—next day I was with Davis, and saw Kitchen and Booth—Kitchen had a small parcel in his left-hand pocket—Davis asked what he had got, taking the parcel from him—he said it was a parcel his mother gave him; he was a sailor lad—we said we were police officers; he commenced to cry, and said he had stolen them—we took them to the station—afterwards we went to the lodging-house, where I saw Moss with something under his arm and under his coat—I said, "What have you got?"—he said, "Nothing, sir"—I took the parcel from him, and found it contained five waterproof aprons—we said we should take him to the station—he said, "All right, governor, I will go with you"—I was present when the three prisoners were charged—I heard no statements made in answer—before the charge was taken Kitchen said he stole the aprons from a shop over London Bridge.

ALFRED BUGDEN . I am an indiarubber manufacturer, at 40, King William Street—these waterproofs are mine—I missed them at twenty minutes or a quarter to seven on the evening of 22nd January—they had been hanging on the sash of the glass window outside the shop, they would be outside the shop; there were about a dozen all tied up together like these, I could not tell the exact number—they hung down from a hook with a ticket on them—this string has nothing to do with them—they are worth 1s. 6d. each, 13s. 6d. altogether.

Cross-examined by Moss. I did not see either of you round my shop.

Moss and Booth, in their defence, stated that they received the things from Kitchen, who said he had found them.

Moss called

GEORGE KITCHEN (the Prisoner). I lived at 9, Arthur Street, Hull, and am a sailor—I brought the bundle to you on that morning, and told you I had found it—the first time I saw you was on the morning of January 23rd, when I gave you the parcel.

By Booth. I told you at the same time that I told Moss that I had found the waterproofs—I said I wanted breakfast, and had been out three nights—I had never seen you before that morning—we had slept at the same lodging the night before I had not seen you.

Cross-examined. I never saw Moss before the 23rd, at about five minutes past nine in the morning—I stole the waterproofs about twenty minutes to seven on the evening of 22nd—I got to the lodging-house about a quarter-past eight—I took the waterproofs in with me; I was alone at the time—I said at the Police-court I had stolen them; I did not say I was in company with the other two prisoners when I stole them.


KITCHEN— Four Months' Hard Labour.

3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-190
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

190. BENJAMIN DOYLE (22) , Robbery, with other persons, with violence, on James Reaoch, and stealing 5s. from him.

MR. BOOTH Prosecuted.

JAMES REAOCH , I am a block-cutter, living at 87, Lett Road, Stratford

—on 27th January, at a quarter to twelve, I was walking in Albert Street, Shadwell—I was sober—the prisoner and two men came up and stopped me—the prisoner asked me if I had got any money on me—I said, "Yes, I have got a little; what do you want it for?"—he made no reply, but struck meinthe chest with his fist, and knocked me down—the other two men with him held me down while he searched me, and this man took 5s. out of my right-hand trousers pocket—the money was not in a purse—then the two men holding me down ran off up Albert Street, and the prisoner ran down Albert Street—I got off the ground and ran after the prisoner—I never lost sight of him; I called out, "Police! stop him!" and a policeman came out of another street and took him to the station—he struck me a very severe blow, which knocked me down—I did not lose my senses—I suffered pain for two days from a bruise on the chest; I am all right now—I did not see a doctor.

Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I did not speak to you, you stopped me as I came to you—I never left Albert Street till I went with you.

WILLIAM WAITEMAN (Policeman E 607). On 28th January, about half-past two a. m, I was on duty in Cable Street, opposite Albert Street—I heard the last witness shout out, "Police!"—I ran down Albert Street, and saw the prosecutor, the prisoner, and two other men—when I got fifteen or twenty yards from them they started running away—when I was ten yards off the prosecutor shouted out, "That is the one"—I ran after the prisoner, and caught him at a distance of about 300 yards, when he ran up against a doorway, and I grabbed at him as he fell down—he said, "Oh, you bastard! you would not have caught me if I had not been so full of beer"—I took him back to the prosecutor, who charged him with assault and robbery—the prisoner said nothing—when searched a discharge from a ship, two knives, a handkerchief, and a pawn-ticket were found on him—the prosecutor was sober.

Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I did not catch you in Station Place. By the JURY. There was plenty of light; I could see right down the street, and I never lost sight of the prisoner—he had just started running when I first saw him; the prosecutor was running close behind him, then the prisoner darted across the street, and came towards me and past me, and the prosecutor said, "That is the man," and I seized him.

The Prisoner, in his defence, said that the prosecutor asked him a question that he did not answer•, but he made way on the path for the prosecutor to pass him; then he turned and saw a bit of a scuffle, and the police charged him; and he asserted his innocence.

GUILTY . He then PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction of felony in August, 1887.— Fifteen Months' Hard Labour.

3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-191
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

191. THOMAS FIELDER (75) , Unlawfully committing an act of gross indecency with Alfred Charles Gilder; other Counts, for acts of gross indecency with Alfred George Gilder and George Fulker, and for indecent assaults upon the same three persons.

MR. LAWLESS Prosecuted.

GUILTY .— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.

3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-192
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour; Imprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

192. CHARLES MANN (25) and GEORGE WILLIAMS (20) , Robbery with violence on William Creighton, and stealing a watch from his person.

MR. HEDDON Prosecuted.

WILLIAM CREIGHTON . I live at 20, Percy Circus, Clerkenwell, and am a professor of music—on 14th January, at half-past one a. m., I was on my way home in the City Road, when a few yards from Duncan Terrace I was surrounded by the two prisoners and another man—one stopped me in front and said, "What do you want to hit me for?"—I had not struck him, nor had I seen him before—I was going to get away, when the two prisoners, to the best of my belief, came behind me—with the help of a gentleman and a constable we secured them; I did not lose sight of them—my aluminium watch was gone—my chain had been stolen previously in the same road—the prisoners are two of the throe men.

Cross-examined by Mann. I did not lose sight of you—I believe you ran down the first turning on the right, towards the Goswell Road—my chain had previously been snatched by someone; I do not connect you with that.

Cross-examined by Williams. My chain was taken about twelve minutes before—I did not recognise that man—I said nothing at the station about recognising you by your backs or forms; I did not lose sight of you—I saw your faces when I turned round to get away, when my hat was knocked off—a man ran out of a turning and snatched my chain, and ran off, leaving the chain in my pocket, and a piece of the chain in my waistcoat; I looked then at my watch, and put it back again—I have no doubt about either of you.

EDWARD GEORGE JOHNSON . I live at 3, Malvern Terrace, Islington—about half-past one on this morning I was in the City Road, near Duncan Terrace, and heard a gentleman's hat fall off on the opposite side of the road—it was a little foggy—I immediately left my friend, and went half-way across the road, and saw four or five people on the off-side of the pavement; there appeared to be a scuffle—I went further, and saw what appeared to be a robbery, and I shouted out, "Halloa! what are you doing here?" and three men immediately ran down the City Road—two of them were the prisoners—I shouted, "Police!" and "Stop thief!" and ran in pursuit down the City Road, across Goswell Road, and then down another street, and a dozen paces round the corner the prisoners saw a constable coming and came back past me—several constables were five or six yards from me; I said, "Those are two men that were concerned in assaulting this gentleman at the corner of Duncan Terrace"—I did not lose sight of the prisoners, and I have no doubt they are two of the men—the prosecutor was following me, but I was the better runner.

Cross-examined by Mann. I should think I was eight or twelve yards in front of the prosecutor, on the other side of Duncan Terrace—you ran into Winyard Street—when you turned round Goswell Road I was so close that I could almost have touched you with my stick—I did not want to catch hold of you—I recognised both of you at the station—I said you were particularly conspicuous by having a light suit on.

GEORGE WALKER (Policeman G 59). At quarter-past one on this morning I was on duty in Duncan Terrace—I heard a gentleman's hat fall on the pavement—I ran across the City Road, and saw the two prisoners and another man not in custody surround the prosecutor—the two prisoners were in front of him and the other behind, and they were rifling his pockets—I saw the last witness run across the road—I joined in the pursuit, blew my whistle, and turned my light on—Fulston, who

was on duty in Alfred Street, came out—the prisoners ran into Sidney Street, where another detective joined in the chase—we kept blowing our whistles—they got into Goswell Road—two policemen heard the whistles, and turned the corner of Winyard Street, and the prisoners then stopped and walked back into our arms—I was in uniform—I took Mann, and another constable took Williams—Mann became very violent, threw himself down, and tried to kick our legs; we had to carry him—they were taken to the station—Mann made no reply to the charge—Williams said something about having come out to see a friend.

Cross-examined by Mann. I did not catch you as you turned into Sidney Street—I did not hit you in the face—you got cut as you did because you threw yourself about; you fell down.

JOHN FULSTON (Policeman G 60). At half-past one on this night I was on duty in Alfred Street—I heard cries of "Police!" and ran into the City Road, and saw the two prisoners and another man running—they went through Sidney Street, Goswell Road, into Winyard Street, where, finding they were being overtaken, they stopped short, and turned and walked back towards me—I took Williams into custody—he said, "It is not me; I have come out to see the time"—that was when I caught hold of him, before I or anybody said anything to him—he was troublesome; I had to get assistance—he tripped me up.

Mann, in hit defence, said he came out to tee a friend, and the constable seized him.

Williams said Mann asked him to see a friend of his, and they were going together when the policemen took them, and used them violently.


MANN then PLEADED GUILTY**† to a conviction of felony in August, 1888, and WILLIAMS**† to one in November, 1886, in the name of William Riley.

MANN— Nine Months' Hard Labour.

WILLIAMS— Ten Months' Hard Labour.

3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-193
VerdictsGuilty > pleaded guilty; Guilty > lesser offence; Guilty > unknown; Not Guilty > unknown
SentencesImprisonment > hard labour; Imprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

193. JOSEPH ALLOWAY (20), EDWARD SMITH (18), and RICHARD BOON (23) , Burglary in the dwelling-house of James Edward Smith, and stealing nine overcoats and other articles. Second Count, Receiving the same.


MR. DE MICHELE Prosecuted.

JAMES EDWARD SMITH . I live at 5 and 7, Euston Road, and am an outfitter—on the morning of 16th January, at four o'clock, I was called up, and found my place had been broken into—I missed a number of goods, of the value of £40, among them being overcoats—I went to the station, and identified Alloway and Smith, with overcoats on them—I saw Boon at the station on 20th January—he bad no goods of mine in his possession.

ALEXIS BROADHEAD . I locked up No. 7, Euston Road, at 1.30 p. m. on 15th January—all was securely fastened when I went to bed—at 4.30 a. m. I was called up, and found goods lying about—I found this jemmy at half-past two in the day on the premises between some bales of cloth—I went to the pawnbroker's, and identified an overcoat—entrance was effected by the back door, which had been locked, but the key had been, by an oversight, left in the door.

CHARLES SCARF . I am assistant to Mr. Seeker, of 9 and 10, Bath. Street, City Road, pawnbroker—this coat with a; velvet collar, whish

Mr. Smith and Mr. Broadhead have identified, was pledged with me on 17th January, about noon, by Boon, for 12s. 6d.—he gave the name and address of John Boon, 60, Lever Street—I knew him as a customer.

GEORGE MCFADDEN (Policeman E 323). At half-past 4 a. m. on 16th January I went to 7, Euston Road, and found the shop door open—the place had been broken into.

JAMES MARIE (Policeman O 197). On the evening of 20th January I arrested Boon at Broad Street, Bloomsbury—I said, "I am going to take you into custody for being concerned with Alloway and Smith; we have found one of the coats pawned at Seeker's, in Bath Street, and have been told that you pawned it there"—he said, "All right, I will go with you; I did pawn the coat, but I did not know it was stolen, or else I should not have done it"—I found at his lodgings six pawn-tickets.

The Prisoner's statement before the Magistrate. "I own I pawned the coat and trousers, but I did not know they were stolen."

The Prisoner called

JOSEPH ALLOWAY (the Prisoner). I have pleaded guilty to the charge of burglary—I am a paperhanger—I have no fixed address—you did not know these clothes were stolen—Smith asked you to pawn the coat.

Cross-examined. I gave Boon the coat to pawn—Smith and two others broke into the place with me; I don't know who the other two were; I did not know them before—this coat which Boon pawned was one of the things we stole; we stole other clothes from Boon's brother—Boon gave us the key beforehand on that occasion; he did not know till the next day, when it was done, that we were going to steal his brother's goods—he did not give us the key for the purpose, but for us to sleep—I and Smith went in, and put on new suits on the premises—Boon was not on the premises; he never put this coat on to my knowledge—I have known him since Christmas; I have not been about with him; I met him casually when I was with Smith; I had never been to his brother's house before; I had never seen his brother—I heard his brother say before the Magistrate that he had let us two in.

By the COURT. I gave the prisoner the coat on 16th or 17th, but I did not ask him to pawn it—in the interval I had left it at 38, New Compton Street, a private house, where my wife and her father and her mother live—Smith said Boon was going to pawn the coat, and I got it and gave it to him.

EDWARD SMITH (the Prisoner). I have pleaded guilty to this charge—I am a carman, out of work; I have no fixed address—Alloway gave you the overcoat to pawn, and I asked you to pawn it—I think that was the day after the robbery; I cannot remember the date—I told you to ask 15s. on it.

Cross-examined. There were four of us in the burglary, I don't know who the other two were—Alloway got someone, I don't know who, to pawn the other coats—I assisted in robbing Boon's brother—Boon handed us the key at ten o'clock at night, and we went in about an hour after, at eleven.

GUILTY of receiving. Alloway PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction of felony in December, 1889.

There was another indictment against the prisoners for burglary in the dwelling-house of Henry Boon, and stealing two coats and other articles, to which Alloway and Smith


ALLOWAY and SMITH— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.

BOON— Eight Months' Hard Labour.

3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-194
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

194. JAMES SWEENEY (26) and JOHN WOOD (27) , Robbery with violence on Charles Benson, and stealing 12s. 6d.

MR. HUGGINS Prosecuted.

CHARLES BENSON . I live at 9, darks' Terrace, Glynn Road, Clapton—I am a salesman in the Corn Market, Mark Lane—on Sunday morning, 19th January, I was walking home from Shoreditch to Clapton, and on the left-hand side of the Hackney Road, a few yards before I got to the railway station, I think near the Oval, I was stopped by four men and pushed into the road and some money taken from me—I called out "Police!"—I was pushed down five or six times—Sweeney put his hand over my mouth and prevented my calling again, but the police were quickly on the spot, so that I was not injured except by them holding my mouth—I charged the prisoners at the station; I recognise them as the men who assaulted me—Wood felt for my money—I had 15s. or 16s. about me; I showed the inspector that I had 3s. 10d. left at the station, so that I had lost 12s. 6d.

CHARLES BUCK (Policeman J 130). About a quarter past one a. m. on 19th January I was on duty in Cambridge Road, near Hackney Railway Station—I heard someone calling out "Murder!" and "Help!"—I turned back about 200 yards behind me, and could see four or five men scuffling on the ground—I ran, and when I got there I saw the prosecutor getting up from the ground and four, or five men standing round him—I was in uniform—Benson turned and said, "I have been knocked down and robbed"—I said, "Who done it?"—he pointed to the prisoners and said the dark man (Sweeney) held him down and put his hand over his mouth while the others robbed him—four or five men stood there listening, but there were about six policemen there, the men had no chance of getting away—Benson said he should give them in charge for highway robbery with violence, and they were taken to the station—Benson could not identify anyone but the two prisoners—at the station Wood turned to the prosecutor and said, "You have done something for us."

Cross-examined by Sweeney. I was by this place two minutes before, and two sergeants as well—when the prosecutor charged you, you said, "Why I have only just picked the man up"—I went to Mr. Grace, who had employed you last, for your character—he said he had to discharge you, not for dishonesty—it did not take me a minute to run back—the prosecutor was not under the influence of liquor.

Sweeney, in his defence, said he and Wood saw the prosecuter lying on the road and picked him up, and asked him what the matter was.

CHARLES BENSON (Re-examined by the COURT). I had had something in the day time to drink, but I was not drunk—Sweeney knocked me down—I am positive he held his hand over my mouth, and that Wood put his liana into my pocket. (It appeared by the depositions that the witness said at the Police-court Wood held him down)—I struggled—I did not hold Wood—I was on the ground—four or five were round me, the others ran away before the policeman arrived.

CHARLES BUCK (Re-examined by the JURY). There was nothing the

matter with the prisoners' clothes—they were not wet or muddy—the prosecutor was all covered with mud—nothing was found on Sweeney, 4d. on Wood.


3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-195
VerdictsGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentencesImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

195. EMMELINE DUGGAN* (22) PLEADED GUILTY to obtaining a diamond ring, the property of John Durden, by false pretences, with intent to defraud; also, to stealing a diamond ring, the property of John Durden.— Twelve Months' Hard Labour. And

3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-196
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

196. JOHN MACKENZIE (29) , To burglary in the dwelling-house of Ludwig Borgsen, with intent to steal therein; also, to a conviction of felony in September, 1888.— Fifteen Months' Hard Labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]

OLD COURT.—Thursday, February 6th, 1890.

Before Mr. Justice Day.

3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-197
VerdictGuilty > lesser offence
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude; Imprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

197. HATFIELD THOMAS TURNER (65) and FREDERICK CLARK (49) , Feloniously forging and uttering a bond of the Republic of Chili, of the nominal value of £1,000.

MR. POLAND, Q. C., and MR. GILL Prosecuted; MESSRS. BIRON and ELLIOTT appeared for Turner; and MR. GEOGHEGAN for Clark.

THOMAS RICHARDSON SMERDON . I am a clerk in the employ of Messrs. Baring Brothers and Co., of Bishopsgate Street, City—in November, 1883, they had in their possession a parcel of bonds for a customer, containing 105 Alabamas, of £200 each, and a Chilian bond, No. 5,850—on the occasion of my putting into that parcel a Chilian bond, the parcel was stolen or lost; it could not be found—steps were taken with regard to it; advertisements were inserted and bills published, giving a description of the bonds, and Messrs. Morgan were communicated with, so that the bonds should be stopped—they had just been put into Messrs. Baring's hands; I think they were deposited on the very same day they were missed—the coupons were stopped—the Chilian bond was a good security, at a premium—the total value of the parcel was £22,000—until the present inquiry nothing was heard of them.

HENRY ALLINSON . I am a clerk to Messrs. J. S. Morgan and Co., of 22, Old Broad Street, City; they are American bankers, trading under the name of Morgan and Co.—they had the issue of the Chilian bonds of 1867 Loan, for the Republic of Chili—the bonds had attached to them coupons, payable half-yearly—I produce the original bond, No. 5,850, for £1,000, with the coupons of £30 each, payable half-yearly—the coupons have been regularly paid twice a year, down to the present time—this other bond, the stolen one, is now altered to 5,880—the original number was 5,850—the coupons upon that were paid half yearly up to July, 1883, and not since—the coupons on the forged bond have not been presented; they are not on the bond now; they have been taken off; they have been cut off all in a row; if cut off separately they do not exactly fit—each coupon is taken off as it becomes due—I have the coupons which fit in the book exactly, and they show me which is the genuine one of 5,850—I have examined the bond with a glass, and can see an alteration of the third figure—I should think the "8" has been washed out by some chemical appliance, and then the new figure "5" printed;

the paper is evidently damaged by the washing—the bonds are never issued in duplicate.

Cross-examined by MR. BIRON. I have been a clerk at Morgans' eighteen or nineteen years—in the course of my duty I have had considerable experience in bonds—the third figure is entirely altered from an 8 into a 5—I only discovered the forgery when I had the two bonds given me to look at—unless by comparing them, a person in the ordinary course of business would not be able to detect the forgery.

Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN. During the hearing at the Mansion House I saw the person calling himself Jones—to my knowledge, he never made any inquiry about the bond.

Re-examined. These bonds are quoted on the market immediately. By the COURT. The value of a £1,000 bond would be £1,030, or 3 per cent, premium.

EDWIN HARRY JONES . I am an accountant, of Belmont Villas, Southend—I have no office in the City—some time in October last year I made the acquaintance of the prisoner Clark—he was introduced to me by a man named Pilcher, at 16, Cornhill, at a friend's, Mr. Dain—he gave me this card, "Mr. Frederick Clark, 15, Cockspur Street"—he was introduced to me for the purpose of wanting to borrow, on a bond, £850 for a client of his, a wealthy old gentleman named Mr. Thomas Turner, who lived at 86,. Banbury Road, Plumstead—I asked him how it was he did not do it through a bank—he said, "There are times when a gentleman does not want to borrow through a bank"—I did not see the bond on the first occasion; I was to let him know whether I would do the loan or not—I wrote to him that night with regard to it, and I saw him, I think, the next day—I then told him I could only do the loan if he would allow me to sell the bond, and he was to give me a promissory note for £850, plus the interest, and I was to let him have another bond in six months' time—I mean I was to sell the bond, and on repayment I was to replace the bond—Clark said he would let me know whether it could be done in that way—I met him again the next day at Dam's, that would be the third interview—he then produced this bond to me; I took the number of it, 5,880—I made an appointment for the next day at the same place at twelve—I made inquiry about the bond the same day at Messrs. Morgan's, and on that day, the day of the third interview, I spoke to a person of the name of Turnour—the next day I met Clark again, and he handed me the bond, and I took it with me; arranging to meet him in on hour's time—he told me that I was to draw two cheques, one for £850 and the other for the balance—it was not mentioned what the balance was to be, that would depend upon what the bond produced—I took the bond and gave it to Mr. Turnour with certain instructions, and he came back and handed me the two cheques produced, one for £850, dated 24th October, and the other for £162 9s. 6d., drawn by Sir Robert Garden and Co., in favour of Thomas Turnour, Esq., or order—he also handed me the contract note for the sale of the bond—I went back to my friend's office and there handed Clark the two cheques, the contract note I kept—he said I was to have back the smaller cheque—I then left him—I made an appointment to meet him again the same day at the same place, or at Birch's, 16, Cornhill, I am not sure which; I did meet him later in the day, and he then handed me the smaller cheque for £162 9s. 6d.; it was then endorsed, B 2

"Thomas Turner"—I paid it into Barker's Bank, in Mark Lane, to the account of my wife; I have not any account myself—I afterwards partly drew out the money—I received the promissory note from dark at the time I gave him the cheques, it is signed "Thomas Turner"—I afterwards gave it him—I gave him the whole thing in one of Carden's envelopes—I can't fix the date of that, it was the last day he went to Carden's, about the 4th December, I think—I mean the last time he went to Carden's when there was a question asked about another cheque; that was on the 10th December—when Clark spoke to me of Turner, he said he had been a clerk in the Bank of England, and had a pension, and that he was a man of respectability.

Cross-examined by MR. BIRON. I said I would not negotiate the loan unless the bond was to be sold—Clark said he would let me know as to that—Pilcher was present at that interview, no one else; Mr. Dain was not there—it was afterwards agreed that it should be sold if necessary, that I should have power to sell—Clark said he did not mind so long as they had a bond back in six months—the arrangement was that I should have the power of selling the bond, but that I should produce this bond or another—the first time I saw the bond was at the third interview, and then I went to Morgan's, who issued these bonds, to make inquiry about it, and as the result of those inquiries I determined to make the loan—I was to advance £850, and the interest was to be 10 per cent, per annum, 5 per cent, at six months—I met Mr. Turner as I was on my way to another broker, and he was introduced into it.

Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN. The £850 cheque was for the amount of the loan, which, at ten per cent., would be £892 10s.—I got five per cent, at six months—I also got the cheque for £162 9s. 6d.—of that I did not pay any to Clark or Turner; I utilised it; I ran a bear upon it; it was quoted at 103—I had no transaction on the Stock Exchange direct, only through Turnour—it is a rule on the Stock Exchange that stockbrokers only deal with principals, not with clerks—Turner had been on the Stock Exchange—I did not know till this that he was acquainted with the firm of Sir Robert Carden and Co.—it is a rule that before entering into a transaction about a bond stockbrokers require an introduction—looking at the endorsements on the two cheques, they do not appear to be written by the same person—I made no inquiry of Clark about that—I paid him £25 in respect of the coupons of the Chilian bond—the bond was not sold, as far as he and his client were concerned; I had to replace a bond—I paid him the coupon ending 31st December, 1889—all through I recognised Clark as acting for a man named Turner—he told me that.

Re-examined. The person I was dealing with was content with the £850 as the loan—I paid Clark the £25 for the coupons because it would be due to him on 31st December—he wrote and asked me for it; that was after I had sold the bond to Carden's with the coupons and got the money—I paid it in October by cheque—this is the letter I wrote to Turner about it, and this is Clark's answer—I had not seen Turner at all; I gave the letter to Clark to give to Turner, and on 6th November I got this letter from Clark in reference to it—I had a cheque for £25, and as Clark asked me for it I sent him that, and was going to give him the balance myself.

By MR. GEOGHEGAN. I understood from Clark that he had power to

endorse for Turner—I don-t know why he did not endorse the £162 cheque then and there; it was given to me by Clark endorsed as it is.

ARCHER TURNOUR . I live at Hazlemere Lodge, Kew—in October last I was not in any occupation; I had formerly been a member of the Stock Exchange—on 24th October, Mr. Jones saw me with regard to the disposal of a Chilian bond for £1,000; that was at County Chambers, Cornhill—I went there to see him, and he handed me the bond to take to a stockbroker and sell—I took it to the office of Sir Robert Carden and Co., with directions to sell—that was about eleven in the morning—I handed the bond to a gentleman in the office; he gave me a contract note, and the two cheques produced, one for £850 and the other for £162 9s. 6d.; it was a cash transaction—I took the two cheques and gave them to Mr. Jones, with the contract note, about half-past twelve the same day—I received £1 5s. from Carden's, in the ordinary way, as commission I believe this is the bond—I saw Mr. Keed, a member of the firm.

CHARLES KEED . I am a stockbroker, and a member of the firm of Sir Robert Carden and Co., 3, Threadneedle Street—on 24th October, Mr. Turnour came and asked me to sell a Chilian bond for £1,000; he delivered me the bond, and I sold it for £1,012 9s. 6d.—there was a commission—I gave him these two cheques on our bankers—I delivered the bond that same day to a broker on the Stock Exchange—afterwards, in December, in consequence of some inquiries, I got back the same bond from the Stock Exchange—this is it.

Cross-examined by MR. BIRON. At that time I had no suspicion about the bond—I do not think it is a constant practice in the City to negotiate a loan through third parties—we should not have negotiated this with a stranger; I should not have dealt at all with Mr. Turner, unless I had known Archer Turnour.

Re examined. We got back the bond from the Stock Exchange when we learnt it was forged.

JOHN ALFRED MARKS . I am sub-manager of the Cheque Bank, 4, Waterloo Place, Pall Mall—In May, 1882, the prisoner dark opened an account with us, giving a reference to Ash win, of 15, Cockspur Street—on 24th or 25th October, Clark handed me this cheque for £850, and asked me to clear it; I did so, and gave him this cheque for £800, on Barclay, Bevan, and Co., payable to Frederick Clark, or order, and on 15th November I gave him this cheque for £50—on 28th October he paid £34 in to his account; I have a certified copy of his account; that £34 was made up of six £5 Bank of England notes, numbers 89,274 to 7, and 89,279, and 89,289, also a cheque for £4, drawn by H. Turner, on the London and County Bank, Woolwich—at a later date, in consequence of a cheque for a larger amount being brought in the same way, I communicated with Messrs. Carden.

Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN. If a person pays in £25, I credit him with it; at the same time I give him a cheque on our bank for the amount, and debit him with it; we do not allow interest—on the 10th August last year he withdrew £50 1s. 6d.

JAMES EDWARD WELCH . I am a cashier at Barclay, Bevan, and Co.—on 25th October, this cheque for £800 was presented for payment across the counter, I paid it with a?100 note, number 15,499, dated 14th February, 1889; a?200 note, 3,071, dated 14th January, 1889; and

twenty £5 notes, numbers 89,271 to 90, inclusive, dated 14th June, 1889.

CHARLES HURRELL . I am a cashier at Barclay, Bevan, and Co. 's—on 15th November this cheque for £50 of the Cheque Bank was presented across the counter—I gave for it a £50 note, No. 5,583, dated 13th March, 1889.

EDWARD BRENT . I am a clerk in the Issue Department of the Bank of England—on 25th October this £500 note, No. 15,499, dated 14th February, 1889, was presented to be changed—it is endorsed "H. Turner, 86"—the name of the road is punched out; "Plumstead Common, Plumstead," remains—I paid it with seven £10 notes, five tens, ten fives, and £50 in gold.

CHARLES JOHN STEWART DAWSON . I am a clerk in the "Woolwich branch of the London and County Bank—the prisoner Turner kept an account there—on 25th October, 1889, he paid in this £200 note.

Cross-examined by MR. BIRON. He has banked with us since 31st May, 1888—he gave a reference—if it had not been a satisfactory one we should not have accepted it—he always had a satisfactory balance.

Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN. I have come across his signature—I do not cash cheques—I believe the endorsement on the £500 note to be his writing.

Re-examined. Another gentleman opened his account—I do not know what his balance was before he paid in the £200 note.

JOHN PHILIP KEMBLE WRIGHT . I am a clerk in the Bloomsbury Branch of the London and Westminster Bank—this £50 note, No. 50,583, dated 13th March, 1889, was paid to the account of Mr. Ratley, on 15th November, 1889.

"WILLIAM RATLEY . I am a licensed victualler in Devereux Court, Temple—I know Clark—about 15th November I received from him a £50 note as a loan—I gave him a promissory note and £1 for the accommodation—I paid the note in to my account at the London and Westminster Bank, probably the same day—I had known Clark since June or July—he acted as vendor in the business I purchased.

FREDERICK DOWNES (City Detective Sergeant). In December I was communicated with in regard to these bonds—in consequence of instructions, I made inquiries with reference to the Chilian bond—on 9th December I went to the offices of Messrs. Carden, with Detective Taylor, knowing that Turner would be there—I saw him there—I told him we were police officers, and that a Chilian bond had been stolen and forged—he said, "That is what you say"—I said, "Where did you get it from?"—he said, "I decline to make any statement till I have seen my solicitor"—I said, "Who is your solicitor?"—he declined to say—after some little time I again said, "Where did you get it from?"—he said, "I got it from a Dr. Daley, of Brooklyn, New York; I gave him £925 font"—I said, "How did you pay him?"—he said, "In notes and gold"—I said, "Where did you get it from?"—he said, "From my bank at Woolwich"—I said, "The whole of it?"—he said, "No, about £200"—I said, "Where did you get the rest from?"—he said, "That is my business"—I said, "Have you any receipt or any document?"—he said, "No, we don't require them; you might"—I said, "Where was Dr. Daley living?"—he said he believed at the Langham Hotel, and he would be back again ho believed in April next—he said, "Is there

anything more you want to know? I have told you all"—I said, "No you have not; and you may depend upon it you hare not heard the last of this"—he then said to Mr. Mayer, one of the partners, "I shall issue a writ; who will accept service for you?"—he said Dr. Daley had gone to New York, and gone some distance up the country; that he had got a horse-ranche in which he was interested—I asked him in what part—he said he could not tell me—he said he gave instructions to Clark to obtain a loan on the bond, and not to sell; that he gave him a promissory note for £945 at six months, and he was to pay interest at £45—at that time I allowed him to go; I was making inquiries about other bonds—on 10th December I was with Taylor at the Arsenal Railway Station at Woolwich, and saw Turner leave the station and go into the street—I stopped him and said, "You know us both, Mr. Turner"—he said, "Yes"—I said, "I shall have to take you back to the City; you will be charged with stealing and receiving five Alabama bonds, and forging and uttering a Chilian, portion of a parcel of £22,000 worth that were stolen"—he said, "I have nothing more to say than what I have said"—we then conveyed him to 86, Bramblebury Road, Plumstead, where he occupied one room, and Taylor searched it—I took him to Cloak Lane, Station, and charged him—he made no reply to the charge—on the morning of the 11th I was with Taylor and Burton at Peckham; I saw Clark outside Peckham Rye Station—I said, "Mr. Clark?"—he said, "Yes"—I said, "We are police officers, and you will be charged with stealing and receiving Alabama bonds for £21,000, and probably you will be charged with forging and uttering a Chilian bond for £1,000"—he said, "Yes, they passed through my hands, but it is a nice tiling to be locked up for being a man's agent!"—he said Turner had brought the Chilian bond to him, and asked him to obtain a loan on it; he knew a friend in the City of the name of Jones, at County Chambers,' Cornhill, who could do it for him, and he took it, and he afterwards wrote to him and asked him to obtain a loan or advance on the Alabamas—on taking him in the train to the City I noticed that he was very fidgety with his left-hand trousers pocket—I said, "You appear to be very fidgety with that pocket; you had better give it to me, and what is in it"—he said, "It is only my purse"—he gave it me, and I took out of it this receipt for this cheque for £50, drawn by Turner, payable to P. Clark, on 4th December on the Woolwich branch of the London and County Bank—he was taken to the City and charged—he made no reply to the charge—I searched him, and found on him a cheque-book of the Cheque Bank, and three blank cheques on different banks, and £3 19s. 8d. in money—I learnt from inquiry that he had an account at the National Bank—I have endeavoured to find some trace of Dr. Daley, but have not done so.

Cross-examined by MR. BIRON. It was on the 9th that I saw Turner at Messrs. Garden's—I got there before him; he came in consequence of an appointment with Carden's people—I told him I was a detective; we introduced ourselves by saying so—his first answer was, "I decline to make any statement until I have seen my solicitor," not "I got it from Dr. Daley, of New York"; I am positive of that—I very likely said before the Magistrate that that was his first answer, and the other was immediately afterwards—I have not made any inquiries about Dr Daley in

America—I did not communicate with the police over there—I inquired where Turner told me to inquire.

Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN. The pass-book found on dark is an ordinary pass book—it was in the pocket of the pass-book I found these three cheques, with a number of other papers—they appear to have been folded up—the stamp on one of them is "London and County Bank, 12th December, 1871"—I saw it was an old cheque—he denied all knowledge of the bond being sold outright by Mr. Jones.

WILLIAM HIBBERT . I am clerk at the Langbam Hotel, Portland Place—it is the practice there to keep a register of people stopping there—I have made inquiries as to a Dr. Daley having stopped there; I have searched the register; it is not here—I have no personal knowledge of any Dr. Daley being there—I do not make out the bills; I receive the visitors as they arrive, and give them their rooms; in that way I get to know their names.

Cross-examined. We have about 500 persons stopping there during the season—a great many Americans stop there—we have no Daley on our books.

ELIZABETH BROWN . I am the wife of John Brown, of 86, Bramblebury Road, Plumstead—the prisoner Turner occupied a room there for about a year and nine months up to the time of his arrest; it was occupied as a bedroom and sitting-room combined—he paid 4s. 6d. a week—he used to be out during the day; he had no visitors.

Cross-examined by MR. BIRON. The furniture in the room belonged to him—he was away a good deal—I don't know where he went.

Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN. I have never seen Clark visiting at Turner's.

THOMAS GEORGE RICHABDS . I am a clerk in the London County Bank at Woolwich—Turner had an account there—I have compared his account, which began on 31st May, 1888, with the bank books—this is the account; it goes down to the time he was taken into custody—the balance to his credit on 25th October was £207, including the £200—before that it was £7—the largest sum ever drawn out at one time was £150—it is my duty to examine all the cheques paid every day—I know Turner's writing—the endorsement on the £850 cheque is very different from Turner's usual signature; he always signed, "Hatfield Turner"—it has something of the same character, but it is different from his usual signature; I should think it is his writing—I think it is the same writing as the signature on the £50 cheque found on Clark.

Cross-examined by MR. GEOGHEGAN. The signature to the £162 cheque does not at all resemble Turner's—I should not cash a cheque with that signature.

GUILTY of uttering.

TURNER— Ten Years' Penal Servitude.

CLARK— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour.

NEW COURT.—Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday, February 5th, 6th, and 7th, 1890.

Before Mr. Recorder.

3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-198
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

198. THOMAS SMITH ASHWIN (60) , Unlawfully, after being adjudged a bankrupt, failing to discover to his trustee all his property.


MATHEWS Defended.

CHARLES L'ENFANT . I am an officer of the Bankruptcy Court—I produce the file of proceedings in the bankruptcy of Thomas Smith Ashwin, it contains the shorthand notes of the evidence taken in the matter—I also produce the file of proceedings in the bankruptcy of John Errington French.

GEORGE BLAGROVE SNELL . I am official shorthand writer to the London Bankruptcy Court—the shorthand notes attached to the proceedings were taken by me; they are correct.

JOHN BALL BALL . I am a chartered accountant of the City of London—the petition in the defendant's bankruptcy is dated September 9th, 1885; it was filed on the 22nd, the adjudication was on October 1st—I put certain questions to the bankrupt, which are called requisitions; they are attached to the depositions, and are dated May 5th—the answers dated May 8th are in the defendant's writing—the petition was presented by Mr. Mathews, of Weymouth County court—the assets are £3 15s., the gross liabilities are £18,571 7s. 10d., creditors fully secured £870—the proceedings were transferred to the London Bankruptcy Court by some creditor in London—in answer to the third question in the requisition, the bankrupt produced to me the account A B C D, showing what became of the £4,489 2s. 6d. and other sums which he received from the Members' Mansions—it is signed John Errington French and Thomas Ashwin—they appear to have been signed in the same ink, at the same time—on 6th July, 1&87, an order was made by Mr. Registrar Giffard, for an account to be filed between the defendant and French—this is the account (produced)—it first sets out the figures in the A B C D account, and then adds something—the total amount of further money due to French is £1,379 14s. 7d., and another sum of £110 put on the wrong side—that leaves a balance of £2,104 5s. 9d. due to French—this account gave me for the first time the particulars of expenditure—I caused investigations to be made with regard to the persons whose names are mentioned there, to whom payments were made, in consequence of which I had certain questions put to the defendant—on September 11th, 1886, we got these further particulars (produced) from the defendant, dated August 11th, in which he gave particulars of advances made by French to him, amounting to £2,200—in consequence of the statements made in the account A B C D, that he had spent £4,000 on behalf of French, I brought an action against French—paragraph 2 states that Mr. French holds the deeds for advances made to him by Solomon, and the judgment orders French to deliver them up to the trustees in bankruptcy—they have not been handed to me; the costs have been taxed at £159, and have not been paid, and therefore I took bankruptcy proceedings against French—a receiving order was made by Mr. Registrar Linklater; that was appealed against, but decided against Mr. French—I took proceedings against French for not delivering up the deeds, and affidavits were made by me and by Mr. French—on 31st October, 1889, Mr. Justice Cave issued a writ against French, for not delivering up the deeds—on the 3rd September, 1889, a clerk who I had not seen before called and made a statement to me—I do not know who he was; he saw me again on September 11th.

Cross-examined, The first requisitions were accompanied by copies of

the accounts between Ashwin and French—those accounts are the same as A, B, 0, D, so far as the figures are concerned—account B shows a balance against the defendant of £2,059 11s. 6d.; in account C an item of £600 occurs—£1,400 is mentioned on the other side, and the balance is carried out—on 11th August I put further requisitions to the bankrupt, which he answered, filing a more detailed account—a cash account was given to me of all money expended by Mr. Ashwin for five years prior to October 1st, 1885—in the account of 30th September, 1884, I find" by cash for sale of furniture and effects, £110"—he was examined by Mr. Hayes, of the firm of Newman, Hayes and Co., and I believe he produced the original of the accounts A, B, C, D, each signed by French and by Ashwin—I was examined before the Magistrate, but was not asked my opinion whether the documents were signed at the same or at different times, this is the first time I have been asked—the accounts B, C, and D were all signed after the year they bear date; they represent true accounts—on the second examination in bankruptcy on 20th December, 1886, he was again cross-examined by Mr. Hayes—on June 8th, 1887, the creditors were represented by Mr. Dennis—the order was made that he should file a supplementary account—I believe Mr. Thomas Hugh Horwood, of 67, Chancery Lane, was examined as a witness—he was said by Mr. Ashwin to be the solicitor who acted for Mr. French in 1884—the bankrupt said that he had deposited the deeds of the Wimbledon and Canning Town property with Mr. French, as security for advances which he had made—I believe he stuck to that story, but the examinations were voluminous, and there were contradictory answers in some places—he said that his brother Stephen died at the end of 1886—he was a solicitor, in partnership with Mr. Ashwin—they had some disagreement, and parted company, and Mr. Stephen Ashwin claimed the deeds as his property as the legal owner—I have some recollection that Mr. Rymel obtained the property—the thing has been so complicated that I cannot recollect; his name is familiar to me as a gentleman said to have some claim on the property—there has been a claim by the executors of Stephen Ashwin, which was followed by a compromise made by me with regard to the property—Mr. Horwood came to my office after the committal, and produced a cheque to me for £1,170 5s. 5d., dated 29th October, 1884, payable to French's order, and endorsed by him, drawn to T. U. Horwood on Sir Samuel Scott's bank—a judgment was obtained by French against Ashwin on 19th November, 1884, for the balance of the account of £800 14s. 2d.—in the action against French in 1886. judgment was given against French, with costs—the costs were not paid, and I served French with a notice in bankruptcy, and got a receiving order—I did not see him till he attended as a witness at the Police-court, and he told me nothing personally—I swore an information, and no doubt I said that I was informed that French said that he had never had a penny from Ashwin in his life—I first saw Biddle at the Police-court, he never made any statement to me till he was called as a witness; I believe he made it to my solicitor—I believe there is an affidavit in existence stating that the deeds were in the possession of Thomas Smith Ashwin, and that Biddle had seen them in a bag in Ashwin's hand on the first day of the trial of Ball v. French, and that Ashwin asked him to go into the box and produce them on behalf of the present holder—the first I heard of John Silvanus Tanner was

when he appeared as a witness—he was not to my knowledge in communication with Newman, Hayes and Co. as far back as 1887.

Re-examined. This is the affidavit (This was made by John Henry Biddle, managing clerk to Nicholas Bennett, stating that he was asked to produce the deeds, but declined to do so, and that Mr. Ashwin was put into the box just before the rising of the Court, but did not appear the next morning. The proceedings in French v. Ashwin were also put in; also a judgment for £826 2s. 6d. and £4 14s. costs)—I think the defendant, in his examination, admitted that at the time judgment was signed against him French was staying with him at a hotel in Canning Place, Kensington. (Portions of the bankrupt's examination were here put in.)

JOHN ALFRED MARKS . I am sub-manager of the Cheque Bank, Limited—I produce a copy of the defendant's account there—it is correct—it was opened in July, 1884, and between then and January, 1885, £200 6s. 4d. was paid in, less £26 5s., for which credit was given on an unused cheque that amount was drawn out on February 28th, 1885, leaving £6 12s. 2d.—when the account was made up £770 12s. 4d. was the balance on the credit side, less about £12, which was exhausted except £3 2s. 3d. on the same date—the account then ceased, and was opened again on 14th January, 1888, and he is credited with £742 4s. 10d. up to February, 1889, when the balance in his favour was £3 1s. 3d., and from March, 1889, to October, beginning with the balance of £3 1s. 3d., he is credited with £1,358 0s. 8d., less one or two small items—that has been exhausted, the last payment' out being £14 10s. on 3rd January this year, except £5 19s. 1d., his present balance—I also produce a copy of the banking account of John Errington French, from October 30th, 1884, when there was a payment in of £1,170 5s. 3d.—on 23rd January, 1885, £23 16s. 6d. was paid in, making £1,194 1s. 3d.—the whole of that money, except 3s. 7d., was drawn out in various sums up to 26th February, 1885.

Cross-examined. We seem to have given the trustee a copy of Ashwin's account on January 15th, 1890; we had been in communication with him two months before that, speaking from memory—I think it is only a few days ago that we had a communication with the trustee with regard to Mr. French's account—we only issue cheques for the amount we have in hand—we issue the forms, and the customers draw the cheques—they have a limited sum on them; £20 is the maximum—£320 was paid in on 25th September, 1889, and drawn out by cheque on the 27th—£381 5s. was paid in on 8th October, and drawn out in one cheque in November—we issue a banker's draft on the Bank of England for larger sums than £20, and our forms are not used; JOHN HENRY BIDDLE . I am managing clerk to Nicholas Bennett, a solicitor, of 2, Gresham Buildings—he acted as solicitor for the defendant in Ball and French—I had the sole conduct of the matter in chambers—there were a great many proceedings, interrogatories, discoveries, and three or four appeals—I received instructions from Mr. Ashwin, and never set my eyes on Mr. French up to the day of the trial before Mr. Justice Cave, on 23rd and 24th May—I received from Mr. Ashwin the money for paying costs and counsel's fees, and filing affidavits and Court expenses—the affidavits and everything were settled by him—I either fetched them or they came back to me, and I had them answered and sent them to Geneva, where I was told Mr. French was residing, and

they came back sworn before the Consul, and in other cases signed by him, and they had a seal on—the trial came on on 23rd May, and the plaintiff's case came to an end shortly before four p.m.—Mr. Jelf, Q. C., was our counsel, and Mr. Justice Cave ruled that there was a case for us to answer—I did not see Mr. Ashwin go into the box—it being four o'clock, the case was postponed to the next morning—we ought to have put Mr. Ashwin into the box the next morning—he was there, but Mr. Jelf advised that it would not do for him to go into the box, for they would get it all along the line, and Ashwin said, "We want to get these deeds in; I will put Biddle into the box"—that was me—I was to be put into the box to produce the deeds—I did not see the deeds, but he had a bag, and lifted it up—when it was suggested that I should go into the box he handed up a bag to go with me, but I refused, as my junior counsel advised me to have nothing to do with it—Ashwin did not go into the box, and he took the black bag and deeds away with him—he was in Court during the trial behind my junior counsel—he had the bag both days—the result of it was that nobody appeared, and judgment was given in favour of Mr. Ball, and against us—a letter was received at the office from Ashwin about a fortnight after the action—I have made diligent search for it, and cannot find it—it was addressed to—Biddle, Esq.—I recognised Ashwin's writing—he said, "Ask Mr. Bennett if he knows anybody who will make an advance on these deeds"—those were the deeds of the property at Wimbledon and Canning Town—I found out on the day of trial that Mr. French was a man of straw, but Mr. Ashwin said that he was a man with £500 a year—he is the person who instructed me in Ball and French; he drew the brief for counsel—having discovered that French was not a man of large means, I attended the solicitors to see if an arrangement could be come to, and said to Ashwin, "If you give me the deeds I can get my costs;" he walked up and down, and said, "Suppose I have not got the deeds, or suppose the deeds are not here; "I always supposed they were in France with Mr. Toufflet—by an affidavit of documents it said they belonged to Toufflet—the whole of this letter (produced) is Mr. Ashwin's writing, it says, "Dear Sir, Mr. Biddle promises me faithfully to let me have the documents relating to Mr. Toufflet"—Mr. Ashwin had called at the office and wanted to see what Mr. French had sworn to; I could not find the document, and sent him the draft—in the meantime I received that letter to Mr. Bennett, and opened it—on 26th October, 1889, this telegram was received at our office, purporting to come from Toufflet. (The original was here produced)—I do not know this writing, but it is certainly not Ashwin's.

Cross examined. Mr. Bennett is not here—I have been a solicitor, but was struck off the Bolls for misappropriating money—that was 16 or 17 years ago—subsequently to that there were criminal proceedings against me by a railway company—Mr. Ashwin promised Mr. Bennett that he would be responsible for counsels' fees in this matter; I heard that—I knew Simmonds as connected with Ball and French—this is Mr. Bennett's signature to this letter, the body of it is his also—Ashwin attended the trial on the morning of the 24th for a few minutes; he came in and went out again; Mr. M. Daniel was not there alone—Mr. Ashwin did notsay, "If those deeds are produced out of the custody of a third person how will that help me?"—this was a black brief bag, I only saw the out-side

of it—he had it with him on both days—I have never sworn that I saw the deeds in his possession—I have been in communication with Newman, Hayes, and Co. four or five months—I never saw the deeds—the brief bag was closed the whole time I saw it—I did not swear that I had actually seen the deeds in his possession—he said in so many words that he wanted me to go into the witness-box and swear that they were the property of the party who had parted with them—I was not asked that before—Ball and French having failed, I went into negotiations for the purpose of getting my costs—I found out that Mr. French was a man of straw, and on my own authority I went and made that proposal, stating that the deeds would be returned if they could be recovered—that was done on my authority.

Re-examined. I communicated that fact to Ash win—I have known him a good many years—I knew him before I was struck off the Rolls—he knew I was clerk to Nicholas Bennett before the proceedings with Ball and French, because I had business in the Temple acting for Mr. Bennett—he knows all about my history—I swore the paragraph which has been read.

TYRRELL EDWARD TINTON BOSS . I was a captain in the Australian cavalry—I first became acquainted with Mr. Ashwin, I think, at the end of 1880—I was introduced to him by the Count de Croy—he said, I think in the spring of 1881, that he was buying the Members' Mansions, he had made some arrangement with a friend to buy them in his name; he said at the last moment that his friend had declined to go on as he thought there was some risk, but he assured me there was no risk—I said that if it was of any use to him, he was very welcome to use my name, and he accepted that; he told me there was no risk—he did not mention a client—he said he could put business in my way if I would help him and come up to town for the purpose, he would pay £100 a year towards my expenses—I did business for him, and received £100—on June 23rd, 1881, I went with him to the office of the Land Security Company and executed some deeds—the first was a deed of purchase of the Members' Mansions from the Midland Land Company; I believe the nominal sum was £68,000—the second was a first mortgage by me to the Provident Life for £55,000; that was not in addition to the £68,000—the third was a second mortgage by me to the Midland Land Company for £11,250—there was also a mortgage of £42,000 to the Land Security Company—I saw money pass from the Provident Life Company to the former mortgagees—saw a £1,000 note pass—in October Ashwin asked me to find some one who would lend some more money on mortgage—letters passed, but I did not find a purchaser—I employed a surveyor, who called upon me for payment—I communicated with Ashwin, and in consequence of his answer I went to see him, and he told me I was responsible for the interest on the £55,000 and everything else—he had made Mr. Ivory the manager, and I signed the papers—when he said that I was liable I objected very strongly, and asked him for an indemnity—he declined, and said that I had done it for a consideration, £100—I went to my solicitors, Messrs. Lumley, and joined Mr. Ivory as a co-defendant—previous to that action I received a notice from the Provident Life office to pay interest—I did not tell Ashwin that I had no property—the action resulted in a judgment in my favour for an indemnity, and

the case went to the Court of Appeal—on 5th July, 1885, it was finally settled in my favour—I was present—Ashwin went into the witness-box—I never heard the name of Toufflet in connection with the Members' Mansions—he said that he had bought the Chateau La Rochebeaucourt, which was a very large property, and the vendor paid over £10,000 for the conveyance—on 5th November, 1884, Mr. Banks got a judgment against me on the second mortgage, and I brought an action for the indemnity, and got judgment on June 13th, 1885, against Ashwin for £9,769 18s. 11d.—I have never been paid any of that—the appeal was taken long before I knew Bompas—I left the Australian service in 1868—I was to have £100 a year as long as the connection lasted, but it had nothing to do with this—I first heard of the Members' Mansions transaction in 1881—I heard the name of French about the same time, but not in connection with the Members' Mansions—I never heard that there was an objection on the part of Mr. Ivory to the putting forward the name of French in this matter—I do not remember saying to Mr. Ashwin, "It does not much matter to me whether it is £5,000 or £5; I cannot pay, and I can sooner pay £5 than £5,000'—it was not for services rendered, it was for expenses, and it was not sufficient to cover them—it was never explained to me that the covenant in the deed made the mortgagee responsible to the mortgagor—he did not tell me that French was the principal in this matter—I never said that I had a friend who would buy—General Ripley, of the American service, was not going to buy, but I brought them together, and they spoke about it—the surveyor was not brought on the scene as a person who would assist in raising funds—I am sure General Ripley was not connected with that, as far as a man can be when it is eight or nine years ago—I know the Count de Croy—he was over here in 1880—I am not sure whether he was here in 1881—he was acting as agent for the Prince de Béarn.

Re-examined. In the action for indemnity against Ashwin he did not go into the box as a witness.

WALTER GRAHAM . I am an architect, of Ayr Street, Piccadilly—in 1881 I was engaged for Mr. White in erecting houses at Manor Park Estate, Finchley—the builder, James Boucher, who undertook the contract, failed, and Ashwin, the defendant, advanced £1,000 to Carter, the successor of Boucher, who was to finish four houses, and Lond six—when the £1,000 was exhausted, the houses were still unfinished, and I advanced £750 to complete them—Ashwin was to get a second mortgage to cover my advance, but he did not; he repudiated it—I ultimately obtained a mortgage from a third party—on 4th December, 1884, I received this notice. (This was signed John Js. French, stating that the houses 1 to 19, Manor Park, Finchley, were transferred and assigned to him far a debt of £12,000)—that was the first time I ever heard of French in the matter—I never owed Ashwin a penny; it was the other way—a writ was served on me on 31st December, and I entered an appearance, but never heard any more of it—Thomas Hugh Horwood, of Chancery Lane, was the solicitor.

Cross-examined. No doubt Ash win's advances were between July and December—they went on into 1882, between January and June—the time came when I wanted a second mortgage there being already a first—I applied to Ashwin to get it for me, and he told me he could not.

Re-examined. In the course of 1881 and 1882 some of Ash win's cheques for payment of wages passed through my hands; Carter £25, Lond £25; those are the builders.

JOHN SYLVANUS TANNER . I live at Wimbledon—I once lived at Clapham; I made Ashwin's acquaintance in 1886; I was laid up with rheumatic gout in bed, and Mr. Ashwin visited me between July and October, 1886—he lived at Upper Park Place, Richmond, and walked over to Wimbledon—in January, 1887, I saw him at my house, and I believe he said he was going to Liverpool; he subsequently brought a brown paper parcel, and asked me to take great care of it, as it contained deeds of property, and put it in my tin deed-box—he said property at Wimbledon and in Kent—I put them in my deed-box; he returned a week or two afterwards, and I handed them to him—while he was away I sent to his house nearly every day for letters, at his request, and which I forwarded to him; he occupied a house with his wife and servants—I went there one day while he was away, and found a man in possession, and the furniture was removed under a bill of sale, and sold by auction—about that time he asked me to take over a claim on the Members' Mansions, and sue upon it; and after several long interviews, I agreed to do so—this (produced) purports to be an assignment to me of a debt of £450, due from Ivory to French, on the furniture at the Members' Mansions, and also an account for the balance which might be found to be due—I believe that was executed—I never saw French Mr. Ashwin gave me the deed, and it purports to be signed by French—that deed recites several deeds—Several other document were handed to me at the same time, all in connection with the same thing—when Ashwin put that assignment before me I wrote this cheque for £50 in favour of J. E. French, and cave it to Ashwin—he took it away; he asked me to do so to pass it through the bank to show the transaction—it was payable to French's order, and he brought it back to me endorsed by French—I did not pass it through the bank; it has never been through—I gave notice to Mr. Ivory; that was signed at the same time, and bears the same date Ashwin brought it to me to sign, and I gave it back to him—I was to sue Ivory, and Ashwin and I were to have the proceeds if recovered—I never saw French till I saw him at Bow Street the other day—I had an office in Chancery Lane from 1884, which Mr. Ashwin and his clerk, Mr. Clark, occupied with me, but Clark was at Liverpool the greater part of the time—we carried on business there from April to September—I carried on my own business, and Mr. Ashwin and Mr. Clark formed brewery companies—up to the time I left, Clark remained there in conjunction with Ashwin, and I have seen them together frequently since I left—when Ashwin was away Clark acted as his agent entirely, and I found the money for the office—I left the others to do the work.

Cross-examined. I am manager of the Central General Press Agency, Duke Street, Adelphi, and have been so since 1888, when I left Chancery Lane—when I was at Chancery Lane I was writing for the Press and visiting the agency, which was then carried on at 69, Chancery Lane—I did not first know Ashwin by applying to him for assistance as a solicitor—I was borrowing money from a Mr. Matthews, and never knew him till I saw him sitting in Mr. Matthews' office—the deeds he gave me at Wimbledon were tied up with about thirty pieces of string, and there

were twenty-five or thirty seals on it; there were two other persons present—he said that they were deeds of the Wimbledon property, because Wimbledon had been discussed on two occasions between us—I have been in the witness-box several times, and I imagine I have been believed—I have never been convicted in my life—I have had two false charges brought against me—no charge was brought against me at Winchester—I was never there above twice in my life, and this was not one—I gave evidence last year, before Justice Stirling, on behalf of Captain Barnett, who was suing the executors of Sir Richard King, his brother-in-law, to recover some money under a deed of gift—I was examined and cross-examined, and several counter-foils of Sir Richard King's cheques were produced, and a number of cheques, many of which were in the name of Mrs. Hill, who was a daughter or Captain Hill; she had the honour of being my wife for two years—these cheques were not given to her between 1882 and 1884—none of them were paid into my account—I saw them for the first time in Court—I did not admit before Justice Stirling that they had been paid into my account—there was an account in the Telegraph and in the Star; I am bringing an action about it—I did not admit that one of those cheques was paid into my account; that was a cheque of D. W. Hill's—it was alleged that the cheques were paid to Mrs. Hill, on account of a child, but it was nothing of the kind; she was not living with me at the time they were paid to her—the allegation was not made that they were for her claim about the child, but they pay the executors of the late Mrs. Tanner, alias Hill, a sum of money for making that allegation, I have heard that from different sources—the plaintiff did not succeed, on the ground of bankruptcy, but the deed was substantiated—I indicted a man named Laporte for libel; I was cohabiting with his daughter; he had already been in prison for libel; the allegations were that I was a man of infamous repute—it was said that I had committed every crime in the Decalogue, and more than that—I did not get into the box when the case was called on; I was subpœnaed by the Star people, but was not called—the man was acquitted because a witness was not there; and his bail was estreated—I was ready to get into the box—the man ran away for twelve months; his daughters were there, and their husbands—I know Laporte's writing; I do not know why I did not got into the box and prove it; I was in the hands of my counsel; I asked the Judge, and I wished to go into the box—I never got money from Mrs. Gordon Baillie, and never paid money to her—I have paid accounts to her with Sir Richard King's money—she was tried before my Lord, and sentenced to five years' penal servitude—Mr. Ashwin went to Liverpool in 1887, but he used to come up over fortnight and go back—I have never boon bankrupt, and never was charged with fraudulent bankruptcy—Laporte did not charge me—I have said, "I know a man named Laporte, he accused me with fraudulent bankruptcy;" he wrote that he accused me—I have been charged with forgery, and there was a charge made of indecent assault, but it was withdrawn, and the Magistrate said that it ought not to have been brought; the child was my own daughter, who was suffering from hip disease and had splints on—she did not accuse me, but the nurse did and the mother—I did not open a banking account in the name of Laporte, I opened one for him, he went with me—I never gave a cheque which was dis-honoured,

nor did he—Laporte's cheque was not given to a fishmonger in Wimbledon and dishonoured, nor was I threatened with criminal proceedings—I knew Ashwin's mother before I went to Richmond, and it; was at her suggestion that I went there to take her house—this is my £50 cheque; it was not accepted in my account in payment for the handing over of the deeds, the understanding being that any balance to French should be paid by me afterwards—Mr. Ashwin did not apply to me for the return of this cheque, it coming back dishonoured; it never went into the bank—Ashwin did not demand the deeds, finding that the cheque would not be paid, nor did I refuse to have them back; he might have had them if he had asked for them—he did not have them returned to him; was occupying my office months and months after that transaction—I never heard that he charged me with obtaining the deeds by fraud; when he learnt that the cheque would not be paid, he forged my name to a cheque, and I charged him—I was at 69, Chancery Lane eighteen months; I took the premises at Ashwin's instigation, for the benefit of him and Clark; I paid the rent and all the expenses.

Re-examined. They left in September, 1887, but I remained much longer—they left at my instance; I locked the door against them, and told them not to come again—there is a copy of my letter in the letter book—I met Ashwin in the street afterwards, but the friendly interviews ceased some time prior to that—the charge about the girl was dismissed by the Magistrate, who said it ought never to have been brought at all—I was charged here with forgery, and acquitted, and the man who charged me afterwards admitted, in the Queen's Bench, that he had forged it. (Mr. Ball's affidavit was here put in.)

WILLIAM YARNOLD . I am managing clerk to Newman, Hayes, and Co., solicitors, acting for the Treasury—I produce an order, made on 7th November, 1889, by the High Court of Justice, for the prosecution of the defendant—we wrote to French on 27th May, and received a letter on the 30th, purporting to come from him, and dated the 29th—on 28th October, 1889, we received the envelope, two letters, and a memorandum, which are attached to the depositions—the memorandum is Mr. Ashwin's writing—one of the letters is a notice, dated 24th October, 1889, requiring the attendance of a witness on the bankruptcy petition—that was sent out by our firm to Southsea, which was supposed to be French's address; the other is a letter written by me, giving notice to French that the case had been restored to the Judge's paper—I have not seen French write, but I have compared this letter with his answers to the requisitions, which are admitted to be his writing—it says, "Mrs. French having left England, it is thought better to return the two letters to the address on the envelope"—they were enclosed unopened in another envelope, and that was written on a separate piece of paper—the envelope is the same writing as the other, Mr. Ashwin's in my opinion—I also produce six letters in Mr. Ashwin's writing, to a person named Riches, who handed them to me for the purpose of the action of Ball v. French, and used in the case—I have an original letter here, sent by Toufflet; the one attached to the deposition is a mistake; the original is in French—I cannot say whose writing it is, it is dated 2nd October, 1889, and is addressed to Mr. Ashwin—I saw Mr. Biddle when he called with regard to the settlement of the action on terms.

JOHN ERRINGTON FRENCH . I live at Stafford Road, Southsea—I first became acquainted with Mr. Ashwin in 1878, in France—I was introduced by Mr. Riches, and went to Paris with Mr. Ashwin, as interpreter and translator; we went to St. Gaudens about the winding-up of his affairs; he was a porcelain manufacturer there—it was sold by auction, and bought in my name; Mr. Ashwin found the money, about 50,000 francs—the Chateau La Rochebeaucourt was sold belonging to the Prince de Béarn at Mr. Ashwin's request—it was estimated at 5,000,000 francs,£20,000; the deeds were made out in my name, but the money was never paid—the Prince's secretary or agent earned on the negotiations, I had nothing to do with it beyond lending my name; they did not require an interpreter—documents were signed at the request of the Count de Croy and Mr. Ashwin—I was not consulted as to the terms, or as to whether it should be purchased or not—I only lent my name to Mr. Ashwin—I did not authorise Mr. Ashwin to purchase Lonsdale Chambers, Chancery Lane, from the Midland Land Company—I was abroad—I heard something about it at the time, but did' not know what was going on—there was a suggestion to change those chambers for the Prince's property at La Rochebeaucourt—I did not receive or pay any money in respect of any of those transactions—my private means were very small; I could not afford to spend any—I had practically no means, but my wife had a little money—Mr. Ashwin furnished me with money for travelling expenses, and when he has called me to England to stay in his house I have had £1, and the last day I saw him he handed mo £2, which I have not had an opportunity of returning to him—I was to go to Dieppe—I had nothing to speak of more than my travelling expenses—I came to London three times for him; once from St. Omer, and also from Geneva—I first heard the Members' Mansions mentioned when I was on a visit to him in London—I did not authorise him to purchase the Members' Mansions for me; I had nothing to do with the transaction—he never told me he had received £4,489 2s. 6d, for me in respect of the Members' Mansions—this account between Thos. Smith Ashwin and John E. French began, "By cash from the Members' Mansions, £4,489 2s. 6d.," and at the bottom of it is put, "This account examined, and found correct, J. E. French, Thos. Ashwin"—that was sent to me at Geneva, with one or two other papers, and I signed them; I thought they were all right; I had every confidence in Mr. Ashwin, and signed them at his request; and the second, third, and fourth accounts in the same way on different occasions at intervals—I did not know that Mr. Ashwin received £600 for me in respect of the Members' Mansions, or £163 15s. 2d.—I know nothing about all these payments out on the right-hand side of the account—I did not authorise any of them—I did not agree costs and expenses at £750—I have never had a bill of costs from Ashwin, or a claim of any sort, or any of the items for costs—I do not know Taylor, Carter, or Lond—I did not purchase Mr. Ashwin's interest in the business of Ashwin and Company, agricultural implement makers, of Stratford-on-Avon, for £1,400—Mr. Ashwin did not give me a cheque for £100 on January 24th, 1883, or one for £200 on 2nd March, 1883—though I signed papers agreeing the balance, I know nothing about them; I did not read the items—I was living in Switzerland in September, October, and November, 1884—I

have stayed with Mr. Ashwin at his house, 4, Canning Place—I do not remember the date; but the furniture was given up to me, and supposed to be sold to me, in the presence of Mr. Ashwin and Mr. Horwood, the solicitor—Ashwin handed me a chair as a token—I forget the exact words, but he said, "This is your furniture"—I paid him nothing for it—I had not £100 to pay for it—I do not remember a document being signed in connection with it, but perhaps there was——I have signed many documents at Mr. Ashwin's request—I have not refused to sign any—I always believed everything was straightforward and honourable, and there being no suspicion in my mind I signed them—I did not, while I was staying in Mr. Ashwin's house, authorise Mr. Hammond, a solicitor, to bring an action against Ashwin for £800 with interest, the balance of these four accounts, nor do I know that such an action was brought or that judgment was given in my favour for £814 and interest—Mr. Hammond sent me in a bill of costs, to my great astonishment, and I sent it to Ashwin at once; he did not send it back to me, he wrote to say that I need take no notice of it, it was all right—I have not got the letter; when I left Geneva all the letters were burnt; I never thought they would be of any consequence; they were very short friendly letters—I did not, on 17th February, 1885, lend Mr. Ashwin £25, nor did I between the last account and the present time advance to him £1,379 14s. 7d., or any part of that sum—he owes me nothing—I know nothing of the notice in the depositions, dated 3rd December, 1884, signed John E. French to Walter Graham—I signed this as I signed other papers—I have no recollection of signing it, but I recognise my signature—I did not authorise Mr. Horwood to issue a writ against Mr. Ashwin for £1,200, nor did I know that he had done so—he did not hand me deeds relating to property at Alexander Terrace and Road, Wimbledon, and Elizabeth Street, Canning Town; I never saw them; I first heard about them when I came to England a year ago, and I never had possession of them, and have never seen them that I know of—it is not true that I advanced him £1,200 upon them; I never had £1,200 to advance—I had a writ served on me at Geneva, in the action of Ball v, French; I sent it back to Mr. Ashwin, as I did every paper I received, because the affairs were all in his hands, not in mine; I knew nothing about them; he had made no communication to me what I was to do with documents—I did not instruct him to retain Mr. Ben Bennett, the solicitor, to act for me, nor did I know till last year that he was defending—I did not pay any money towards the expenses of this action—these documents (produced) were sent to me at Geneva, and I signed them; two of them were sworn there—I received this paper (produced) by post, written out as it is—I did not alter it in any way—I have nothing to do with drawing it up—I sent it to the Consul, swore it, signed it, and sent it back to Mr. Ashwin—I signed all the documents sent to me in a similar manner—I read them without understanding them—it was very foolish—I was asked to send them back by return of post, and I did so—I thought it was all right, I relied on Mr. Ashwin, I had the confidence in him of a brother—I never heard of an action being brought against Ashwin by Captain Boss in respect of the Members' Mansions, or that Ashwin said that the Members'

Mansions were purchased for me; I never saw any details of that action—when the action of Ball and French was decided against me Newman, Hayes, and Co. wrote me a letter of 27th May, 1889; I sent it to Mr. Ashwin, not knowing what it was about. (This informed the witness that Mr. Justice Cave had given judgment against him with costs, and had made an order for the delivery of the title-deeds which he had admitted were in his possession, and they should enforce immediate execution.)—I did not know that I had admitted it, or that an action had taken place—I took the letter to Ashwin, and he wrote me out the draft of an answer, which I copied and sent to Newman and Hayes; this is a copy of it; the draft remained in Mr. Ashwin's hands—it is addressed from Redhill, where I was staying, but it was written in London—I put it in my pocket, took it to Redhill, and posted it there. (In this letter the witness stated that the deeds were not in his possession, he having transferred them some years ago.)—the statements in that letter are not true; I never handed the deeds to anybody, nor did I ever give notice that I had transferred them—a notice in bankruptcy was sent to me at Southsea—I sent it to Ashwin, and met him at Portsmouth Station—he had a document which he wished me to sign, and we went to a commissioner and signed it on 21st September, 1889—this is it; this is my signature—I did not read it, nor was it read to me—Ashwin was with me when I signed it—he took it away in his bag, and I never saw it again till I was at the Police-court. (This affidavit stated that upwards of four years ago the witness assigned all his interest in the deeds to one Toufflet, of Rouen, and was unable to comply with the notice.)—it was not true that I had parted with the deeds to Toufflet—Toufflet is his Christian name, but a great many people call him Toufflet; he is agent des affaires at Rouen—I never handed him any deeds—I did not authorise notice of appeal to be given in that action—I received at my house at Southsea a notice to attend the Bankruptcy Court, I sent it to Ashwin, and two or three weeks afterwards I went to stay with him at Bournemouth, where he rented a furnished house for the season—we talked over the matter of my having to go to the Bankruptcy Court—he said, "Don't be uneasy, it is all in liquidation," and he quieted me completely—I started from Southsea to London to be examined in the Bankruptcy Court, but I got out at Guildford, and sent this telegram to Mr. Registrar Linklater, of the Bankruptcy Court—that was by Ashwin's suggestion on the day we went to Portsmouth. (Read:"Left Southsea this morning to attend Court summons; unable to proceed through illness; will present myself as soon as possible.—FRENCH, Guildford Station"—I have a draft of that in my pocket, which Mr. Ashwin gave me—I was not ill at all—I did not go back home to Southsea, I went to Bournemouth, and stayed with Mr. Ashwin—I told him I had sent the telegram—he said, "Very well"—this letter is not my writing, but I translated it from a letter in English, purporting to be signed by Toufflet, which Mr. Ashwin gave me—he stayed in the room while I did it. (This was from Toufflet to Mr. M. Ashwin, of Stratford-on-Avon, stating that lie knew his two brothers, and had visited them in the Temple when in London; that the deeds of the property in Canning Town were transferred to him in 1885, and that a speculator had offered him 500 francs for them, and he would take 550 for them; that, as he was advised to keep his address secret, the reply might be sent to the care of Mr. Harris, at Brighton)—I left the original and the French translation with Mr. Ashwin

—it says, "As this letter is most important, I keep the original, and send you a copy, according to our custom"—it is about four years since I have seen Toufflet; he was then at Geneva—Ashwin does not know French, and I did not read it to him—I was not at Southsea on 28th October—I do not think I have seen these two letters with the London postmark of October 24th, and this registered letter of October 25th, addressed to me—I did not receive them at Southsea; I was not there at the time—I saw them in Mr. Ashwin's hands at 15, Cockspur Street, they were addressed there by my wife; he did not open them; he said, "I will deal with them"—I did not authorise him to write, "Mr. French having left England, it is thought better to return these two letters"—he told me of it afterwards—he wished me to leave England for a while, during which time everything would be settled between him and his brother, and I could return in a fortnight—he said, "Don't be uneasy, I shall settle it easily; it is all an affair between my brother and me"—he said that he would settle it by giving up the deeds—I said, "Give them up, and it will be all over"—I selected Dieppe to go to, but did not go—that conversation occurred at his lodgings, at Oxford and Cambridge Mansions—I never lived at Cockspur Street—I went with him from Bournemouth to London—we first went to a lodging in Catherine Street, near the British Museum, and stayed there a week, and then went to Oxford and Cambridge Mansions; he had a furnished flat there—I stayed there till about the middle of November—I stayed with him from 23rd September, 1889, when I sent the telegram from Guildford, till November 5th—I told my wife to address all my letters to 15, Cockspur Street; that was Mr. Ashwin's office, where he carried on the business of a solicitor—this telegram is not my writing—I cannot swear whose it is; but Ashwin told me at that time that he had sent a telegram, he did not say to who, concerning the delivery of the deeds—that was about 26th October—in 1886 I went with him to the Cheque Bank, Charing Cross, and he opened a banking account in my name with £1,175 5s. 5d.—I did not find the money—I drew it out in three or four different sums at his request, and handed them to him in notes—I have never had a banking account in England; I had one many years ago when I was in Algeria—I know nothing about the furniture of the Members' Mansions—I have. never seen Ivory—I never received or gave any money in connection with these deeds—this cheque for £50 was sent to me by Mr. Ashwin—I do not know whether it was at Geneva—I endorsed it and sent it back to him, and saw no more of it—it is dated February, 1887—I never had the money—I should say that these four letters (from Arthur L. Miches) are in Mr. Ashwin's writing—the fabrique is the porcelain manufactory.

Cross-examined. I have no documents in Ashwin's writing tending to corroborate the statements I have made to the Jury—I know of no documents tending to show that what I have told the Jury is not a tissue of falsehoods—early in life I went to Australia, and from there I went to Chili, from Chili I came to England, and married on the money I brought home with me—I bought an estate in Algeria with it called "Medane"—I sold that in 1867, it realised about £1,600—I came to England just before the Franco-German War, which kept me in England; I then went to Bruges, and then to St. Omer—this fabrique was purchased in my name in 1879 or 1880—I went there

three times I think, but not to look after it—I was the registered proprietor and mortgaged it—my wife joined me in the mortgage; by the French law she signed it—it was for 5,000 francs, not 6,000, but I am not certain—it has just been sold by forced auction by the mortgagee—in 1882 or 1883 I became the registered proprietor of the Chateau La Rochebeaucourt in the Province of Rhone et Charente—I was sent there to stay, and remained there about two months—I never was there for six months; about two months was the longest time—I was staying with the Vicomte, who received me in the name of the Prince—I was staying with the bailiff—I met a friend in Paris, and took him to stay there for about a fortnight—I went there a third time, but did not stat in the Chateau; I went there to get into it, and my right was denied, and in the end a lawsuit was tried, in which I was the defendant—I do not know whether there was a charge of fraud; I was not at the trial, and I have not seen any document—we were both accused; I was not the only one who signed—I never saw the accusation—the charge was brought in my name, because I was the registered proprietor of the property—I made periodical visits to the Chateau for two or three years—during that time I had an interview with Mr. Ashwin in Paris, at which the subject of Lonsdale Chambers was mentioned—I do not know to whom the Chambers belong; I know Mr. Ivory had to do with them—I do not know that he is the manager of the Midland Land Company—I know of a proposal being made in my name to take Lonsdale Chambers, that may have been in 1881—I heard that the negotiations had broken down—after that I heard mention made of the Members' Mansions, Victoria Street—I do not know that Lonsdale Chambers and the Members' Mansions were owned by the same company—I remember seeing Mr. Ivory in Paris; Mr. Ashwin was there—we were there at least a fortnight or three weeks—that was in 1881—my meeting with Mr. Ashwin at St. Omer in 1878 was my first visit—I had no friendship with him except that we travelled together—I am not related to him—St. Omer is six hours' journey from Paris—I went to Geneva in August, 1881, I think, and I was there seven years up to 1888—here is this account, "£1,400 March 10, 1883, to interest, transfer of capital and interest in Ashwin and Co., Stratford-on-Avon"—I pledge my oath that I know nothing about that—I may have signed a deed under Ashwin's hand, assigning to me the interest in Ashwin and Co., of Stratford-on-Avon, as I signed other papers—I was in England in 1884, and went with Mr. Ashwin several times to Mr. Horwood, of Chancery Lane—I went to Mr. Horwood this autumn, but did not instruct him to bring an action in order to recover that £1,400—I did not know anything about his having recovered it for me, nor did I give him authority to receive the same, and pay it over to my account—I swore some affidavits at Geneva, but not for the purpose of recovering any money; I never expected it—I never had a cheque for £1,170 5s. 5d. handed to me by Mr. Horwood as having been recovered by him in this action—I opened the account at the Cheque Bank with notes and cheques which Mr. Ashwin gave me; it was not my money, I simply gave it in—it is some years ago, and I cannot recollect whether it was cheques or bank-notes; it was money; I do not know what the amount was, I think it was about £800—I said before the Magistrate that the largest amount I paid into the Cheque Bank was £300, but I think I corrected myself and said £800—it was £1,100

—I do not know that that was recovered by Mr. Horwood from M. C. Ashwin, for the business at Stratford-on-Avon—I can read and write; I have made and saved money, and lost money too—I cannot remember swearing any affidavits in the suit of French v. M. C. Ashwin; show them to me, and I will tell you whether it is my signature—I never saw an affidavit till I came to England in 1889, but I know that it is a statement on oath, and that to swear to a lie is a wicked and wrong thing—I have sworn to lie after lie—I do not remember sending a letter to Mr. Horwood on 29th October, 1874, instructing him to bring an action of myself v. Mr. Ashwin; that is all I can say unless I see the letter; I will not pledge my oath—I do not remember this furniture being assigned to me in September, 1884, by an assignment signed by myself, but I will not deny it—I remember the furniture being taken to Hudson's Repository; I did not go there with it, but after it got there Mr. Ashwin and I went there together, and I was seen in the Repository—I do not remember sending Mr. Horwood a cheque for £18 under my own hand, for him to send to Mr. Hudson, but I do not deny it—I do not remember Mr. Ashwin applying to me for money to settle some claims which were made against him—I never gave him a cheque for £230 or any money; I had none to give him—I do not remember that that was to settle an action called Lee and Ashwin—I do not remember a cheque of Bennett's executors, which I offered to compromise; that is absolutely new—I never saw the deeds till I came back to England last year, so I know nothing about them—I never had them deposited with me for advances I had made—this affidavit was sworn and signed by me before the lawsuit at Geneva on 25th January, 1887, and paragraph 3 says: "The deeds referred to in paragraph 4 of the present affidavit were handed to me as security for loans made by me to the said Thomas Smith Ashwin, as can unquestionably be proved"—that was false—Mr. Bennett forwarded that affidavit to me—I said in chief that Mr. Ashwin forwarded it because he was in the habit of forwarding all papers—I kept it a day or two—I sent the documents by return of post, according as I could find the Consul at home—I read the documents, but not attentively—there was always somebody at the Consul's office—the form was that I took a book in my hand and kissed it, and vowed the contents of that paper to be true on my oath—when I signed that document I did not know that I was swearing to a lie; if I had read that paragraph attentively I should not have signed it; I did read it—I swore this affidavit (another) on 3rd December, 1887—I have had, but have not now, in my possession the documents relating to this matter—I did not trouble my mind about it; when I came to England in 1889 it was quite new to me—I have told the truth to the jury, and I am telling the truth now—I did not trouble my mind about these deeds till I came to England in 1889—I cannot reconcile that, it is not reconcileable—I see this affidavit sworn at Geneva by Mr. Bennett—I do not know whether I received it from him, I will not swear I did not—the answers to interrogatories bear my signature; I swore them before the Consul at Geneva—I knew afterwards that proceedings were taken against me, because I did not obey the judgment of the Court as to the costs—I knew that a receiving order had been made against me, and that I had committed an act of bankruptcy, and I was informed that for the judgment debt I should be made bankrupt, and that proceedings in attachment were being taken against me—I did

not know what that meant; for a long time I remained openly in my house without any suspicion that I might be seized—after the proceedings, in August and September I did not realise that I might be taken at any moment—I first realised it when I received a letter from Newman and Hayes, that I was to be made a bankrupt; that was in September, I expect—I began to feel that I was in danger—when I went to Mr. Ashwin, at Bournemouth, at the end of October, it became clear to me that under the order I could be made bankrupt, and when I left him in November I went within three or four days to Newman, Hayes, and Co.—I made a statement in the middle of November, but I never went round—I never told anybody—I never had any idea about being sent to prison—I thought everything would be arranged—it was not conveyed to me at Bournemouth that my personal safety was at stake—I may have signed the original assignment in Graham and Goodwin to Ashwin; I do not remember the document—I had a bill of costs at Geneva from Mr. Hall—I signed a retainer to Mr. Bennett; I have seen it since—I do not remember signing a retainer to Mr. Hammond, but will not swear I did not—the affidavits are not reconcileable with the statement that what I have said to-day is true.

Re-examined. The statements I have made to-day as to the documents I have put my name to are correct—I have never had any property of my own, apart from the property in Algeria—I have not been in any business or profession—I lived eight years in Algeria with my wife, and my children were born there; she was the editress of an English newspaper in Geneva—Mr. Ashwin gave me £2 in the middle of November; he said, "You will want to purchase a few things; here is £2"—that was to enable me to go off—he had urged me for several days to go abroad while he arranged the affairs of his brother in connection with the deeds and the proceedings against me—I never saw an attachment against me, but I suspected it—I was not told of it.

FRANCES ELIZABETH FRENCH . I am the wife of the last witness; we were married some years ago, when he had property in Algeria—I know Mr. Ashwin slightly; I have seen him at St. Omer and in London—he did not come to see us at St. Omer; he was staying with a friend of ours—the money invested in property in Algeria was lost, the bank failed—my husband had some money when we were at St. Omer, and I had some from my father, and I had my own income—I was connected with a newspaper in Geneva—after my husband lost his money he had no private means of his own—he did not transact any business—I do not think I ever saw him with more than £5—he had no banking account—when we were living at Southsea he was decoyed away to Bournemouth, when I was away on a visit—I communicated with him by letter—two letters arrived for him at Southsea, and I sent them to him under cover to Mr. Ashwin's, 15, Cockspur Street—I knew he was with Mr. Ashwin, but did not know his address—on 5th November I went to Cockspur Street, but did not find him—I waited at the office some time, and in consequence of information I went to Oxford and Cambridge Mansions, and found him there—Mrs. Ashwin was there—I took my husband home with me—I found out that morning that there was an attachment against him, and that he was liable to be sent to prison—I accompanied him to Messrs. Newman and Hayes, where he made the statement which he afterwards deposed to at Bow Street Police-court.

Cross-examined. My husband and I are first cousins—after our marriage we went to Algeria—the property there had been purchased before that—it was sold in the year that the French war broke out, and realised something like 40,000 francs—we came to England during the war, and afterwards went to St. Omer—my husband used to hand his money to me and tell me to lock it up, and then he used to ask me for it—an English journal was started in Geneva long before we went there; it was not a great success—I was not the proprietress, I was paid editress; it died several years ago—I was editress of three journals, one after the other—I recollect my husband going to the Chateau La Rochebeaucourt in 1879, but not to live there—he went there twice or oftener—it is difficult to say how long he was there, because he was in Paris part of the time—he was away three or four months, he came home and went away again.

NATHANIEL GOLDING (Detective Officer D). I arrested the defendant on November 7th, the day the warrant was issued; I read it to him, he said that it was all false. The defendant's examination in bankruptcy was here put in, and partly read


3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-199
VerdictsGuilty > pleaded guilty; Guilty > pleaded guilty
SentencesMiscellaneous > fine; Miscellaneous

Related Material

199. GEORGE DE LANGE, ALEXANDER VAN CLEEF, AARON VAN CLEEF, BENJAMIN VAN CLEEF, EMANUEL BARUCH , and GEORGE CALLOW , PLEADED GUILTY to unlawfully applying to certain boxes of cigars a false trade-mark; the said prisoners, except Callow, also PLEADED GUILTY to selling the said cigars. They received good characters.

CALLOW fined £5, and the other five defendants to contribute £50 between them towards the costs of the Prosecution.

OLD COURT.—Friday, February 7th, 1890.

Before Mr. Justice Day.

3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-200
VerdictsNot Guilty > unknown; Not Guilty > no evidence

Related Material

200. CATHERINE BRENTON (36) , Unlawfully neglecting and ill treating Ellen Brenton, a child in her charge, in a manner likely to cause injury to her health.

MR. BUTLER Prosecuted, and MR. GORE BROWN Defended.

HENRY EDWARD HARRISON . I am a registered medical practitioner, and am medical officer to the Board of Guardians of the Fulham Union—on 13th December I visited the house, 202, Latimer Road—I there saw the prisoner and her child Ellen, twelve months old; she was in a very emaciated condition, but I found no trace of any disease; it had its night things on—I saw no bed or bedding; I did not notice whether it was covered; it was taken up by the mother, and I examined it.

Cross-examined. I did not see any rugs in the room or over the child; I can't say there were not any; I can't say they were not over the child—emaciation may arise from wasting produced in a number of different ways; it is not uncommon with children under twelve, sometimes caused by unsuitable food, sometimes by catarrh; sometimes cow-milk may possibly be undigested by an infant—I was told that a nevus had been removed from near the heart of the child when it was younger; that would not necessarily weaken an infant; I should not expect it; it depends upon how it is done; if done skilfully it would not be likely.

Re-examined. When I first saw the prisoner she did not complain of the child being ill—an overfed child would not be likely to eat ravenously.

ANNIE GEARING . I am the wife of William Henry Gearing, of Pember Street, Notting Hill—the prisoner and her family came to live there; they left about the 19th September—I never saw bed or bedding in the prisoner's rooms—I have on several occasions seen her rooms, when the door was open; they were in a very dirty condition—I had to send for the sanitary inspector, in consequence—the child Ellen used to sit a good deal on the steps leading to the kitchen in which they lived—the elder children used to mind it, and they used sometimes to leave it in the care of the two younger children—the prisoner was very often out; the child had not sufficient clothing—in order to get rid of the prisoner and her family I took proceedings to get a warrant of ejectment.

Cross-examined. There was some flock in the room, and some sackcloth—they were very, poor; they left owing us money—the elder boy was about twelve, and the girl about six or seven; this was a very small baby—I said before the Magistrate that I thought it was in a consumption; it looked very ill when they came to my house, and I thought it was in a consumption by its looks—I never saw the prisoner drunk.

Re-examined. The younger children were about six or seven.

WILLIAM COUSINS (Policeman T 842). In consequence of a warrant I received from the West London Police-court, I called on several occasions at 4, Pember Street—on the first occasion I did not find the prisoner at home—the second time I called was about the second week after I received the warrant, some time in September—I never entered the room till I called to eject them; I saw no bed or bedding in the room then—I saw three children sitting round the fire on some old boxes—I could not see a particle of food of any description, or any bedding whatever; the children were very poorly clad—I got them some food, and they ate it very ravenously—the prisoner afterwards came in and took the children away; on that particular occasion I should say she had been drinking, but before that I saw her outside the Black Bull—I then asked her name, and told her my business, that I had a warrant against her—she made use of obscene language; she was then certainly the worse for drink.

Cross-examined. There were two rooms; I went into both; there was scarcely any furniture; I saw no sacks; there might have been a sack, or some old rags—there was some very slight covering.

SARAH COOPER . I am the wife of Henry Cooper, a wheelwright, and live at 210, Latimer Road—the prisoner and her family came to live in my house about the end of September—she was often ill while there, many hours at a time—sometimes she would be out for two or three hours, or four or five hours some days—on those occasions she was left with a little girl, the one next to her, to mind, very dirty, and hardly any clothes on her; some days she would be left without any clothes at all on her—she used to go out not to work; I have sometimes been out on an errand, and have seen her go into a public-house—she would go out at eight in the morning to go to work—I have seen a small heap of flock in the front room, that the man and his wife used to lie upon; it was flock that had been emptied out on to the floor—I have several times given the child Ellen food; she ate it as though she was very hungry—she was not properly fed and clothed during the time they

were in the house—I several times told the prisoner that I wondered at her going out and leaving the child with a little girl—she said, "I don't leave her with the little girl, I leave her with the other children," and I said they left her for hours—the husband used to go out about five in the morning, and come home about seven, with a basket on his back, if coming from work; I believe he is a bricklayer's labourer—sometimes in the morning there would be a woman come in and stay a little while, and then go out, and after that the prisoner would go out; they were drinking people.

Cross-examined. When the mother was out I sometimes saw the child lying on the bedding, not properly covered; sometimes when I heard it crying I would go in and coax the baby, and tell her that her mother would soon be in, and I would take her in a little tea and bread and butter—the prisoner was always out when I did that—the neighbourhood of Nothing Hill is very much occupied by laundresses—the child was a very delicate-looking little thing.

MR. BROWN submitted that there was no ease made out under the new Statute, under which the prisoner was indicted; the neglect alleged must he such as to cause unnecessary suffering; lie referred to several cases, particularly Reg. v. Ryland, Crown Cases Reserved, page 99.

MR. JUSTICE DAY could not say there was no case, and therefore left it to the JURY, who found the prisoner


There was another indictment against the prisoner for Manslaughter, upon which no evidence was offered. NOT GUILTY .

3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-201
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceMiscellaneous > sureties

Related Material

201. RICHARD ALFRED BRIDGMORE (18) and SIDNEY GOODALL (17) were indicted, and also charged, on the Coroner's inquisition with the manslaughter of Jesse Augustus Wallen.

MR. ERNEST BEARD Prosecuted; MR. GEOGHEGAN appeared for Bridgmore, and MR. GRAIN for Goodall. After the case had commenced the prisoners desired to withdraw their plea, upon which the Jury found them

GUILTY . To enter into their recognisances, and find sureties to come up for judgment if called upon.

THIRD COURT.—Friday, February 7th, 1890.

Before Mr. Common Serjeant.

3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-202
VerdictGuilty > with recommendation
SentenceMiscellaneous > sureties

Related Material

202. JEROME HOPKINS , Unlawfully publishing four malicious libels of and concerning Dr. Thomas Crosby.

MR. BODKIN Prosecuted.

THOMAS BOON CROSBY , F. R. C. S. and M. D. I practise at 13, Fenchurch Street, and live at 21, Gordon Square—I am a member of the committee of management of the Guildhall School of Music, and for some time past I have been interested in musical matters—in September, 1888, the prisoner called on me in Fenchurch Street, and told me that an oratorio composed by himself was going to be produced in London towards the end of January, and asked me if I would allow my name to be used as a patron—he produced a small book, in which there were several names, and I signed my name as a patron—as he was leaving he said I should have four tickets for a guinea if I wished; that was half-price—I ordered no tickets, and did not agree to take any—a few days after a letter was

handed to me by Mr. Chaplin, my secretary, which enclosed four tickets for the oratorio—I immediately returned the tickets, with a polite note on 29th December, 1888—after that I received this letter of 4th January from the prisoner, returning the tickets—on 5th I wrote this—I received this of the 5th—I answered it, and received these postcards of the 10th and 12th, addressed to me at 21, Woburn Square; the tickets were returned again (The letters and postcards requested pay men of £1 1s. for the tickets)—I had communicated with the Rev. Dacre Craven, Rector of St. George-the-Martyr, Bloomsbury, whose name is mentioned in this letter of 16th January, with reference to the prisoner—I wrote to the prisoner again, and Messrs. Trinder wrote to him on 19th January—this letter was written by him to Messrs. Trinder and Co. on 19th January. (This accused Mr. Crosby of libelling prisoner to Mr. Craven, and said he wished no blackguards, cheats, or liars on his list of patrons)—I received this post-card of 23rd January, and these letters of 30th January and 24th September. (In these applications for one guinea were made)—I was sued by the prisoner in the City of London Court for £1 1s.—judgment was given in my favour, with a guinea costs—I produce two extracts from the registry of the Court with the Court seal on them—I received a guinea, and acknowledged the receipt—I received these letters of 5th and 11th October from Folkestone, 25th and 30th December, and other letters and post-cards—the one of 30th December bears a skull and cross-bones—it contained the lines, "With gentlemen's names Crosby loves to appear, so that nobody dare venture a sneer. But when asked to pay he answers, 'No fear, not a penny nor guinea for you, do you hear'"—on 5th January I received this telegram, "Just summoned for libel to Craven"—between 6th January, when I applied for a summons, and 14th, when it was returnable, I received these three post-cards of January 11th and 12th—at the hearing of the summons I expressed my wish to merely put an end to the annoyance, and said if an apology were offered I would withdraw the summons—the prisoner did not accept that offer, and was committed, being on his own recognisances—my wish is the same now as when I was at the Police-court. (The letters which formed the subject of the libel contained the following passages: "You cheated me out of my subscription"—"Perjured yourself, denying your own writing to save a guinea"—"You libelled yourself to your pastor"—"A much dirtier and more contemptible experience with dear English cousins than this whole business I have seldom heard of"—"A contemptible sneak")

Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I am not a musician—I cannot read music—I am a member of the Corporation of London, and as such I am on the Committee of the Guildhall School—I cannot say if there was any object in your asking me to be on your list of patrons if I had no musical reputation, and paid no money—I only wrote my name and address in your book; the "G 1" against it is in your writing—I swear it is not in mine—it was not there at the time, to the best of my belief—I signed no subscription-book—I did not tell you to send the tickets to 21, Gordon Square, because it was a private affair—you always asked for the money—I had volumes of letters from you, but I had no polite assurance from you that you wanted nothing but the money—I did not write to Mr. Craven saying you were troubling him for money not owing.

FREDERICK HUGH CAPRON . I am a solicitor, and a member of the firm

of Trinder and Co.—we have acted for some time as solicitors for Dr. Crosby—I received several letters by post purporting to come from Jerome Hopkins in the course of last year, and these of 19th January and 11th October among others—at Dr. Crosby's instructions I have written several letters to the prisoner requesting him to desist from writing any more letters.

ARTHUR CHAPLIN . I am secretary to Dr. Crosby, of 13, Fenchurch Street—I remember the prisoner coming there in December, 1888, and I saw him write this letter, and enclose it in this envelope, with the words, "Present" and "Dr. Crosby," outside—I handed him the paper to write it on—I recognise these letters as being in same writing.

JOHN THOMAS HOPPER . I am a clerk in Messrs. Trinder's office—I was at the Police-court before Sir Robert Fowler on 10th January—I saw these letters put in—the prisoner admitted the writing, and said he was going to justify; he wanted to go into it then.

The Prisoner's statement before the Magistrate. "I have a full answer to all that has been said."

Witness for the Defence,

JEROME HOPKINS (the prisoner). lam a musician—I live in America, but I am travelling always over here, and giving concerts—the word "present" on an envelope does not mean I gave the tickets as free tickets; it is merely on direction that the letter is presented by someone—I had no idea these letters were libels; they were in envelopes, and when envelopes were prohibited I had to send postcards—I merely wrote them to claim a debt; they are no libels, according to my definition of (the word.

GUILTY. The JURY expresssed a wish that the fact of his being a foreigner should be taken into consideration.

MR. BODKIN said Dr. Crosby still desired to recommend the prisoner to mercy.— Discharged on recognisances.

NEW COURT.—Saturday, February 8th, 1890.

Before Mr. Common Serjeant.

3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-203
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

203. SUSANNAH WEBB , Unlawfully ill-treating a child and causing him bodily injuries.

MR. HUTTON Prosecuted.

JANE PARKS . I am the wife of John Parks, of 50, Templeton Road, Stamford Hill, next door to No. 48, where the prisoner lives with her little boy, aged eight—on January 10th I heard blows next door, and the little boy screaming, "I won't do it any more, mamma; don't hit me any more"—I beat the wall with a hand-brush, which broke—that was between two and three o'clock, and the beating and screams were continued the whole afternoon, and between six and seven o'clock I went down to the prisoner's door and made inquiries—I afterwards went in and went up to the prisoner's sitting-room, which is the one in which I hoard the beating—I knocked at the door, but got no answer, and went down and saw a policeman, and went back with him, and saw the prisoner and the little boy, who had seven bruises on his back and dry blood on his lips—I asked the policeman to take the child away as I was afraid his mother would kill him; she said, "Don't take my child, I would not hurt a hair of his head—I can't say whether she

was sober—the policeman said, "If I have any more of this I must look you up"—the boy said he was not hurt, his mother had only given him a smack in the face, so I asked the policeman to strip him, and he and the prisoner did so, and he had seven bruises on his back about two inches long—the prisoner said she had not done it, and used abusive language, and told me to mind my own business—on January 21st I heard the boy being punished, as before—he cried, "Don't beat me, mamma; I won't do it again"—she said, "Call me mumma"—I then heard a crash, as if he was being thrown on his face, and heard him cry—she said, "I have hit you now, have not I?"—about an hour after that I went into the passage of her house, and called out, "Oh, you good for-nothing bad woman! what are you doing to that child?"—she answered to Mrs. Poulter, "I will summons your little girl for scratching my little boy's face"—Mrs. Poulter said, "My little girl never done it"—I did not see the prisoner that night—I saw the boy next morning at the door when the inspector was there, and the prisoner—she asked me if I saw her strike the child; I said no, but I had heard sufficient—I said, "I know you have beaten him, I heard him cry for mercy"—she said that they said she was drunk, and asked me if I had ever seen her drunk—I said, "No"—the boy's face was black and blue, but I saw no blood, only bruises—she was not taken to the station till the next night, but the boy was taken away.

EMILY POULTER . I live with my husband at 48, Templeton Street—the prisoner and her husband and little boy lived there—her husband was away all day; he is a conjurer—they occupied the first floor front—on 10th January I heard the little boy screaming, I knew his voice—I called out that if she did not leave off I would fetch a constable, and have her locked up, because she had been knocking him about all day—I had seen her hit him that morning with her hand, it did not knock him down, but it was a very hard blow—it was not for any misbehaviour—I have never seen him unruly ever since he was in the house, or owdacious—I did not sec her strike him again that day, but I saw him after it was done—Mrs. Parks came in, and I went into the prisoner's room with her—there was blood on the boy's face then, but when we fetched a policeman it had been washed off, but there was still blood on his lips and in a hand-basin—I was present when he was stripped, and saw seven bruises on his back—just before the policeman came we stood in the road; there was a light in the room, and we could see in, as the blinds were up, and we saw her take a strap and hit the boy twenty times at least—we all screamed out, "Stop the blows, or you will kill the child"—the window was not open, but she could hear us, because we shouted to her—she was striking him on his back and arms—I believe this is the strap (produced)—on Tuesday, January 21st, I heard the child scream, "Oh, mamma, don't do it, I won't do it any more"—she said "Ah, I have hit you now, have not I?"—I saw the boy that evening, he was in an awful state, he had three or four wounds from the buckle of the strap, and blood all over his face, and two black eyes, his face was all laid open—I had heard screams all the afternoon—I sent for a policeman, but he did not come—an inspector came next morning, and I said to him, in the presence of the prisoner, "What do you think of this? she has put it on my little girl twelve years old"—she said that my little girl had done it,

and that if the child did not false swear that my little girl had done it, she would give him a good hiding when he got upstairs—the inspector said, "We must see into this"—the police came on the Friday, but she was out with her husband all day—I had complained at the station on the Tuesday, as I could not stop in the house for the noise—she was taken on the Friday night—she drinks very hard at times.

Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I have very frequently seen you strike the boy; you were not always in your room, you were all over the place—I did not complain of his causing mischief between us, and say that if he was a child of mine I would cut his tongue out, and that he was a wicked bad boy—you knocked my little girl about, and blacked her eyes, and I ought to have taken a summons out—you do not know what you do after you get drunk—I did not push your boy into a bath in the washhouse—you are weekly lodgers at 2s. a week; I asked you to take the room, but did not know you were such a woman as you are.

CAROLINE POULTER . I am the daughter of the last witness, and live with her—on Friday afternoon, January 10, I heard screams of a little boy in the prisoner's room—Mrs. Parks came in, and I went up with her and my mother, and saw the little boy with blood on his lips, but when the policeman came it was washed off—the prisoner heard my mother Bays he would fetch a policeman—on Tuesday, the 21st, I heard the boys creaming—I was one of the crowd who went outside to look in at the window, and saw her hitting the boy with her hand—I did not see a. strap, but I have seen her hit him with a strap a good many times—I saw the boy afterwards; he had a cut and bruises on his eyes—it is not true that I have done all this to the boy, or cut his face or beat him with a strap.

Cross-examined. He said that you said he was to say that I did it—the boy and my mother were present then—I did not push him down, while you were at work; the mud on his coat he got in the street—I have never hit him—he threw something at me and hit me—I was not always telling tales about what my mother said.

HENRY LOUIS WEBB . I am the prisoner's son, and am 8 years old next July—on the day the policeman came my mother hit me with a strap three or four times across my arms and round my back—she did not hurt me, but I screamed—I had blood on my lips; mother punched me on my mouth—Mrs. Poulter said she would fetch a policeman, and then my mother washed the blood off my face—a basin was standing there, but there was no blood in it, I looked to see—on the following Tuesday week my mother hit me with a strap across my back and legs, and twice on my face—I screamed.

Cross-examined. I screamed before you touched me—I said, "Oh, mother, don't"—you struck the table three or four times with the strap before you attempted to touch me—you asked me to come and be a good boy, and you would not touch me—I remember being upstairs screaming "Murder!" and taking a barrow out of a field and selling a lot of your things, and biting you and kicking you—I do not remember that you wore hitting me then; when you went to your work a young woman and baby were there, and she struck me—I have always been a bad boy—you never had anything for your breakfast without sharing it with me.

By the COURT. I do not do anything—my mother got me this coat—I

put it on on Wednesday for the first time since it came out of pawn—I always went out shopping with her—she has taken me into public-houses.

JAMES CHINN (Policeman N 371). On 10th January, about seven p.m., Harriet Poulter called me, and I went up to the prisoner's room with Mrs. Poulter, Mrs. Parks, and Mr. Johnson, and saw her and the boy there—I should say she was the worse for drink—I saw blood on the boy's top lip—I asked to be allowed to examine him; the prisoner stripped him, and I found seven slight bruises on his back about the size of a farthing—I asked her how they came there; she said she did not know—I said I had been informed that she had been ill-treating him—she said that she had not—I questioned him, and he said, "No"; I asked him again, and he said, "She smacked me on the face once, but I was not hurt"; I told her if she ill-treated him I should be obliged to lock her up; I then left.

Cross-examined. Your door was not locked; I opened it with the handle—the boy was standing by your side, and I think he had his arms round your waist—I met your husband, and asked him if he knew how the boy was treated; he said, no, he was away from 10 a.m. to 12.30 p.m.

----URRY (Police Inspector). On January 21st I received information, and on the 22nd I went to 48, Templeton Street and examined the boy's face; he had five scars and a black eye—I had him stripped, and found a large bruise on his left buttock; I asked him in the prisoner's presence how he accounted for it; he said he received some of them while playing, and the others were caused by the daughter of the landlady, Mrs. Poulter—he did not indicate which were caused by the girl—I asked the prisoner if she could account for them; she said, "No, only from what the boy tells me"—I also found several small bruises on both arms, and on his wrist and elbows, and communicated with the Society for the Protection of Women and Children, and on the 24th I received a warrant for her apprehension—she said, "I know what it is for, I am innocent."

Cross-examined. I told you all to keep quiet, as I could not hear anything.

ALEXANDRA BARENESS . I am a medical man fully qualified—I examined the boy on January 23rd, and found bruises and cuts over both eyes, and scratches on his forehead, a bruise on his left arm between his elbow and shoulder, and one on his left elbow; his forearm was bruised, on the back part; there was a cut on his wrist; his right arm was contused for about four inches by two; the back part of his right forearm was bruised down to the wrist, and there was a wheal over the wrist and a large bruise on the right shoulder extending down to the back of the arm; the same on the left shoulder; a large bruise on his left buttock: the outside of his left thigh was bruised, and the left side of his ribs; his right ear was bruised, and the temple above it—a strap would cause all those bruises, except the one on the buttock; that would require greater violence, such as a kick—great violence must have been used with the strap—he was thin—he did not seem in much pain then, but there must have been considerable pain at the time—it is very improbable that that little girl could have caused those blows.

Cross-examined. The boy was not bodily ill, but he was bruised—he did not whistle in my place—he told me his mother had beaten him with

a strap—if he was thrown down by a dog the violence would not have been sufficient to cause the blow on his hip.

Evidence for the Defence.

SUSANNAH WALL (the prisoner). I am married, and have been the mother of nine children; five are living, one is married, one is at service, one at the Boys' Home, one at Sanger's Theatre, and this boy is the youngest—he will be eight years old in July—I say that this charge is false, and it would not have been made provided I had continued drinking with Mrs. Poulter, but because I refused to do so she made complaints about me and my boy, both she and her child; my husband heard it, and it caused several words between me and him—on this Friday I lent Mrs. Poulter 2s.—I was ordered to bed by the doctor; she said she could not pay me then—I said it did not matter—I sent her 6d. by my little boy, and she said, "Never mind, that will go off what I owe you"—I also sent her some bitter ale—she never offered to pay me the 18d., and I sent 6d. down to make up the rent—I was in her kitchen when she declared that if my boy was her child she would cut the tongue out of his mouth—she often said he was a very bad boy, and should not play with her children, and frequently I have been there when they had been playing, and her boy bit my boy, who cried—I have often gone out and found my boy fighting with other boys; he did so yesterday in the waiting room; the constables saw his conduct—I have merely corrected him in a proper manner, or he might have been doing the same as his brother, stealing—I have made a. pet of him rather than anything else—I have been too good to him.

Cross-examined. I admit that I have corrected him, but not severely—he has aggravated me, and my husband brought this strap home on Christmas evening, but I never struck him with it—it is false that Mrs. Poulter and Mrs. Parks stood outside and saw me beating him with a strap—there is no ill-feeling between me and Mrs. Parks; I don't know her—she comes here because Mrs. Poulter fetched heir—I suggest that she is conspiring with Mrs. Poulter to take away my liberty—I always properly chastised the boy—I did not do the injuries found on him—his shoulder was bruised by falling off a gateway, and he went to the hospital for it; that was two years ago—if his right arm was contused, his forearm bruised, and there was a weal on his wrist, I can't remember whether I did it—I do not suggest that the doctor is conspiring with Mrs. Poulter—I did not tell the constable that Mrs. Poulter's little girl had caused the marks; I told him nothing about it—I do not know how to account for the bruises, but he is an audacious boy, and always fighting—I spoilt him before—three constables were., required to bring him home, one after the other—he did not knock them down, but they had to push him and make him come home.

By the JURY. His brother was convicted of stealing.

ALFRED HENGLER SEVERN . I am a plumber and gasfitter, of 3, Wellington Place, Deptford—the prisoner has been to my place with her boy several times—I never saw her ill-treat him—he was always well fed and well clothed—he is a most unruly boy—I never saw her strike him—he threw himself down at my place one Sunday, and struck his face against the piano because my little boy would not give him some Jubilee medals—he bruised his face slightly; that is two years ago—I became bail for the prisoner

at her husband's request, and took her to my house—I asked the husband to bring the boy—he was brought on Wednesday; I think it was the 27th—I examined him, and there was not a bruise on his body; but there was a slight discolouration on his eye, and the remains of an old scratch on his forehead—on the following day I took him to Mr. Young, the solicitor, that he might see that my evidence was correct, and he took me to the Police-court; he was employed for the defence at the Police court—on Tuesday last, after I left the Court, I was invited to take tea with the prisoner and her husband, at her sister's in Kennington, where they now live, and the prisoner told the boy about half-past seven to go to bed—he said, "I shan't go for you"—she said, "I will take your boots off"—he kicked her, and I stooped down to take his boots off—he laid down and screamed, "Oh, my back! Don't hit me! Oh, my throat Leave my throat alone!"—with assistance I carried him upstairs, and placed him on a bed in a room by himself, and he shrieked for a good half-hour; in fact, till he came downstairs and vomited—I have to ask you to call the officers below to say how he behaved while we were waiting.

Cross-examined. Altogether he is a most desperate character; I never saw a worse boy—I have known his father thirty years; he is a conjuror—my wife and Mr. Young and the prisoner, and several others, were present at the examination on January 29th—I believe my wife is in Court—I have not applied to Mr. Young to come—the doctor's evidence that "he is very thin and poorly nourished" is not true—I saw a mark on his forehead—there is a scratch on his nose now, but not a sign of a bruise on his left elbow—his elbow and forearm are not contused, nor is there a cut on his left wrist; there is not the slightest bruise on his body—I examined his left buttock—there is not the slightest bruise on him except his eye—I examined him for the purpose of giving evidence—I did not think it necessary to call in the doctor; I thought it was simply a superficial affair. (Dr. Galer and Br. Harkness were here directed to examine the boy again).

NELLY FLORENCE WOOD . I am the wife of Frederick Wood, of Frankfort Street, a dustman—on the Saturday that the prisoner was tried at the Police-court, the father brought the boy to me; I saw one bruise on the back of his shoulder, and his arm was bruised, but I did not count the bruises—I called my landlady up—I said I should not like to be in a room alone with him, for his talk was not fit for a gentleman to use.

Cross-examined. I am the prisoner's daughter—I lived with her before I was married—Mr. Delahay, an officer of a society, came and asked me some questions, and put down my answers after the prisoner had been tried at the Police-court—I said that my mother was violent at times—he asked if she used to beat me, and I said, "Yes"—I did not say, "Yes, for the least thing"—I said that she drank and had fits; I did not say that I always thought they were drunken fits; I said she had fits when she drank—it was read out to me, and I did not contradict it at the time—I said, "I have seen her beat the other boy; I have been marked by her"—I said that she blacked my eye and broke my nose; the doctor told me at St. Thomas's Hospital that my nose was broken, when I went there with a broken leg.

Re-examined by the Prisoner, I went to school at Brighton till I was

fourteen—I then went to a place which you did not approve of, and you got me another place; it was an hotel—you received a letter from me, saying that I had done something wrong—I was fifteen when I got into trouble—you struck me because I was saucy—you saw me over my trouble, and got me into a Home, and paid 5s. a week for me—you took my child.

LUCY RICHARDSON . I am the wife of Daniel Richardson, a labourer, of Tottenham—I had a furnished room of the prisoner for six months—I never saw her strike her boy—she had her meals with me—there was always plenty for the boy to eat and drink—I have seen him fight with other children out of doors, and comeinmarked.

ROLAND JAMES HUNT (Policeman L 255). I have seen the boy playing about here downstairs this week—I did not see him throwing himself about—I took no notice of him.

JOSEPH DAVEY (City Policeman 905). While waiting here to give evidence I saw the boy's father sit him on a settle in the body of the Court three times, and he threw himself off, and the third time he threw himself on the floor, and kicked about in an extraordinary manner, and I said, "If you don't behave yourself I shall put you in my dark cells"—he got up and sat on a settle—the same evening he said, "Come on, we are going home now," but they had to carry him—I remarked, "A little of what my father used to give me would do him good," not knowing that his mother was locked up for beating him.

Cross-examined. The father said, "Look at this boy," and I told him to sit down—when I threatened to place him in a dark cell he behaved quietly.

Evidence in Reply.

JOHN RECE GALER , M. D. I examined this boy on January 23rd, the same day that Dr. Harkness did—I have heard Dr. Harkness's evidence, and corroborate it entirely—I examined the boy twenty minutes ago—there are still some bruises On his right temple, his right and left shoulder-blades, his right thigh, right and left elbows, and there are two very small wounds on his forehead still—the bruise on his buttock has dispersed, but I saw it there on January 23rd.

Cross-examined. There are three small scars on his forehead; also an older one done two or three years ago—I do not include that.

ALEXANDER HARKNESS (Re-examined). I examined the boy with Dr. Galer a little while ago—I corroborate him in every particular.

Prisoner's Defence. I have not done it; I am quite innocent; it is all false, and all through my mixing up with this sort of people.

GUILTY .— Six Months' Hard Labour.

OLD COURT.—Saturday, Monday, and Tuesday, February 8th, 10th, and, 11th, 1890.

Before Mr. Recorder.

3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-204
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

204. CHARLES FEELEY was indicted for wilful and corrupt perjury committed before Thomas William Saunders, Esq., and Franklin Lushington, Esq.


JOSEPH ROBERT SAWYER . I am chief clerk at the Thames Police-court

—I produce the charge-sheet of 23rd July, in which two men, Hyde and Whaley, were charged with being concerned together in stealing from inside of the bar of the Duke of Kent public-house a paper bag containing about £4 10s. the property of Mr. Hewitt, a licensed victualler, of Dean Street—I was acting as clerk when the charge was heard on that date before Mr. Saunders—I took the prisoner's deposition—he was the first witness examined, and on his evidence and that of Sergeant Adams and Phœbe Stone a remand was granted—the prisoner said on oath, "I live at 1, Earl's Place, St. George's. At ten minutes past nine on Friday, the 19th July, I saw the prisoners Hyde and Whaley round the West Garden Dock gate. They were running. They went to Cannon Street to a coffee shop. I followed them, knowing them, and Hyde asked me to have some breakfast, which he paid for. We went to some public-house, and Hyde gave me 2s. He told me he had some money to divide between four. He told me he had got some money from the Duke of Kent that morning. He said they had taken it; he told me if I went to Twine Court I might pick up a quid or two, as they had chucked some money there, coming along by some new buildings. Whaley was there all the time, and heard what Hyde said. I went to West Garden Gate. "The case was remanded from the 23rd July to the 26th July, when the evidence was read to Feeley, but no fresh evidence taken, and then it was remanded to 2nd August—I produce a charge-sheet of 3rd and 4th August containing a charge against Brooks and Brady—on 2nd August the prisoner was again examined—the Magistrate then was Mr. Lushington—the prisoner's evidence may have been again read to him; I cannot say—this is the note of his evidence taken on 2nd August: "They (referring to Hyde and Whaley) did not say which of them had gone into the public-house, and which had taken it, or what had become of the other two; on the 23rd July, after giving evidence at this Court, I was followed from the Court by two brothers named Taylor"—then he goes on with reference to that, I think, "On the 19th July, after what the prisoners had told me, I went to the station and gave information. On 20th July, Saturday, the Taylors knocked me down and kicked me, and I had to go to the London Hospital in consequence; on 23rd July they told me if I dared to come here again they would do for me; I know the Taylors are acquaintances of the prisoners Hyde and Whaley"—on 5th August Brooks and Brady were charged; this is the charge-sheet; it is almost exactly similar to that against Hyde and Whaley—on 9th August there was a further hearing, and prisoner was then recalled, and the whole of his evidence read again, and he was cross-examined as follows:—"I am a dock labourer. I was at work up till a few days before. I swear I saw Hyde. He took me to the Black Horse public-house. There was a lot of labourers at the West Garden Dock Gate. There is frequently a rush at the gate. I was looking for a day's work. I followed because I saw others following. I caught him up in St. George's Street. I did not know hen what he had been doing (he is Hyde). He invited me to breakfast, and while he was eating so he told me. I did not have words with him on the Saturday. On the Friday evening I gave information to the police. Hyde was arrested at the Chambers. I have never been convicted in my life. I have no spite against Hyde at all. I do not know Tom Tosher. I know Tosher. Fenn was not with me"—that

cross-examination was for the most part for Hyde, but I cannot say if it was by Mr. Young—on 9th August the two prisoners were committed to the County of London Sessions by Mr. Lushington.

Cross-examined by the Prisoner, You gave no evidence to my recollection concerning Brooks and Brady—they were committed on the evidence of other witnesses, and sent for trial with Hyde and Whaley—you said, on 2nd August, "On 19th July, after what the prisoners had told me, I went to the station and gave information."

GEORGE BUSH (Detective Sergeant, Scotland Yard). I have made several plans—I made this plan of the Duke of Kent public-house, showing the bar, the till, and the premises, the approaches to the bar, and the entrances to the public-house from Dean Street and Martha Street—these are tracings—I have also made a plan of the neighbourhood immediately connected with the Duke of Kent—leaving that public-house by the Martha Street entrance and going down Martha Street you come to Sutton Street, from that, by turning to the right, you get into Cornwall Street, and after going through part of that you come to the end of Dean Street; going down Dean Street you come to Cable Street, and from there you can get into Albert Street, and then crossing the High Street you come to the West Garden Gate, one of the entrances to the London Docks in New Gravel Lane—this morning at nine o'clock I went to see Inspector Boots; he is ill in bed and unable to leave his room; he is in a very serious state, and is unable to come here—he has been ill for some weeks.

Cross-examined. One part of the Duke of Kent is in Martha Street and the other in Dean Street—from the door in Martha Street you cannot see the door in Dean Street—I have made inquiries at Mr. Hillyard's, a hatter's, of the Mile End Road—I saw him on 10th January—I had seen him previously in December, I think; I called with another sergeant—I did not ask him on 10th January to come to the Police-court to give evidence against you to prove a hat was purchased at his shop—I went and showed him a hat; my object was to see whether he sold such hats, and I was told yes, it was similar to hats sold by him, and that he knew it by a mark in the crown—he is here—I don't say it was bought at his shop; he knew a certain manufacturer supplied hats like it to him—I cannot say he told me he was the only man the manufacturer supplied—he could not say he sold it, he sells thousands—nothing was said about coming to the Police-court on Friday.

The Depositions of Thomas Roots, Inspector of the Criminal Investigation Department, were read, as follows:—"In October last I received certain instructions from the Homo Office to inquire into and report upon" the case of four convicts named Hyde, Whaley, Brooks, and Brady, who had been convicted at the North London Sessions, on 14th August last, of stealing £4 10s. in money from the Duke of Kent public-house in Dean Street, Shad well, on 19th July, in the morning. I took statements, among others, from Hyde and Whaley. On 14th October I took the statement from Hyde at Wormwood Scrubs Prison. In the course of that statement he mentioned the names of a number of persons. In consequence of this statement I made inquiries of and took from Joseph Jennings, Louisa Coffey, David Healy, Henry Andritt, and Margaret Gregory. Whaley's statement I took on 12th October, to the best of my belief. In consequence of this statement I made inquiries and took a

statement from Margaret Gregory. I also took statements from Timothy Crawley and Richard Smith, in consequence of Hyde's statement on 14th October.

Cross-examined. Louisa Coffey was not a witness here, nor Ottridge nor Michael Crawley."—"I have been making inquiries and had charge of this case. In the course of my inquiries on 8th October I saw the prisoner at Shadwell Police station. I took a statement from him, and wrote it down from his lips; it was read to him by me, and he said, 'It is true.' The statement is marked 'A.'—Police-station, Shadwell, October 8th, 1889. Charles Feeley says: I am a fire-wood cutter. I live at 225, St. George's Street. On Friday morning, 19th July last, I was at the West Garden Dock Gate waiting for work, when I saw Gleeson (Hyde) and Whaley running from the direction of Shadwell; eight or nine other boys were running after them. I thought there was going to be a fight, so I followed as well. I caught Gleeson up; he asked me to come and have a cup of tea. I went with him and Whaley to a shop in Cannon Street, about five minutes' walk from the West Garden Dock Gate; we breakfasted together, Gleeson paying for it. We then went to the Black Horse public-house on Tower Hill, where Gleeson paid for two pots of ale. He gave me 2s., and said: We have got a few shillings from the Duke of Kent public-house. When we were running through Twine Court I threw some money over a fence where they are building a new house, and if you go back there you may get a quid or two. I left them, and went back to the dock gate. I gave information to a constable. I told the constable about eight or nine in the evening. He asked me where I lived. I told him one of the prisoners (Whaley) lived at a lodging-house in High Street, Shadwell. I don't know the constable's number or name. I should know him again. Some nights afterwards I saw Sergeant Adams. I went with him to the lodging-house, and picked Whaley out from between forty and fifty sleeping men. I afterwards picked out Gleeson or Hyde in the same house. I gave evidence against them. I did not know Brooks or Brady, and gave no evidence against them. I never heard, except at the Police-court, that they were connected with Whaley and Gleeson in the robbery. Gleeson told me at Tower Hill the money they got was to be divided between four; but he did not say who those were. I had previously known Gleeson about two and Whaley four months. I did not search for the money Gleeson said was at Twine Court. (Signed-Charles Feeley.) Roots' Depositions continued; "I also took statements from Edward Hyde, Richard Smith, Ann Higgins, Thomas Phillips, and Joseph Jennings. Hyde's signature appears at the bottom of his statement. Ann Higgins signed by a mark witnessed by me. Jennings also signed by a mark witnessed by me. In the course of my inquiry Police-Sergeant Smith handed me a black felt hat, which I understood was the hat left behind in the Duke of Kent public-house on 19th July by one of the thieves. This hat I took to the Wormwood Scrubs Prison and tried it on a prisoner named Brooks. It did not fit his head. I did not try it on Brady. I have never seen him. I took the hat and tried it on the prisoner Hyde. It did not fit him; I tried the hat on Whaley, it did not fit him. I took the hat to Chelmsford Prison, where Richard Shaw, otherwise known as Clements, was confined. Clements had his hair parted in the middle, with a curled fringe low down on either side, with the curl turning upwards. I tried

the hat on him as people ordinarily wear their hats; the hat was small for him where tried on in this hat. I put the hat on the back of his head, exposing the fringe. At this time I had not heard as to the manner in which he wore his hair or hat. On 17th October I went again to Chelmsford Prison. The hat then fitted on the back of Clements' head. I remarked the fact to Police-Sergeant Bremner. I have heard in the course of this inquiry of Edwin Bryce. On 26th November I took Patrick Feeley to see Edwin Bryce at Pentonville Prison. Patrick Feeley saw him there. Bryce was in ordinary clothes. He was placed with fourteen other men, all in ordinary clothing. Feeley walked up to Bryce and touched him. He said something on touching him. On 25th November I took Patrick Feeley to Chelmsford Prison. There he saw Clements with fourteen other men in ordinary clothing. He walked straight up to Clements, made a statement, and touched him on the chest In the course of his statement he mentioned a particular sum of money. In the course of my investigation I never heard the name of Police Constable Papworth, or the number 372 H. I took a statement from Patrick Feeley on 20th November. This was taken in a similar way to the others mentioned. The statement is produced.

Cross-examined. Charles Feeley told me he did not know the exact time. I am quite sure I wrote down at Feeley's dictation. If eight or nine is mentioned in the statement, Feeley must have said so. I did not take Phillips to any prison to pick any men out. Mrs. Higgins has been taken by me to Chelmsford Gaol to see Shaw, and to Pentonville to see Bryce, the same day that Patrick Feeley was taken. On 20th November Patrick Feeley did not say to me that he had told the prisoner that ho had been with two men, or what he had been doing, or what money he had. The conversation referred to in Phillips's statement took place at the docks. Patrick Feeley mentioned two sets of men he saw running, and Phillips one set of men. Patrick Feeley said he went away with the second two; he did not mention anyone else leaving the dock gates, except himself or Phillips. Phillips did not mention the precise date it occurred. He said it was morning, three months ago, between nine and ten o'clock. I remember taking a statement from Richard Smith. Smith did not mention to me that he followed with twenty other men, in company with Feeley and Phillips. Smith in his statement says he started about 11.30 a.m. with Crawley for Tilbury to get a job pea-picking. He does not say specifically where he started from. His statement is that going through Barking we met Hyde, who said he was tramping home from Tilbury, as he had failed to get a job in the Lusitania; we met him about half past one. Mrs. Higgins did not mention to me the time she saw the men run from the Duke of Kent; possibly it was an omission of mine. The statement was taken in a house under great difficulties. I remember taking Whaley's statement. I think I took three statements from police constable Adams. I took two statements. I saw him at Shadwell Station, when I took his statement down.

Re-examined. Patrick Feeley, when making his statement on 20th November, gave me a reason for not telling Charles Feeley where he had been, and what he had got on 19th July, that he (Charles Feeley) would want part of it. Phillips's statement was taken on 9th October. I tried him all ways to fix a date of the robbery, but he could not do so. I

Phillips's statement, he says that Smith and Clements had got some money from the Duke of Kent that morning. Smith described Hyde's trousers as cord trousers. Phillips described Clements as wearing a handkerchief round his neck, and patent boots. Patrick Feeley described how he went to a coffee-house and had breakfast, and how he, Phillips, Clements, find another man went with him; that the coffee-shop was opposite Queen Street, Tower Hill, and that Dick Clements paid for the breakfast, and that after breakfast, Clements gave half-a-crown to Phillips and himself. He said Charles Feeley was not with them at breakfast. By the Magistrate. Smith did not mention any other object than pea-picking for going to Tilbury. He mentioned no job on a boat."

EDWIN BBYCE (in custody). I am now undergoing a sentence of twelve months' imprisonment for stealing a purse—I was convicted on 7th October—while I was in prison on 19th October I saw Inspector Boots, and made a statement to him—I know the Duke of Kent public-house, Dean Street, Shadwell; it is a corner house—on the morning of 19th July I was at the house with Richard Clements, James Portlock, and Jack Jefferies—we were passing the house, and I saw the young lady behind the bar put a bag of silver on the shelf—I said to Clements that she had just put a bag of silver over there, and "We can get this bag of silver easy"—we waited a few minutes, and then Jefferies went in first to talk to the woman while one got it—Jefferies went in the Dean Street side, the side nearest to the railway arch—Clements did not go in then; a man came-in and spoiled it—then Portlock went in the same place where Jefferies came out—Clements went in by the door in Martha Street, at the other end, farthest from the barmaid—I stayed on the kerb by the door where Portlock went in, and the door was left a little way open, so that I could see right along and see what took place—Clements took the bag of silver over the counter—I could see him get over the bar, go to the place where the bag of silver was, and take it—as he was in the act of getting back to the counter, she turned round and saw him; she got hold of him by his hat, which fell off; she fell down, and he came running out without his hat, but with the money—I, Jefferies, and Portlock ran after him—he ran on in front bareheaded towards the High Street, we followed; he and Portlock went into a house in Albert Street—I went round another turning into the highway—I met the prisoner's brother, Patrick Feeley, at the bottom of Albert Street, just opposite the docks—I told him something, and then I went to the bottom of Albert Street, and looked up, and saw a mob standing outside the door—I went away after I told him to go and look if the men were caught or not—he came back and told me they were not caught—I went away towards Tower Hill—about an hour afterwards, I think it was, I met Hyde (or Gleeson) and Whaley—before I met them I met Jefferies—I met Jefferies directly after I met Patrick Feeley—I and Jefferies went to Portlock's house—we did not go in, but waited outside till four o'clock—Clements and Portlock did not come all that time—then some time after four I and Jefferies parted—I met a friend, who told me he had seen Portlock and Clements going towards home, and I ran back directly, and got there almost as soon as they did; I saw Clements looking out of the window of Portlock's house—that was about half-past four—that was the first time I had seen Clements since I had seen him running away without his hat—when I saw him looking out of Portlock's window

he had a new hat on, not the one he had lost; he said something about his hat—I was about with Clements and Portlock during the evening—I saw Hyde and Whaley that day against the Coach and Horses public-house, by the London Hospital; it was ten minutes after four in the afternoon, something like that, after I left Portlock's house—that was the first time I had seen them that day—neither of them had anything to do with the robbery; I was telling them about it when I met them, and asking them if they had seen Clements or Portlock, and they said they had not—Clements wears his hat on the back of his head, so as to show his fringe—I was with him when he bought a hat—I believe he bought the hat he was wearing on the morning of the robbery at Hillyard's, in the Mile End Road; I was with him, and ho smoked a cigar Hillyard gave him—that is the hat.

Cross-examined. It was about a quarter or twenty minutes past nine when the two men went into the house in Albert Street, and I went to the bottom of the street—I did not say I met Hyde and Whaley an hour after that; I said I met your brother then—I knew by the jink of the money in the bag it was silver—when the man went into the public-house to take the bag the other man called for some ale, so as to draw away the attention of the barmaid while the bag was stolen—I saw the barmaid, Miss Phœbe, serve half a pint of four ale to Portlock, while Clements went over the bar and took the money—I am quite sure of that—Clements, who took the money, came out of the house first—the man who called-for the ale came out three seconds afterwards—I waited for him—the man with the bag was running along the street; we followed him—you cannot see the dock gates from the bottom of Albert Street—I never went round to the gates, or anywhere near them—I stopped from a quarter or twenty minutes past nine on the morning of the robbery till four o'clock outside Portlock's house—while I stood there I saw a man—I don't know if he was the barman of the Duke of Kent—I did not know him before, and I should not know him again—I gave no, information about this till I was convicted, because I did not want to go to prison for it—the first person I saw about it was Mr. Boots, who came when I was on the mill, and I gave him my information—I knew before that that Hyde and Whaley were in custody—I don't know the date—I knew it—I knew it by the paper coming round to get them a solicitor—I did not go to the station to confess, and I should not confess now if I had not been in prison.

EDWARD GLEESON (otherwise Hyde, in custody). My real name is Gleeson—last July I was arrested upon this charge of robbery from the Duke of Kent public-house on the morning of 19th July I was not concerned in that robbery in the slightest way—on Thursday evening, 18th July, I was at work for Mr. Moore at the London Docks pumping water—I only earned a shilling for two hours—my work was over about half-past seven—some time after on the same night Mr. Moore paid me 1s., and asked me to have a drink before I went away—we went into a barber's shop, and Mr. Moore stood me a shave as well as a drink—I had some conversation with him, and told him something—then I went to the lodging-house at the corner of King David Lane, where the deputies were, Mr. and Mrs. Gregory—I had been sleeping there, I forget the number of my bed—I stayed there somewhere about an hour or two—I dozed off to sleep before

I went to Tilbury—I saw Mrs. Gregory that night—I went from there to a public-house to inquire after a man who was going to Australia—I knew him by the name of Aldridge, his real name is Andritt—they told me he had gone to another public-house; I went and found him and had some talk with him—I left the public-house at a quarter to twelve, and got to Shadwell Railway Station at a few minutes to twelve—I went there with Mr. and Mrs. Coffey, Mr. and Mrs. Jennings, Dave Haley, Harry Aldridge, and Stephen Aldridge—Andritt was going to join his ship, the Luszitania, at Tilbury, and Haley and I were going to see if we could get a voyage on the ship—the Coffeys, the Jennings, and Stephen Aldridge came to see Andritt, Haley, and myself off to Tilbury—I went to Tilbury, travelling third class, paying the 1s. that Mr. Moore had given me for my job that night—I think it took an hour or one hour and a half to get to Tilbury; we got there about half-past one—when we got there Haley took Aldridge's bag and I took his bed—the two policemen on duty at the gates allowed Aldridge to pass through, because he was going to join the Lusitania, where he was a fireman, and Haley they allowed to pass through, but they stopped me because I had cord trousers on, like a dock labourer—Haley had on dark clothes, more like a sailor—I said the bed belonged to Aldridge; they said if he wanted it lie would come for it—I gave the policeman the name, and he stuck it on the gate—I waited there between half an hour and an hour, thinking ho would come back—Aldridge came back, and told me something, and I gave him the bed, which the policeman let him take away—he gave me fivepence in coppers—I had not a farthing besides that—in consequence of what he told me, I knew it was no good staying—he said there was no job for me, all the crew was on board—that was about half-past two—I went as close as I could to the dock gates, and stayed there till it was light—then I inquired of some men, going to work, the way to London, and I walked from Tilbury to Purfleet—that is the next place I can answer for properly—at Purfleet I took a rest with my back against a gate, where the railway lines run across the road—I dozed off to sleep there—when I woke up some railway official on the line was holloaing at me—I said, "What time is it?"—he said, "Ten minutes to six; you cannot go to sleep in there; you had better shift out "—I said, "All right"—I got up, and went on my way walking—there was a publichouse or inn on the left-hand side—I got there about half-past six—I had a penny biscuit, a pennyworth of tobacco, and a pennyworth of ale, half a pint—I looked at the time, and said, "How far is it to London?"—the man said, "Fourteen miles"—between Purfleet and Barking I stopped to take a rest in a field by the side of the road; I got over the fence and dozed off to sleep—I slept some little time, the sun was warm, I could not tell the time—I got up and continued my way and eventually got to Barking—as it took me I daresay three hours to get from Barking to my lodging-house, and as I arrived at my lodgings at half-past one or two, I suppose it was about ten or eleven that I got to Barking—as I came through Barking I met two men I knew, Crawley was the name of one, I don't know the name of the other; I know him by sight working in the docks—I spoke to them—I mentioned the Lusitania, and said I could not get aboard, I could get no chance of getting away, and I had conversation with them—I came on towards London, they went the reverse way, towards Tilbury—I walked all the way back, and got back here

somewhere about half-past one or two—I went to my lodgings in King David Lane, Shadwell—several men saw me who knew I had left the previous night to go there; Cokeley and Flynn, and an old man (I don't know his name) sitting there in the kitchen—I saw Mrs. Gregory when I came back—my boots had been painful in my walk, and I had my laces undone after I woke up—when I got home to my lodgings my feet were swollen with the walk—I complained of it, and took my boots and socks off and washed my feet in salt and water, as I heard it was good—I do not remember seeing Whaley at all that afternoon; I am not aware that I did—he had been lodging in this same house, and I knew him as a lodger; I had not been in his company at all—I swear I have given a truthful account of what I did on that night and morning and next day—I remember being in bed in the lodging-house on the early morning of Tuesday, 23rd July, when the prisoner and Sergeant Adams came into the room—previous to that they came and arrested Whaley—I was not sleeping in the same room—when they came to me I was asleep; they woke, me—I could not make out, by the lantern shining in my eyes, what was the matter—Adams said, "Put your clothes on; I want you"—the prisoner stood in front of Adams, and said, "Yes; that is one"—I said, "What?"—Adams said, "I will arrest you with being concerned in stealing £5 from the Duke of Kent"—I said, "It is false; I know nothing about it"—the prisoner said, "That is one, sir"—I said, "What do you mean?"—he said, "Well, I must get my own back somehow or another"—I have known the prisoner for the last two years in the docks, where he and I have worked occasionally—I have spoken to him when he has pretended to go away to the rear, and said, "Why don't you stick to your work? Not impose on others to do your work; but I have not spoken to his superiors about him—I have not reported him—I could not say when I last spoke to him—we both went in occasionally—when he said he had to get his own back, I got up and dressed—I was taken to the station and detained—the barmaid and some tradespeople were brought to see if they could identify me—they could not do so—the officer in oharge of the station asked Sergeant Adams if he could not get other witnesses, and he said, "I daresay I can," and he was away two hours, and then he said, "I cannot get any more"; and then the prisoner was allowed to pick me out again after I was put among a lot more men—that was after he had pulled me out of bed—he did identify me—on the morning of 23rd I was brought before Mr. Saunders, the Police Magistrate, at the Thames Police-court, and charged with Whaley with having committed this robbery from the Duke of Kent—there were witnesses in Court, and I called on the Magistrate to ask them to give evidence, but he would not—I was remanded till the 26th—on 23rd the prisoner gave evidence against me—I was not represented by solicitor or counsel—on 26th the prisoner was not at the Court; no one was against me—I was remanded till 2nd August, when the prisoner gave evidence against me—I was not represented by any one—I was remanded till 9th August, and then Brooks and Brady were charged as well as Whaley and myself—on that occasion the prisoner gave evidence for the third time against me—I was then represented by Mr. Young, the solicitor, of Arbour Square, who cross-examined the prisoner on my behalf—I thought my witnesses would be there, and I applied for three days' remand

till I could get them—the Magistrate would not allow it—he did not say I could call them at my trial—I was committed for trial on the 9th—on 9th August Brady said he told the police who it was, and that he had forwarded a letter in a way that the police would get it into their hands, giving an account of the men that committed the robbery, and the description of their clothes, and that sort of thing—it was produced in Court by Detective Smith—on 14th I was tried, with Brooks, Brady, and Whaley, at the County Sessions—I was not represented; I had no money—Brady was the only one represented by counsel, and he was represented by Mr. Purcell—I called Haley, Mr. Coffey, and Mr. Jennings, and they came and gave their evidence of their own free will, because they knew I was innocent; they were not subpœnaed—my witnesses were cross-examined—in the result I was convicted and sentenced to five years' penal servitude—I am now undergoing that sentence—after my conviction I sent a petition to the Home Secretary, dated 26th August—I had no communication with Brooks or Brady after my conviction; as soon as we were convicted we were put into separate cells at Sessions—on 14th October Inspector Roots and Bremner visited me in my cell—I gave Roots as full a statement as I could think of—in my petition to the Home Secretary, and in my statement to Roots I mentioned several names—Roots took them down, he was to see and examine them if he pleased—I heard no more of the matter till I was brought as a witness to the Thames Police-court on 21st December, when I gave evidence on oath—I did not see the prisoner on Friday morning, 19th July—he did not see me soon after nine o'clock on that morning by the West Garden Gate—I was not running past that gate at ten minutes past nine on that morning—it is not a fact that I and the prisoner went together to a coffee-house and had breakfast on that morning; or that I paid for the breakfast; or that I went with him to a public-house on that morning; or that I told him I had got a few shillings from the Duke of Kent; or that I had got the money to divide between four people who were concerned in the robbery;. or that I gave him a florin or half-crown, or any other coin—I swear to God I never saw him; I was not in London at that time—I did not tell him I had taken the money from the Duke of Kent, or that if he went to Twine Court he might pick up a quid or two, because I had thrown the money there as I was running away from the Duke of Kent public-house—it is not a fact that Whaley was in my company or the prisoner's on that morning, either at the coffee-house, or at any public-house, or that he was present when any conversation or any money passed between us.

Cross-examined. I was not told by any man on any part of the 19th July about this robbery—I did not see Whaley that day—Bryce did not meet me on that day in Whitechapel, and speak to me about the robbery—when I got to the lodging-house after walking from Tilbury, I went down the yard and washed my feet there—no salt water or towels were brought to me by anybody—there may have been some linen to wrap up my feet in on the form I was sleeping on; not that I am aware of; I went to sleep on a form after I had washed my feet—no person gave me any linen that I am aware of—I have not written to any companions since my conviction—I wrote a letter to my father, and received one from him at Pentonville—at Tilbury, Haley went first through the gate, and

Andritt afterwards—it is hardly any distance from the station to the gate; Andritt was a little way ahead of me and Haley—when the train arrived the gates were opened wide, but after the people got through they were closed—I was stopped at the gates—Andritt went on board the boat first—the policemen stopped me, and I said I didn't belong to the Lusitania, but I might get a job if they were any hands short; they said, "You cannot get a job, you might stow away and get us into trouble"—the bed was put inside the gate, I told them it belonged to Andritt; they put the name on a piece of paper, and put it on the bed—Andritt came back, and we had a talk—he and Haley did not know I was stopped (perhaps twenty or thirty people were going on board the Lusitania); they did not see if I was inside the gate or not—I was not employed by the dock company to check you at your work, or anyone else—I was employed casually by them—you might be away for an hour or an hour and a half, and I said, "Why don't you turn it up? I will not work with a man like that"—if I had liked to check you it might have made it serious for you—I made no complaint to the Magistrate about checking you at your work—on the Friday a boy paid me three pence out of sixpence he owed me—I borrowed sixpence or a shilling of Mrs. Gregory, my landlady—that was not the day the boy paid me the three pence—Mr. Moore paid me a shilling; Mrs. Gregory lent me and John Donovan sixpence between us on the Thursday—I did not borrow fourpence on Friday night for my bed—I paid Mrs. Gregory threepence, and said I Would give her the other penny by-and by; I did not borrow fourpence of her.

Re-examined. I said to another man that I would not work with a man who was running away from his work, and the prisoner heard me say it; he did not answer, but looked at me—Mr. Moore gave me a shilling on the Thursday for work I had done, and stood me some beer and a shave—it was on that same Thursday night that Mrs. Gregory lent sixpence to Donovan and myself—on Friday, after my return, the threepence was repaid by the boy, when he saw me sitting in the kitchen—I paid threepence for my bed, and said I would pay the other penny afterwards.

EDWARD MOORE . I live at 4, Market Hill, Shadwell, and act as foreman for my mother, who supplies ships with fresh water—I have known Gleeson about twelve months—on 18th July we were pumping fresh water into the Macgarel and the Scipio from a barge in the London Docks—among the men I employed to do that was Gleeson; I had employed him on previous occasions—on the 18th he worked for about an hour, more or less—after that I, he, and James Geary went into the Coach and Horses, Shadwell, where I paid Gleeson 1s. 3d. for the work he had done—we had some beer and some conversation—Gleeson told me where he was going that night—he left me about half-past nine, I should think—I did not see him after that, but some days after I heard he was in custody, and some little time after I was spoken to with regard to giving evidence.

Cross-examined. The Scipio was owned by Scrutton, Sons, and Co., of Gracechurch Street; I believe they have a store in the West India Dock Road, Limehouse—this was on Thursday evening, the 18th, because I know one of the ships went away on Friday, and the other on the Saturday—I think the Scipio went on Friday; I am not certain—after seeing his letter from the shipowner I am satisfied I am mistaken, and it was

on Saturday the Scipio left—the Macgarel left on Friday—I don't remember going with Gleeson to the barber's shop and having a shave—I told the Magistrate we did not get written orders to pump water into vessels; we get verbal orders from the mate or captain of the ship—I believe the bills were produced in Court to show I was paid for the work—it was 1s. 3d. I paid Gleeson, I am positive—I did not go to the Police court when Gleeson was arrested, to prove that I employed him on 18th July, because I knew nothing about it; I was not called on—Sergeant Smith, I think, was the first one who came to me about this case—I cannot say if he told me where he came from.

Re-examined. I paid Gleeson on the night of the 18th—I was paid for this work on the Saturday, for both the ships, I believe; I won't be sure—looking at this receipt for 16s. 6d. I can say that I got the money for putting water on board the Macgarel on the 18th—the 19th July at the top is my writing, and it is my signature at the bottom—I was paid that 16s. 6d. on 19th July; the figures 20. 7. 89 are in different writing; it appears to have gone through the office in connection with the Scipio and Macgarel.

JAMES CLEARY . I am fireman on board a steamboat, and live at Shadwell—I know Gleeson—I heard he was locked up on a Monday July—on the Thursday before that I was engaged in pumping water from a barge into a steamer; I had been engaged in that work constantly for some years—Gleeson was taken on in the evening for the purpose of finishing the work—I had often employed him to do work before—he worked with me for a couple of hours—when we had finished we went into the Coach and Horses, High Street, Shadwell, with Mr. Moore, and I saw Mr. Moore pay him there for the work he had done—we had some conversation there.

Cross-examined. Mr. Moore paid Gleeson one shilling and some coppers, 15d., I believe—I know Mr. Moore had no more money on him till I got my wages, because I lent the man a few coppers myself—I remained there till Gleeson went—he left me and Moore there—I heard them say nothing about going to have a shave—I know nothing about that—two, three or four men can pump at a time; we often have four—I will swear it was on the Thursday night previous to Gleeson being locked up on the Monday; I can't say the date he was taken, I have been away since, but I am certain it was the Thursday—we finished on Thursday, and on Friday we finished the Macgarel—I have not given evidence before, I was away—I came here first on Monday, and made a statement to a gentleman who wrote it out—I did not go to the Police-court, because I did not know I was wanted till last Monday—I went to sea in the ss. Tynedale, from Deptford to Philadelphia, on the 2nd November—I was discharged from that vessel last Saturday week, and I arrived in a Newcastle boat on Sunday night week—I had time to give evidence before I sailed, but I did not know my evidence would be of any benefit—I lived at Gregory's before I sailed; he is not my landlord now—Mr. Moore first told me I was required—I believe I went into the lodging-house about six o'clock, and employed Gleeson from there—Moore was standing a little further on by the Coach and Horses—Mrs. Moore was the owner of the barge—I have all along employed two or three hands to come and go to work—I believe it was 15d. no gave him; he had no more on him, or he would have given him more, because he generally gave 2s. for two

or two and a half hours' work—they did not leave me together to get shaved.

LOUISA COFFEY . I am married—I am sister to Henry Aldridge or Andritt—on a Thursday night, in July, I went to Shadwell Road Station with Haley, Andritt, and Jennings, to shake hands with those lads when they were going to take the train to Tilbury, I believe—Hyde was going to try and stow away-; my brother Henry was going to Tilbury to go to sea; he was fireman on board the Lusitania—the train went at close on twelve at night—Hyde was of the party who went—I saw them get their tickets, that was the last I saw of them; I did not go down the stairs to the train—I did not see. Hyde again till I heard he was in trouble, and I have not seen him since—I believe my brother was going to Australia—he did not come back till November.

Cross-examined. Haley took the tickets; I don't know how many he got—Hyde, Haley, and my brother were the three that left to go to Tilbury—my husband, Edward Coffey, now undergoing six months imprisonment at Holloway, was not there; he was at the Paragon that night, but he ran back from there to shake hands, when he heard I was at the station, and went back with me—he did not start with me from our place to go to the station; he was not on good terms with my brother—I know Jennings—he did not go down the station stairs with Haley, Hyde, and my brother—Hyde went by train, and I never heard of him again till he was in trouble—I shook hands with him, and I did not see him come upstairs afterwards.

Re-examine. My husband came to the Paragon, and heard my brother was going away; he was not on good terms with him, but he ran from the Paragon and shook hands with him, hearing he was going away.

JOSEPH JENNINGS . I am a coal trimmer, and live at 53, Market Buildings, Shadwell—I have made three voyages in the Lusitania—she sailed on 19th July—on the night before I went to Shadwell Eailway Station—on the same night I met Gleeson in Ratcliff Highway, and had some conversation with him about the Lusitania, and I went to Shadwell Railway Station with him and Mrs. Jennings, my cousin, Mrs. Aldridge, Mrs. Coffey (whose maiden name was Aldridge), Mr. Coffey, her husband, Henry and Stephen Aldridge, and David Haley—we got there, it might have been at ten minutes to twelve; we caught the twelve o'clock train—I shook hands with Hyde on the station; X went on the platform with him—I saw Hyde, Haley, and Aldridge get into the train—I shook hands with them before they got in—I stayed there till they went away; I waved my hat and said good-bye—I saw no more of Hyde till next night, Friday, at nine o'clock—I saw him then between Ratcliff and the Duke of York—I laughed at him, and told him he had made quite a trip to Australia—I had 4d. in my pocket, and I took him into the Duke of York and gave him ale—he was limping on his feet; he told me his feet were sore from walking.

Cross-examined. Only Haley, Hyde, and Aldridge went with me up the stairs on to the platform—three tickets were taken—I met Hyde between eight and nine on night of 19rh July—I paid for the drink then—Hyde might have stopped with me then half or three-quarters of an hour—it might have been till quarter-past nine—I did not see Moore with Gleeson that evening—I have never seen them together—I know Moore by doing his water—he has not employed me, out he has employed

several men I know—I did not say before the Magistrate I saw Moore in his company.

HENRY ANDRITT . I am a coal trimmer, living at Shad well—I know the Orient ship Lusitania—I was engaged as coal trimmer on a voyage she took to Sydney—on night 18th July I left Shad well Railway Station to go to Tilbury—Haley, Gleeson, Mr. Jennings, my sister Louisa Coffey, and my younger sister Lizzie went with me to the station; Haley, Gleeson, and myself went off by train at twelve o'clock, travelling third-class, and getting to Tilbury about half-past one—we all three went to the dock gates—Gleeson carried my bed—I and Haley went inside the dock gates—Gleeson had no right or authority to go in; he came down on chance; I went on board—all the men were on board—they did not want anybody—Haley got on board about half-past two—I came back to Gleeson to tell him he could not get any work—a policeman was at the gate—I stopped talking to Gleeson for about twenty minutes—I had to stop outside till the sergeant came—I gave Gleeson fivepence, all the money I had in change—I went into the docks again from half-past two to a quarter to three, as near as I can remember—I left him outside the gates, and went on board, and took the voyage to Sydney, and got home, and got my discharge on 13th November, I think; here is my discharge—I then heard what had happened to Gleeson, and I volunteered my evidence to Sergeant Bremner.

Cross-examined. I, Haley, and Hyde went to the dock gates together—one of the gates was wide open to let the passengers in—when I went aboard, and turned to look for Gleeson, I missed him—when I came back three-quarters of an hour afterwards I saw the bed with a ticket with my name on it—we arrived at Tilbury about half-past one; I came back about a quarter-past two—I had a conversation with Gleeson for about twenty minutes; that made it about half-past two—he said he had no money, and I gave him fivepence—I cannot say if he rode to Shad well; I was not there—all I can say is I left him at two or half-past two.

DAVID HALEY . I am a labourer, living at Stepney—I have known Gleeson three or four years—on 18th July I knew the Lusitania was going to sail for Sydney, and I went from Shadwell by train at a few minutes to twelve to Tilbury in company with Andritt and Gleeson in a third-class carriage—I carried Andritt's bag and Gleeson his bed—I had no employment on board the ship, but I succeeded in getting through the dock gates and on to the vessel—Gleeson did not get in, and the last I saw of him was when I was close to the dock gates about half-past one—afterwards I was found on the boat, and was turned off at Gravesend—I made my way back to London, and afterwards I heard about Gleeson being in trouble, and I gave evidence for him at the Sessions—Gleeson was not represented by counsel—I was in the hospital when I first heard of the robbery—I remained there from 22nd July to 8th August—I had a pair of serge trousers on that night, and got through the dock gates—Gleeson had corduroys on.

Cross-examined. A summons was served on me to attend at the Thames Police-court and give evidence against you—I went before a Magistrate, and was sworn—on 8th August I was discharged from the London Hospital—I was suffering from a kick—I will swear it was the London Hospital—I have been nowhere else since—I was in Bromley Hospital once with a skin disease; that was about five years ago, and I was in

there last month, twelve months—I believe two or three went upon the platform—Jennings was one; I could not recollect other names—Hyde and Aldridge went to Tilbury with me—I know Edward Coffey—I could not say if he went with us to the railway station; I believe he was there with his wife; I could not swear he went; his wife was there, I know—Henry and Stephen Aldridge, Gleeson, Mrs. Coffey, and I all went to the station—when we had walked through into the dock Hooked round, and said to Aldridge, "Where is Eddie?"—that was before we went on board—I saw he was not coming; we went on board—I missed him before we got to the dock gates, before we went on board.

WILLIAM BOSWALL . I am a clerk in charge of the registers at the London Hospital—I produce the official register—David Haley, the last witness, came into the hospital on 22nd July, and left on 8th August.

Cross-examined. He was suffering from orchitis; he was under Mr. Taddy.

TIMOTHY CRAWLEY . I live at 225, St. George's Street, Shadwell a common lodging-house—I am a labourer when I can get work to do—I know Gleeson, or Hyde—on 19th July last I went from London to Purfleet with Richard Smith to pick peas—we started from Paddy's Goose public-house, Shadwell, between ten and eleven o'clock in the morning, and walked on foot—as we passed through Barking we met Hyde walking—I stopped and spoke to him while Smith stood across the road—Hyde mentioned the name of the Lusitania tome—my brother had gone away in her, and I knew of her; he had stowed away in her in one of her voyages to Australia.—before he went away my brother said something to me about coming back, and the ship he should come back in if he did—after that conversation I and Smith walked on together in the direction of Purfleet; we went on to Tilbury, and then returned to Purfleet at about eight o'clock at night—we could do no good, and slept in a field—we stayed there till next morning, Saturday, and then we both came back to London, walking always—I saw no more of Hyde when we came back—the morning after we came back I looked at the Daily Chronicle of the 20th July for the Austral in relation to what my brother had told me; it belongs to the same company, the Orient, as the Lusitania—I don't think I saw the name of the Austral in the paper that morning; I cannot tell you where I saw it—I did not hear of Gleeson again till I went to King David Lane Police station, when he was in custody—I did not hear of it till Flynn said a man wanted me at King David Lane station to give evidence—I went" and saw a gentleman in plain clothes, and gave my evidence to him—I don't know who he was—I gave evidence at the Police-station; it was taken down in writing—I then went away—I was not told to come again to the Sessions House on derkenwell Green, and I did not attend there—I heard no more of it—my brother's name is Michael Crawley—I saw nothing in the paper of the departure of the Lusitania.

Cross-examined. I was with Smith before we left the Paddy's Goose about half an hour—it was between ten and eleven when I first saw Smith—I was not round the West Garden Dock gate, but inside the Paddy's Goose—it was between one and two when I reached Barking, the Barking Road just over the iron bridge at Silvertown—I live at King David

Lane Chambers, a common lodging-house, at 225, St. George's Street—I did not get that address from a newspaper—I said before the Magistrate I lived at a common lodging-house—my intention in going was to try and stow away on the Lusitania, and if I could not, to go pea-picking—I went to a pea-field and asked some women about peas; they said it was no use; it was too early—Hyde told us when we met him it was no good trying to stow away—we started about eight o'clock next morning to come back to London.

WILLIAM HARRISON LEA . I am a clerk in the registry office for shipping, and in the Board of Trade Custom House—I produce the official log of the Lusitania, belonging to the Orient Line—she started on a voyage to Australia on 19th July from Tilbury—the crew were paid off on 13th November—I find Henry Andritt on the list of the crew; he signed articles on 15th July, and joined her on the 19th as one of the crew—he was paid off on 13th November—Michael Crawley stowed away in the Lusitania on her previous outward voyage to Australia, going on 15th March, 1889; he was found on 17th, and on 8th May he was landed at Sydney—Michael Crawley shipped on the Austral, belonging to the same line, when it returned from Sydney to England, on 28th June, 1889; he signed articles on 28th June, and was discharged at Tilbury on 30th August, 1889.

Cross-examined, I can give no information about Gleeson.

JAMES SELF . I am a clerk in the office of the Orient Steam Navigation Company, 13, Fenchurch Avenue—they own the Lusitania—she loaded cargo in the Tilbury Docks, being bound for Australia, and left Tilbury Docks on the morning of 19th July; she got out of the docks and arrived in the river at quarter to six a.m. on 19th—the men were paid by me on the authority of this list, supplied by the purser—I find the name of Henry Andritt, trimmer, on it—he was paid by me £9 17s. up to 13th November; his mark attests it; on that day he would get his discharge, the ship being paid off then.

RICHARD SMITH . I am a wire rope maker, living at Gladys Road, Shadwell—in July last I heard of a robbery from the Duke of Kent—it was on a Friday that I heard it, about five in the morning—I was standing round the West Garden Dock gate—there were a number of people there at the time—as I stood there I saw two men run by, and in about a minute or two after two more ran by—standing near me was Patrick Feeley, the prisoner's brother; I saw him run by, and Thos. Phillips following them—I saw them go through West Gardens into St. George's Street; there I lost sight of them—I heard of the robbery about a quarter of an hour afterwards, and when Phillips and Patrick Feeley came back I heard that they were the ones that had done it—I knew Gleeson by sight—he was not one of the party that I saw running along—I did not know Whaley by sight—I knew the prisoner by sight—I did not see him of the party that were running—the two persons I saw go after them were Patrick Feeley and Thos. Phillips—I remained there about an hour after—I then went to the coffee-house called Paddy's Goose, with Timothy Crawley—after a short time there I left in company with Crawley, intending to go to Tilbury to get some work—we tried to go aboard a ship as stowaways to get a job, and if we could not go away by ship, to try pea-picking—we walked—we intended to make the whole journey on foot—we went by rail to Shad-well

and got to Barking—as we were going along the road to Barking, we met a chap named Gleeson—he was coming towards London, and we were going from it—he spoke to us, and we both spoke to him—we had some little talk together—in the course of conversation the name of the ship was mentioned, the Lusitania—after that we left him going on our way to Tilbury, and he going on his way towards London—we got on to Tilbury—we found no work there—on that same night we returned from Tilbury to Purfleet—we slept there that night—next morning, Saturday, the 20th, we started back to London—we walked back, and got to London somewhere about one in the afternoon—Crawley and I returned together—we parted, and I went to my lodging—after that I went to Paddy's Goose—I there saw Crawley—I think he was reading the paper; I don't remember what paper it was—they only take in two papers, the Daily News and the Chronicle; it was one or the other—I afterwards went to King David Lane station—I can't remember when it was—it was some days after the Saturday—I made a statement there to Sergeant Adams and another gentleman—I can't say whether that was before Gleeson and Whaley were sent for trial—I attended at the Thames Police-court, and was called into the witness-box—Gleeson was in his convict's clothes—that was the first time I gave evidence in the matter—the first place where I made a statement was at King David Lane—I did not go to the Police court when Hyde was charged on Clerkenwell Green—I made a statement to Inspector Roots on 10th October—that was a correct statement.

Cross-examined. I heard of the Lusitania before I and Whaley were taken into custody—it was between eleven and half-past on the morning of 19th July that I left Paddy's Goose to go to Tilbury with Crawley—it was about ten when I saw the four men run by the dock gate—I remained about the dock gate, it might be about five or ten minutes, after Phillips had told me where he had been—I remained round the gate about an hour after the men ran by—after Phillips came back I heard him say where he had been—Crawley and I went away from Paddy's Goose about half-past eleven; that was the time by the clock—I did not follow the men, I saw Patrick Feeley and Phillips follow them—I and twenty more men did not follow where they went to—we went to the corner of West Gardens; that was all; that was about thirty yards—I do not know the names of the twenty men it was between one and half-past that I met Hyde at Barking—I can't tell you how long it was after that that I heard Hyde and Whaley were in custody—I first heard they were in custody two or three days afterwards—I did not appear and give my statement till 8th October, because I was laid up in my bed, till I was sent for—Harry Fink came up to me while I was in bed—he said I was wanted at the station, but I could not go—I was in bed three or four days—none of the police spoke to me about giving evidence—I went to the station when I got up—I saw a lot of gentlemen there, Sergeant Adams and Mr. Smith—I can't remember whether I was spoken to by any gentlemen to go there—I said at the station that Harry Fink told me I was wanted.

Re-examined. I remember Phillips coming back about an hour afterwards; he began talking to some men round the gates—he mentioned Tower Hill; he said he bad been there and had some food; he mentioned the Duke of Kent—that was immediately on his return—that was about

an hour after I had seen the men run by—I daresay it was about an hour or an hour and a quarter after Phillips came back that I left the West Garden gate.

By the Prisoner. I did not see you there at all—Crawley and I arrived from Purfleet about half-past twelve—it was between one and half-past when we got back to London.

JAMES LUMLEY . I used to live at the lodging-house, King David Chambers, King David Lane—I was lodging there on the 18th and 19th July last—at that time Edward Gleeson was lodging there—I saw him there on the afternoon of Friday, 19th July, about twenty minutes to half-past four; he was sitting on the seat in the eating-room—he seemed to be bathing or wiping his feet with a cloth of some description; his feet seemed to be swollen—I only had a couple of words with him—I could not say whether Mrs. Gregory was there at the time; the room was full of men.

Cross-examined. I was called at the Thames Police-court on two occasions—the clerk took my evidence—in the first statement it was said that I met Gleeson between a quarter and half-past twelve; that was corrected on the second occasion; I said it was a mistake—I remained in the house, I suppose, about twenty minutes—I have not said it was five minutes; I said it was five minutes from the dock to the Coach and Horses; I was twenty minutes in the house—I might have been in the kitchen five minutes—I went down and washed myself—I saw Gleeson in the upper kitchen both before I went down and after I came up.

Re-examined. I was at work in the dock on this Friday—I left work at four o'clock, and went to the Coach and Horses, and had something to drink—there were a number of people there—I went from there to the lodging-house.

MATTHEW FOSTER . I am the station-master at Tilbury Docks Railway Station—on 19th July no tickets were issued there for short journeys until the 8.23 train; no ticket was issued to Shad well, nor any in Black wall, till the 8.13.

Cross-examined. No ticket could be taken from my station between three and four in the morning to Shad well; the first train was at half past seven—if you walked from our station to two stations nearer London you could take a short ticket there—the first train to arrive at Shad well is 8.40.

Re-examined. No ticket was issued either to Purfleet or Barking till 8.23, and that would be to Black wall—on a shipping night the train would be a quarter of an hour late, and would not get to the dock till about two—a train leaving Purfleet would stop at Rainham—I can't answer for the tickets issued between Shad well and Barking—the price of a ticket would be sevenpence.

WALTER GEORGE WHALEY . lam undergoing 18 months' hard labour from the London Sessions, on August 14th, on a charge of being connected with a robbery at the Duke of Kent public-house—I was tried with Gleeson, Brooks, and Brady; we were all four convicted, and sentenced to 18 months—when I was arrested I was sleeping at King David Chambers; I was awoke about one a.m., and saw Feeley and Sergeant Adams, who said, "I shall take you for being concerned in the robbery at the Duke of Kent"—I said, "I know nothing about it"—I was innocent of the charge—Gregory, the governor of the

lodging-house, was there—a man in bed, named Scott, said, "If you are innocent, go to the station"—I got up and dressed myself, and went to the station quietly, with Sergeant Adams—I did not say, "I did not do it, but I was there and know who did do it;" that is false—I had nothing to do with the robbery, and knew nothing at all about the time of my arrest—on the morning of July 19th I left the lodging-house about 9. 55, or it might be a little later, and went straight to St. Bride's Wharf, and stayed there till four o'clock, when I got work, and worked till seven o'clock—I was not at work the day before, or on the Saturday—I know the prisoner—it is not true that I went with him to a coffee-house on the morning of the 19th, or that I ran past the West Garden Dock gate that morning, or that I went to any coffee-house that morning, or that I was present when Gleeson asked the prisoner to have some breakfast, or that Gleeson in my presence gave the prisoner 2s., and said he had got some money from the Duke of Kent public-house; or that if he went to Twine Court he might find a quid or two, which I had thrown away—I was not there—I only know him by sight—I never had a word of conversation with him—when I was undergoing my sentence I was seen by Inspector Boots and Inspector Quin, on 12th October—I went to bed on the night of the 18th about 11.30.

Cross-examined. I slept in bed No. 13; O'Neall slept next to me, he was a witness at the London Sessions and at Arbour Square—I do not remember a man named Bryce, who is undergoing twelve months for stealing a purse, meeting me in Whitechapel on July 19th, and telling me all about the robbery—I was not employed at No. 10 warehouse in the Eastern Dock that day—O'Neall and I did not leave the lodging-house together that morning, and he was not with me at St. Bride's Wharf.

By the JURY. I have no spite against the prisoner.

MARGARET GREGORY . I am deputy of this lodging-house in King David Lane—in July last two men named Gleeson and Whaley were lodging there, and on Thursday, 18th July, about 9.30, Gleeson asked me to lend him sixpence—I saw him again about ten o'clock; I know the time by the police going by, and he spoke to me about going to Tilbury—he did not sleep there that night—I keep this book (produced), and put down those that sleep there and those who go out, and those who pay for their beds and those who owe for them—Gleeson occupied No. 60 bed—I find a cross against that bed on 18th July, indicating that he was out of the house that night—I put down 4d. if they pay for the bed, and if I trust them I put "0"—I go over the house at two o'clock every morning, and on that Friday morning, at two o'clock, I saw Whaley in No. 14 bed—next day, Friday, I saw Hyde or Gleeson in the kitchen, between three and four p.m.; he complained of his feet being swollen, and was lying down on a form—I gave him a pail of water from the boiler, and some soap and soda, and tore up an old sheet, and gave it to him—he stayed in the house some little time afterwards; he wanted to go to bed—I have an entry that he slept in the house that Friday night—I lent him 4d. to pay for his bed—on the Saturday he paid for his lodging, but did not sleep in the house—he was there on the Sunday and on Monday night—I saw Sergeant Adams come on the Tuesday morning, and I saw the prisoner when he came to the side door—I did not go upstairs till he came the second time; my husband

pushed me out of the room—Whaley slept there on the 18th, but did not pay for his bed, he had no money—I went my round at two a.m., and saw him in bed—he went to bed before eleven—I saw him in bed asleep next morning, between 9.30 and 9. 45, and he left the house about five or three minutes before ten; it was after 9.30—to the best of my belief that was the first time he left the house; had he left before, the watchman would have told me—next morning Gleeson and Whaley were taken out of my house, charged with robbery; I heard it one night in the next week; I was in bed—I did not go to the Police-court the first day they were locked up, but I did on the Friday—they were remanded to Friday—I got into the passage of the Court, and saw Sergeant Adams and the prisoner, and said, "Mr. Adams, you have two innocent men there, they know nothing about it"—at that time I had not only heard of the robbery, but I knew the date—I said to the prisoner, "You ought to be ashamed of yourself"—he said, "Why?"—I said, "There are two innocent men there; they know nothing about it, and you know that"; and I said, "Sergeant Adams, they are innocent; they know no more about it than I do—I went into Court, but the policeman at the door told me to wait outside—Sergeant Adams was at the door, and prevented my going in—I remained in the street till the case was remanded—I was told by the policeman at the door to remain, and if I was wanted I should be called in, but I was not called in—I went again on the next Friday—they knew I was there, but they would not allow me in Court—Adams saw me and the prisoner—I was not in Court, and was not allowed in the passage—I was standing in the street—there was another remand till the 9th, when I went again, but was not called in—I did not go to the Sessions—I did not think I was required there, as I was not required at the Police-court—a man named O'Neall lodged with me on the night of the 18th, who is known by the nickname of Ribs—he slept in bed No. 15, next to Whaley—the three beds were: Whaley 14, O'Neall 15, and Gleeson 60—15 is on the first floor, a bed behind the door.

Cross-examined. You were at home on Wednesday—on the Thursday I lent Gleeson sixpence, and on Friday fourpence out of a shilling which a man paid me—I gave the fourpence into his hand while he was doing his feet in the kitchen—he returned the fourpence to me—my husband was at work on a meal boat—no one has this book but me; I had it while I was confined—they used to pay Bridge, and she came up and told me who paid the money.

Re-examined. My baby is seven months old; I was about again in July; I had to get up on the seventh day.

GEORGE GREGORY . I am the husband of Mary Gregory; we are both deputies at the lodging-house in King David Lane, Shadwell—I have suffered a sentence of penal servitude, and was also convicted last year of assaulting the police, and suffered a term of imprisonment—I was out and at the lodging-house in July, when Gleeson and Whaley were lodging there, but I never saw Gleeson—on Thursday night I went to the play, and my wife told me something about Gleeson going to stow away—on Friday night I went to bed soon after I came home at six o'clock, and about ten o'clock she woke me up and said, "Gleeson has come home"—on 23rd July Sergeant Adams came into my parlour by himself; the prisoner then came, and I took them to the sleeping rooms on the ground-floor through three

rooms, and into a fourth, where Whaley was asleep in bed 14—Adams showed a light on his face, and the prisoner looked in his face, woke him up, and said, "Come along, Haley; we want you"—"Whaley turned round, and said, "My name is not Haley; it is Whaley"—Sergeant Adams said, "Are you sure it is the man?"—the prisoner said, "You give me 2s. 6d. and a breakfast; should not I know you again?"—Adams said, "I shall charge you with stealing money at the Duke of Kent; go and dress yourself, and come along with me"—he said, "I am innocent"—someone said, "If you are innocent go to the station," and he got up and dressed himself; I was close to his bed, and heard the whole conversation—I did not hear Whaley say, "I did not do it, but I was there, and I know who did," and I was standing close to him—when he was dressed I showed him downstairs, and we all four went to the station—going along the prisoner said to Adams, "Did you hear what the prisoner said, he said, 'I did not do it, but I know who did,'" fiat was the first I heard of it—that was about four paces from my doorway-we then went on to the station, but I waited outside—about five minutes after that Adams came back with the prisoner, and spoke to me, mentioning Gleeson's name; but I do not know whether the prisoner heard—we then went back to the lodging-house, leaving Whaley at the station—I took Adams and the prisoner through the room where Gleeson was sleeping in No. 60 bed—I awoke him; a light was shown in his face—the prisoner looked at him, shook him, and said, "Come along, Gleeson"—he said, "What do you want me for?"—the prisoner said, "I can't help it, I am only getting my own back"—Adams said, "We want you for a robbery at the Duke of Kent"—he got up, and dressed and went with me and the prisoner to the station, and I stood outside a little while, while they went in, and then went back to my lodging house by myself, and got back about 2.30—Adams came back before 3.30, and wanted a man named Curly—I said, "I know him; he came in about twelve o'clock, but he don't live here"—we went down Albert Street but did not find him—about 3.30 Adams came to the lodging-house, and in consequence of what he said I took three or four men to the station; they were placed with Gleeson and Whaley—Miss Stone, the barmaid of the Duke of Kent, and Mrs. Higgins, who has a shop opposite, were brought in and looked round, but could not identify anybody—I went to the police office every day the case was on, and saw Adams on each occasion—he did not call on me to give evidence—I was not examined either before the Magistrate or at the station.

Cross-examined. I have undergone seven years' penal servitude for highway robbery—when we came downstairs on that night you were two paces behind and you ran to Sergeant Adams and said, "Sergeant, do you hear what the prisoner says?—Whaley very likely heard that as well as the Sergeant—I do not know whether he ever spoke about it in his evidence, I only say I heard it—Gleeson and Whaley did not call me as a witness, because the Magistrate would listen to no one—I was in Court one day to hear the case, and it ended in another remand—I swear he never said, "I was there, I did not take the money, but I know who did"—I used those words to the gentleman who took my statement—you and I and Sergeant Adams went together to find Curly in Albert Street—I went home after that, and went to the station with Sergeant Adams.

THOMAS O'NEALL . I am a labourer—I was lodging at King David Chambers, Shadwell—I have been working at St. Bride's Wharf, Wapping—on Thursday evening, 18th July, I got home about half-past ten or a quarter to eleven—I went into the room on the top floor—before I went to bed I went into the kitchen—I there heard some conversation between the lodgers—I heard the name of Gleeson mentioned, also the name of a ship, the Lusitania—after being there a short time I went to bed—I got up next morning about half-past nine or quarter to ten—I was awoke by the deputy—I called Whaley when I came downstairs, and he came with me—we came downstairs together, and washed, and then went into the kitchen—while there I heard something about a sugar vessel that was to be unloaded at No. 10 warehouse in the London Dock—Whaley was in my company all the time that morning—I am positive he was never out of my sight—he slept in the next bed to me, No. 14—he was asleep when I was called—we left the lodging-house about a quarter to eleven—he was in my company from the time I was called till we left the house—when we got to the dock he spoke to a man named Cole, and he took him on to work—I worked at of. Bride's Wharf that week, but I could not say which day it was—I am quite sure this morning was the morning after I heard Gleeson's name and the Lusitania mentioned—on Monday night, 22nd July, I was sleeping in the lodging house, in the same bed, and next to where Whaley was sleeping—I awoke about one o'clock, and saw Sergeant Adams there, and the prisoner and Gregory—What said to me, "Look here, Tom, they want to take me for stealing £4 10s. from the Duke of Kent, in Dean Street; you know I am innocent, don't you?"—I said, "Yes"—I had not heard this robbery spoken about before that—Whaley was in the act of dressing himself when he said this; he was putting his trousers on—shortly afterwards he was taken away by the Sergeant—I got up, and went down into the kitchen—while there the prisoner came back with Adams—they went upstairs, and came down with Gleeson—I went with them to the Police-station—I stood there among some others for the purpose of identification—both Gleeson and Whaley were in the group—Mrs. Higgins and Miss Stone were brought there to see if they could pick anybody out—they looked at us all, and they failed to identify any body—I afterwards heard that Gleeson and Whaley had been sent for trial—I went to the Sessions House at Clerkenwell Green, and gave evidence there about the Thursday night and Friday morning—Whaley was not represented there by Counsel; there was no one to examine me—I have never been in trouble—I have never been before a magistrate.

Cross-examined. On 19th July I left the lodging-house with Whaley about half-past 10, and about a quarter of an hour after Cole came out with a quantity of men at West Garden Dock Gate, and Whaley was taken on at 11—I was not in company with Whaley at St. Bride's Wharf that morning from half-past ten in the morning till four in the afternoon—he was not employed there; he was employed by Cole at 11—after I had given my evidence at Clerkenwell, the Judge ordered me to be arrested and taken before a Magistrate for perjury, for giving false evidence on behalf of Whaley—I saw Whaley the following night at the Ship and Dolphin in New Gravel Lane, and we had some drink together—I could not say whether I was at the Ship and Dolphin the previous day drinking with Whaley; it is so long ago—after the Judge ordered

me to be arrested I waited outside the Court for about five minutes, long enough for anybody to have arrested me—I left my lodging the same night and went to live at Wapping; and after four or five weeks I went back to the lodging-house—I did not dream of anybody having a warrant against me—I aid not leave the lodging on account of that; I left of my own accord, because I had a row there—I had better accommodation at Wapping—Whaley did not call me as a witness at the Thames Police court—I was not there—the Sessions was the first place at which I gave evidence.

Re-examined. I went away from King David Lane on the 14th August—I was at Wapping, I dare say, for two months, at least I was then working at St. Bride's Wharf, and I went into the country for three weeks and some days, to East Farleigh, hop-picking—I was two days at St. Bride's after I came back from the country—St. Bride's Wharf is about four minutes' walk from the docks—I had no charge preferred against me when I came back, nor did I hear of any.

THOMAS PHILLIPS . I am a butcher by trade—I am out of prison now; I was released on Thursday, 6th February, from a sentence of three months' imprisonment for stealing a watch; it was my first conviction—one morning last July I remember being at the West Garden Dock gate with Patrick Feeley, a brother of the prisoner—as we were talking together I saw two men going along; I think one of them was named Dick Clements—they were going just round the corner into the highway—Clements spoke to us—from what he said, I and Patrick Feeley went with him to a coffee-shop in Mint Street, Tower Hill—we had some breakfast there; Clements paid for it, I think, with two two-shilling pieces—it came to four shillings—it was silver—after that he gave Patrick Feeley and me half a crown each—after we had the half-crowns he said that he had got some money off the Duke of Kent, and he said to his pal who was with him, "It was a bit of luck for me to get some money"—I reckon we were at the coffee-house with them about half an hour, because we had to wait till it was cooked—we then left, and went with them to the top of the Minories, and from there to Mansell Street; and as they were going along Clements was paying Savage in silver money out of a bag; I saw that—we went with them into a public-house at the corner of Mansell Street, and had some drink; Clements paid for it—he took that money out of his pocket—Patrick Feeley was with us all this time—we went then to Leman Street—they left us there, and we went straight back to work again at the dock at West Garden Gate—it was about ten when Clements and his companion passed us at the gate and asked us to have some breakfast and it was just about a quarter to twelve when we got back to the gate—I can't say now far it is from the corner of Leman Street to the dock gates; it would take about half an hour to walk—when we got back I saw the prisoner outside the gate, just after we got there—Patrick spoke to him—he said, "Charley, we have had half-a-crown and a good breakfast given us at a coffee-shop in Mint Street"—I don't remember what the prisoner said; I don't think I heard exactly what he said—I think he said, "I wish I could have had the same, a good breakfast and half-a-crown"—we remained there about a quarter of an hour talking together, the three of us, I, Pat, and Charley—I can't sat whether they went away together; I lost sight of them—it was Patrick left us—up to the time of getting back to West Garden Gate at half-past

twelve the prisoner had not been in my company that morning; he did not go with us to the coffee-shop.

By the JURY. Nothing wag said about splitting on who did the robbery; I did not tell the prisoner who did the robbery.

By MR. MATHEWS. I know afterwards that the half-crown was part of the money—I did not tell the prisoner that Dick Clements had given it to me; we did not tell him who had given us the half-crowns, or the breakfast—I knew Clements before, only by sight—I knew Gleeson by sight; he was not one of the men who was with me that morning, he was not with me at all that morning, at any part of what I have been telling—I knew Whaley by sight; he is not one of the men with me in the coffee-shop that morning; he did not take any part in what I have told about—I afterwards hoard that Gleeson and Whaley were in custody; I was not allowed to go into the Court at Arbour Square—I went there two days running; I remained outside, and when I went inside the passage I asked Sergeant Adams if I was to be called, and he said, "No, wait outside"—as I was not called at the Police-court I did not go to the Sessions; my conviction was after this matter, in November last.

Cross-examined. My first conviction was for stealing a watch—I only saw two men when I left the dock gate on the 14th—I and Patrick followed them; nobody followed us—I know Smith; I think he followed behind; I saw him that morning round the dock gate—I did not speak to him before I followed the two men; I spoke to him afterwards, after I came back at a quarter to twelve—he did not follow us in company with twenty more—I had my dinner before I went into the dock; it was a little after three when I came out of the dock and went to Paddy's Goose, and had some tea and supper—I was employed at half-past twelve—I came out of the dock before twelve—I said before the Magistrate that I came out of the dock at twelve and had dinner at Paddy's Goose; that is right—I had my dinner before I went in; I came out and had a snack, that was all—I was working for George Cooper—I went in to work for him at half-past twelve; that was the first time I was employed that day—I was walking round inside before that, waiting to see the contractor take on the men, and I came out and had my dinner at twelve—I was not at work till half past twelve—I was paid off by Cooper in the afternoon; I can't say exactly at what time—I was paid a shilling; that was for two hours' work—he discharged we for coming out a second time—I made the excuse that I was going down to the urinal—there is a policeman at the gate to see who goes in and out; he did not stop me; I walked straight in—I was not called as a witness at Arbour Square; my name was not called out—I saw Richard Smith yesterday, and spoke to him—ho did not tell me on the morning in question that he was going to Tilbury—he was in my company about half an hour at the dock gate; it had gone twelve before I saw him.

Re-examined. Patrick Feeley was not with me at that time; he had left me—I can't fix the hour that I saw him, it was before I had dinner—on 9th October I gave a statement at King David Lane Station—I then told Inspector Roots what I have told to-day—this is it.

By the COURT. I was brought up at a Board School—I can read and write—I passed in the 4th standard.

GEORGE GREGORY (Recalled). On the night of Thursday, 18th July, I

remember seeing Gleeson in company with Rocky Donovan, drinking together at the Albion—they called me.

Cross-examined. I did not explain that before the Magistrate—I was not asked till now.

PHOEBE STONE . I am manageress at the Duke of Kent, kept by Mr. Hewitt—on the morning of 19th July, about a quarter to nine, I was in the bar alone—a young man came in at the Dean Street doors—they are swinging doors with a leather strap—they don't quite close, a person outside could see into the house—I had placed on a desk, at the back of the bar, a bag of silver containing about £4 10s.—the young man spoke to me—I was at the other end of the bar, and I went down to the Dean Street end, and told him I did not know where the party lived that he asked for—I then turned to go away and saw somebody jumping over the counter at the Marlborough Street end—I at once rushed towards him—he struck or pushed me in the chest and knocked me down—in the struggle his hat fell off in the bar—this (produced) is it—he took the bag of silver, jumped again over the bar, and went out at the door—I called out, and the barman came and went after him—I did not notice the first man go out; I only saw the two men—on the morning of the 23rd July I went to Shadwell Police-station in order to see if I could identify the men—I looked at them all, but did not identify any of them—I afterwards saw Gleeson and "Whaley about the Police-court, and said I did not think it was either of those men (looking at Gleeson and Whaley)—I say so now—I afterwards saw two other men who were charged—Brooks and Brady—I did not identify either of them.

Cross-examined. I could not point out the men if I saw them—I did not serve either of them with anything; they did not ask for anything—Moore, the barman, came to my assistance in about two minutes; he would be able to see them—I believe they went down Arthur Street, but I don't know—I did not see them running.

Re-examined. The first man asked me where some lighterman lived; he mentioned a name, but I do not recollect it—I was speaking to him, and then I found the other man jumping over the counter—I gave the hat to Police-constable Smith.

ALFRED MOORE . I am barman at the Duke of Kent public-house—just before nine o'clock on 19th July I was there, and I heard Miss Stone call out to me—I ran into the bar at once, and in consequence of what she said I ran into Dean Street—when I got into Martha Street I saw two men running, and some people after them—I followed them; they went through Martha Street, Sutton Street, Cornwall Street, Dean Street, Cable Street, and Albert Street, where they went into the second house on the left—I did not follow them into the house; a constable was sent for—I did not see the faces of either of the men who were running; one man was taller than the other; the shorter one had no hat on—I afterwards identified the house in Albert Street—I was taken on the Saturday afterwards, I think, to the Police-station, where I saw about a dozen men, but I could not pick out any of them as being the men I had seen running—Gleeson and Whaley were not amour those men—Brooks and Brady were picked out by somebody else—after that I saw Gleeson and Whaley in the dock at the Thames Police-court—I could not recognise them at all—I am quite certain of the direction the men ran in.

Cross-examined. I did not want to go to the Police-station—I was called by Detective Smith to go there to try to pick the men out—Miss Stone called me, and I went into the bar, and then into the street—in Martha Street I saw the two men three doors from the first shop in Martha Street, not three doors from the public-house, because the road divides them—I don't know how long before they had run away; I went into the street directly I was called; I said nothing before the Magistrate about two minutes—I said before him that the two men were three doors from the public-house when I got out; the distance from the publichouse to three doors from it is as the distance from here to the corner of this court and half as much again—Miss Stone did not explain the way they ran; she was out of breath, and said, "Go, go, go," and I ran out directly—Mrs. Higgins keeps the greengrocer's shop opposite the public-house—I don't know if she followed one of those men—I never met her; she did not speak to me.

ANN HIGGINS . I am the wife of James Higgins, greengrocer, at 33, Martha Street; our shop faces the Duke of Kent public-house—I remember the robbery taking place there; I cannot remember the date—before the robbery took place I noticed a man walk up and down several times, from half-past eight to nine in the morning; he had rather carroty hair, which came out in little curls on each side—he was rather pitted with small-pox—my attention was attracted to him—he looked into the bar; after that he walked up and down several times, and walked on his toes into the private part several times, and then went into the private side and shut the door; almost immediately afterwards I heard a scream and saw the man run out of the private-door—he had a white bag in his hand, putting it into his pocket—he ran down Martha Street—I went down Martha Street and into Sutton Street, and then I came back—I met the head barman, Mr. Moore, who was coming back, and I told him he had gone through Sutton Street into Cornwall Street—I was out of breath—about one or two a.m. on 23rd July Sergeant Adams took me to King David Lane Police-station to see some men—I did not recognise anyone—the man I had seen was not there—I went a second time and saw other men, but the man I had seen was not among them—I don't recollect speaking to Adams as to what I had seen on the day of the robbery—the man I saw go in the public-house had a round hat on when he went in, he had no hat when he came out—I was not asked to give evidence at the Police court, nor at the Sessons—I told Adams the men I saw at the station were not the men—I don't remember seeing Adams before—I don't know how he saw me.

Cross-examined. I cannot say if I saw more than the one man run out of that house; I only saw the one man go in—I did not follow him through three or four streets—I ran after him from the bottom of Martha Street into Sutton Street by myself—the barman followed after me—as I came back I met him in Martha Street—I know nothing about where Moore went—the two Martha Streets are together—I said to Moore when I met him, "He has gone through Cornwall Street"—I said I had just lost sight of him, and that I had followed, and he went on and I went back to my business—I don't know if a man that keeps a fish shop was running with Moore—one Martha Street is where one side of the Duke of Kent is, and the other Martha Street faces it—I did not meet him in the one the Duke of Kent is in—you can see one Martha Street from the

other—there are Upper and Lower Martha Streets; this one is the Lower one—you may call them all one—Dean Street divides them—I met Moore after I had followed the men and lost sight of them—the man I followed had no hat on—I did not appear at the Court because I was not subpœnaed; and they did not come to fetch me—Smith said to me, "I should like to see you at Arbour Square on Friday"—I said, "Am I compelled to come?"—he said, "No," and I said, "If I am not compelled to come, I don't want to come."

Cross-examined. Neither Smith nor Adams ever came to fetch me; no one came for me—I saw the man turn in the direction of Cornwall Street, and then I returned to my business—there were two barmen in the public-house at the time; I do not know the name of the second one.

By the Prisoner. I am sure the barman I met coming back was Moore.

JAMER HILLYARD . I carry on business with my brother as hatters, at 55, Mile End Road—I sell a good quantity of such hats as these from my shop, and we also send them out wholesale for other people who sell them—they are half-a-crown apiece—other hats with similar marks are sold by other retailers.

Cross-examined. I cannot swear this hat was bought at my shop.

WILLIAM SMITH (Police Sergeant R). On 3rd August I took Brooks and Brady into custody, on a charge, with others, of stealing, on 19th July, £4 10s. from the Duke of Kent public-house—on 19th July I had received a hat from Miss Stone, which was left at the station—on 3rd August I fitted it on Brady; it did not fit him—on 5th August I tried it on Brooks; it did not fit him—it was left in the custody of the police until I handed it over.

Cross-examined. The witnesses who prosecuted Brooks and Brady at the Police-court and at the London Sessions were Miss Stone, Burke, Moore, and Fenn—the information first received from witnesses was that from a woman named Burke; she was the first who spoke to me as to Brooks and Brady—there were a number of persons came to the station—Mrs. Bose and her daughter and Harry Fenn gave information—I believe a week or fortnight previous to Brooks and Brady's apprehension they were taken by Sergeant Adams on the same charge; I was not present—Fenn and two or three females took me to Twine Court and pointed out the prisoners to me—when they were charged all they said was, "We have been taken for this before, and this is made" or "got up"—you gave no evidence against those two men.

Re-examined. I heard that when Brooks and Brady were first arrested they were not identified and were let go; after that they were re-arrested, brought back, and charged.

GEORGE BUSH (Re-examined). I have made inquiries as to trains from Tilbury—the first train from Tilbury in the morning to Shadwell is 7. 38, the next 8.23, and the next 8. 53—the 7. 38 would arrive at Shadwell at 8.40, the 8.23 at 9. 23, and the 8. 53 does not stop at Shadwell—the trains from Barking are at 5 a.m. reaching Shadwell 5. 31, 6.10 reaching there 6. 46, the 6. 53 reaching there at 7.20, the 7. 11 reaching there at 7. 46; then comes the 8. 8, which is the first train from Tilbury, and reaching Shadwell at 8.40—the third-class fare from Tilbury to Shadwell is 1s. single, from Tilbury to Purfleet it is 3d., from Purfleet to Shadwell 11d., from Purfleet to Barking 4 1/2 d., and from Barking to Shadwell 7d.—I find it is from 24 1/2 to 25 miles from Shadwell to Tilbury Docks by

road; from Tilbury to Purfleet is about 6 1/4 miles; from Purfleet to Shadwell 18 1/4 miles—Barking lies half-way between Purfleet and Shadwell; it is 9 miles, leaving 16 miles between Barking and Shadwell—from the Duke of Kent to the West Garden Dock Gate by way of the High Street is about 425 yards, and by way of Martha Street, Sutton Street, Cornwall Street, Dean Street, Cable Street, and Albert Street to New Gravel Street it is about 700 yards—from the lodging-house in King David Lane to the West Garden Gate is about 280 yards—Paddy's Goose is about 80 yards off, just across the road—on 28th December I was at the Thames Police-court, when the prisoner was under remand, and evidence was being given against him on this charge; he asked that Constable either 472 or 372 might be called to give evidence as to his making a statement to him on the night of the robbery—he was found, and brought to Shadwell Station—I have a note somewhere of what the number was; I have not my note here; I think it was 372—I and Bremner found the constable together, and had him at the Court to give evidence—he turned out to be Constable Papworth; he was called by the prosecution; he gave evidence on the prisoner's behalf at the next remand.

Cross-examined. The first train from Tilbury reaches Shadwell at 8.40—I don't know what time the robbery was committed—I don't know how far you can travel for ninepence—it is 24 1/4 miles by rail—I take it you could ride eighteen miles for ninepence, as the fare for a mile is a halfpenny a mile; that would leave 6 1/4 to walk.

Re-examined. The fare from Purfleet to Shadwell is eleven pence—I have come somewhat recently into the case owing to Inspector Boots' illness.

EDWARD PAPWORTH (Policeman H 372). In July last year, one night, or early in the morning, I patrolled Cable Street, Albert Street, and King David Lane—later on that night I was taken to a lodging-house in King David Lane—the same night the prisoner came and spoke to me about a few minutes to twelve midnight—he said, "I know who the two men are who are concerned in the robbery at the Duke of Kent; I was standing against the West Garden Gate of the London Docks waiting for employment when two men ran past; I followed them through West Garden into St. George's Street (called the Highway by some people); I followed them along St. George's Street, into a coffee-shop; they gave me my breakfast, and paid for it, and half-a-crown; on my way when I caught them up I asked them what was up, and they said, 'We have done a job at the Duke of Kent'"—after giving him half-a-crown he said they said, "If you go down Twine Court, and over the palings by the buildings, you will find a sovereign there which we threw over"—he left me then—I asked him the men's names—he said they were Gleeson and Whaley—I asked him where they lived—he said in King David Lane Chambers—I put the names and addresses on a piece of paper, which I kept till the case was over at Middlesex Sessions, and then I tore it up, or destroyed, or lost it—the prisoner left me then—about twenty minutes afterwards I came across Sergeant Adams in plain clothes—I knew he was on duty for the purpose, and I told him what the prisoner had told me, and we went with him down High Street, Shadwell, within a few yards of Dello Street—I there saw the prisoner at the corner of the street, by a public-house—he was a few

yards off the pavement, and seemed to be crossing; his brother Patrick was close to him, either going into a public-house or coming out—I knew Patrick by sight, well—I have seen him outside to-day—the Sergeant spoke to the prisoner, and after that I, the Sergeant, and the prisoner, went towards the chambers in King David Lane—I left the Sergeant and came away—a row was taking place at the time—a few minutes afterwards I went with the two of them to King David Lane—we went in about one o'clock by the front door—I stood against the side door on the staircase to keep an eye on it—Adams and the prisoner went upstairs together, and shortly afterwards the Sergeant, the prisoner, and Whaley came down together and went to the station, leaving me at the house—after a short time the Sergeant and the prisoner returned and went upstairs a second time, leaving me downstairs against the staircase—then they brought Gleeson down—Adams said, "Take him to the station," and gave him into my custody, and I went with the party to the station—the prisoner followed behind—the prisoner was there when both men were charged—they were detained in custody that night—I stopped and took charge of the men while Adams went out to get people to identify them—they could not be identified—next day they were brought before the Magistrate, remanded till the 26th, and then till the 2nd—I knew nothing about Brooks and Brady—on the first day I was there, I was never called as a witness—the first time I gave evidence was some time in December, after Sergeant Bush had found me—I am quite sure it was on the night that we effected the arrests that the prisoner first spoke to me—I made no notes on the case beyond those I have spoken of—I destroyed them two or three days after the trial—I don't know if I lost or destroyed them; I was asked for them and could not find them—the morning following the 23rd I went and looked over the palings in Twine Court to see if I could see a sovereign or any money there; I could not find anything.

Cross-examined. You spoke to me twice about the Taylors—I don't know if it was on a Saturday—I might have said to you, "Don't let them see you speaking to me, because they might hear what you told me last night"—I am speaking about the night you told me, the 22nd, at midnight—you did not tell me anything about the robbery the night the Taylors assaulted you—when you told me about the Taylors it was not respecting the robbery—I did not hear about it before—you might have spoken about the robbery before you were taken to pick the men out; I don't remember—I told the Sergeant the same night that you told me; that was the night of the 22nd, about twelve—you approached towards him—I went towards High Street, Shadwell, and saw the Sergeant, coming as you got to the corner—I think you were at the corner of Dello Street, and the Sergeant came up—I don't know if you spoke first to the Sergeant.

Re-examined. The prisoner spoke twice to me about the Taylors, two or three days previous to the 22nd—he did speak to me on the Saturday night they assaulted him—I cannot remember anything being said about the robbery that night that I spoke to him, because I didn't want to let them see me—I said let him get a warrant against them, as it was an assault—both men have been since convicted for it—the arrest followed on the same night that he told me about the robbery, and within an hour

of his first telling me—I took down the names and addresses about midnight on the 22nd, and then the arrest was made.

By the Prisoner. I took a note from you on 22nd; if it was before twelve, it may have been a minute or two before twelve—they were arrested on the 23rd—I do not produce my note; I kept it for my own information—I did not produce my note before the Magistrate; I was not called, and did not give evidence.

By MR. MATHEWS. I took the note a few minutes to twelve on Monday night, and the men were arrested at one on the Tuesday morning.

DANIEL ADAMS (Police Sergeant H R). On 19th July last a report was served at the Shadwell Police-station of the robbery from the Duke of Kent—I saw by the book that Phœbe Stone was the informant; I was not there at the time—special attention of the police was called to the matter—I was engaged in the case on the 20th, Saturday—I at once began to make inquiries—about one o'clock on the early morning of 23rd July I was out in plain clothes—I saw Papworth, who made a statement to me, and soon after I saw the prisoner with his brother—he came across the road, and to the best of my belief I said, "Have you anything to say to me, Feeley?"—he said, "Yes, I know who done the robbery at the Duke of Kent"—I said, "Oh"—he said, "I was standing at the "West Garden Gate on the morning of the robbery with a number of others who were waiting for employment, two men ran past these, and others followed them; another man and I came up with them in St. George's Street, they spoke to us; they said, 'We have got some money from the Duke of Kent; if you go back to Twine Court you might find a quid or two;" they took us into a coffeehouse in St. George's Street; gave us breakfast, we went from there to the Black Horse, on Tower Hill; we had some beer" (I am reading from notes I made in January, after I gave my evidence on the last occasion at the Police-court—the notes I made at the time I destroyed on or about 16th August; I burnt them with recognisances and other papers), "' and one of them put his hand into his pocket, pulled out half-a-crown, and put it back into his pocket and pulled out a two-shilling piece, and gave it to me, saying, "It has got to be divided'"—I said, "Do you know their names?"—he said, "Yes, a man named Hyde or Gleeson, and Whaley"—I said, "I don't know them; will you point them out?"—he said, "Yes," and we went together to a common lodging-house at the corner of King David Lane and High Street, shadwell—the deputy went upstairs with us; the prisoner pointed out where Whaley was sleeping at the top of the house—I roused him up—I borrowed the constable's lantern and turned the light on—the prisoner said, "That is one of them, Haley," and then he corrected himself almost directly and said "Whaley"—he said, "This man's name is Whaley"—and I said, "Yes"—I said to the prisoner, "Are you sure about this man?"—he said, "Yes; if you gave me breakfast and money I would know you"—I then told Whaley I would take him into custody for being concerned with another in stealing £4 10s. from the Duke of Kent public-house, on the morning of the 19th—he said, "I did not do it. I was there and know who did"—I took him to the station, accompanied by the prisoner—I think Gregory, the lodging-house deputy, followed us—I cannot swear he did—Gregory went upstairs with us when I arrested Whaley, and

he was present when the conversation took place, and could hear what was said, I should think—he was at the side of the bed and I at the foot—if he had been listening he must have heard—I did not notice anyone in the next bed to Whaley at the time; he was sleeping next the wall—the prisoner called him Haley first, and corrected himself almost directly, and then Whaley, waking up, said, "My name is Whaley; "I am not very sure on that point, and I think the prisoner corrected himself almost directly—I think Whaley said, "My name is Whaley, "but I won't say positively he did—I am quite sure when the prisoner spoke to me out of doors before we got to the lodging-house he gave the name of Whaley—we left Whaley at the Police-station and returned to the lodging-house—we went into the room underneath that from which I took Whaley, and the prisoner went up to Hyde or Gleeson, and I told him the charge—he said nothing at all in reply—I brought him downstairs, and handed him over to Papworth—I am quite clear this was the morning of the 23rd—Papworth took him to the station, I and the prisoner following—I sent for Phœbe Stone and Mrs. Higgins and Mrs. Rolls; Gleeson and Whaley were placed with eight or nine others, but the three women could not identify them—Phœbe Stone said that neither of these men, to the best of her belief, was the man who assaulted her and took the money; I believe those were her words; that was not the morning she went to identify them, but some time afterwards—Mrs. Higgins did not, to the best of my belief, tell me they were not the men; I won't swear she did not; I don't remember it; she did not identify them, nor did Mrs. Rolls—I do not remember the two men being left among the others for the prisoner to go and see a second time—the two men were detained on the prisoner's statement, and on the 23rd were brought before the Magistrate; the prisoner's and other evidence was taken—they were remanded until the 26th; no evidence was taken then—they were remanded till the 2nd August, and then till the 9th—the prisoner did not appear on the 26th; on the 2nd he was present—he told the Magistrate he had been threatened, and that he was afraid to come up to give evidence against the two men; I think he said he had been assaulted by the two Taylors, and that was the reason he had not come on the 26th, but that he had come in consequence of a warrant on the 2nd—I apprehended him, and he was locked up for the night—his previous evidence was read, and he gave evidence on the 2nd—the two men were remanded till the 9th—on the 3rd Brooks and Brady were re-arrested, brought before the Magistrate on Monday, 5th, and remanded till 9th, so that all four might be brought up together—Mr. Lushington was the Magistrate on 2nd, 5th, and 9th—I had previously apprehended Brooks and Brady on the 23rd—people were brought, but could not identify them, and they were liberated—owing to further information they were apprehended again on 3rd August—I remember finding a letter on the mantelpiece in the charge-room on 9th August; I believe it was written by the convict Brady to me; my address was on the envelope; I don't know how it came in the charge-room—I glanced over the letter, and, seeing it came from Brady, and as the remand was coming on at eleven that day, and it was then quarter-past ten, I went to the inspector and asked him what I should do with the letter—he said, "You had better see the superintendent"—I took the train and went to Leman Street,

and inquired if the superintendent was in, and I was told that he had gone to the Police-court—I returned to the Police-court and saw the superintendent and showed him the letter—he said, "You had better show it to the Magistrate," as the remand was coming on directly—when I got into the witness box I handed the letter to the Magistrate in the presence of every person in the Court; Sergeant Smith saw me hand it—Q. Do you represent you did all that with regard to a letter you had not read?—A. I saw it came from Brady concerning the robbery; and I only glanced over it—I did not read it thoroughly—I know the names of the persons who were mentioned in it—I would not swear they were not mentioned as being the names of persons who had actually committed the robbery—beyond handing the letter to the Magistrate I did not think it was my duty to do anything—the prisoners were then committed for trial—the inspector did not read the letter—the superintendent, I think, looked at it; it was 11 o'clock when I got back to the Court on the 9th; I saw the prisoner in the passage and had conversation with him—I was speaking with Moore, the barman at the Duke of Kent—I said to the prisoner, "Have you any doubt about those men? if so, you had better mention it to the Magistrate before your depositions are signed, because they will very likely be committed for trial to-day"—he replied, looking at Moore, "If you gave me 2s. and a breakfast, would not I know you? What do you want me to say, Sergeant?"—I said, "Simply to speak the truth, that is all"—he might have said, "What else do you want me to say?"—I swear he said, "What do you want me to say?" whether he added the word else I don't know—I am quite certain I replied, "Speak the truth"—when he spoke about the 2s. and the breakfast, Moore replied, "I should think so"—Moore was listening to the conversation—I gave a statement to Inspector Roots on 18th October, in which I mentioned this conversation—I know I said to the prisoner, "Speak the truth"—whether I followed with the words, "Very well, Feeley; if you are satisfied that is all right, "I am not sure; I might have added it—this is my signature to the statement—my answer may-have been to him, "Very well, Feeley; if you are satisfied that is all right"—I don't remember those were the words I said to Roots—I might have said to the prisoner, "Speak the truth"—I would not swear it—the prisoners were committed for trial on the 9th—I saw Mrs. Gregory frequently while the prisoners were under remand—I saw Mr. Gregory and Papworth and Mrs. Higgins in the course of the case—I don't remember speaking to Mrs. Higgins; I may have seen her—Mrs. Higgins and Papworth were not called as witnesses; Papworth was there—the men were tried on 14th August at Clerkenwell Sessions, and convicted—7at the trial Papworth and Mrs. Higgins were not called—Phœbe Stone and Moore were called—I don't swear Mrs. Higgins was not called; I think I have no doubt about it; she might have been requested by the other Sergeant to be there—I don't remember that she was called—Gleeson called as witnesses Mrs. Coffey, Haley, and Jennings—with the exception of Brady, who was represented by Mr. Purcell, they were not represented at Sessions—O'Neill was called by Whaley; he was the only witness asked for—neither Mr. nor Mrs. Gregory were called—to the best of my belief Mrs. Gregory did not tell me during the remands at the Police-court that Hyde and Whaley were innocent; I don't remember her speaking to me in the passage of the

Police-court—she told me so in her own lodging-house; not on the night of the arrest, but some time afterwards; I saw her so often through the direction of Inspector Roots, I don't remember when Mrs. Gregory told me that; it was some considerable time after the 23rd—neither prisoner called her—if they had, no doubt she would have been told—I did not think it my duty to mention the letter in the course of the trial—I did not mention it—my notes contained what Whaley told me—they were destroyed on or about the 16th August, two days after the trial was over—I know Mr. Frayling, one of the assistant solicitors to the Treasury—on 28th December I came into Court and said to him, "I have not got my notes with me; shall I have time to go back and fetch them?"—he said, "You had better stop now"—I did not say a word to him then about having destroyed my notes; those were the notes I referred to; those were the dates that I have taken from books in the ease—I did not say a word about the destruction of the notes—I had not got even these notes at the time.

Cross-examined. Whaley said at the chambers in answer to the charge, "I did not do it; I was there; I know who did"—I am quite sure of those words—Gleeson said nothing in reply to the charge—when the charge was read to him at the station, he said, looking at you, "I will give you something when I come out"—you have never before given me any information, and I have known you six or seven years—you have never spoken to me before this about robberies—I don't remember as we were going to the Police-station you running away from Gregory, and saying to me, "Sergeant, did you hear what he said?"—the only conversation you have had with me since the first time you were arrested on the charge was when I went up to attend the Police-court; you said you had work to do next morning and did not think you should be able to attend at the Police-court—I told Mr. Sayer, but afterwards you attended and got the papers yourself—I had these depositions under my arm to give you—those were the only words I had with you since your arrest—you did not go to Albert Street with me, or give me any other names but those of Whaley and Hyde—I was looking for Curly for another robbery—you did not go with me to find him—I went round with Gregory—I don't know if you were there or not.

Re-examined. Gregory went with me to where Curly was staying for the night—when Gleeson was arrested he said not a word; he uttered no threat—this statement of mine to Roots on 5th October was read over to me and signed by me as being correct (MR. MATHEWS read part of the statement containing the passage: "Hyde said nothing except a threat to Feeley")—A. That was after the charge was read over to him—Q. "Hyde said nothing except a threat to Feeley; that was 'I will give you something when I come out.' Hyde and "Whaley were taken to the Thames Police-court"—A. They could not be taken to the Thames Police court—something is left out of that statement—it might be what was read over and signed by me as being correct, but it might be passed over—I have given you about the threat to-day—when the charge was read over to Hyde he said, "I will give you something when I come out."

FREDERICK GEORGE FRAYLING . I am a clerk in the office of the Solicitor to the Treasury and Director of Public Prosecutions—I was in

charge of this prosecution as representing the Director—on 28th December I spoke to Sergeant Adams with regard to his notes—he said, "I have not got them with me "; and asked my permission to go and fetch them—he said nothing about the destruction of those notes, or his original notes in the case, or anything that led me to believe he had not got them in his possession—I inferred he had them at home, and that he was asking my permission to go and fetch them—this is the order of the Attorney General, signed by him (I know his signature), directing the preferment of the bill, and setting out the special reasons on which the prosecution is to proceed under the second section of the Prosecution for Offences Act, 1879.

Witnesses for the Defence.

JOHN GOODYEAR . I am a Police Sergeant attached to Shad well Station—I was in charge of the station on the morning of 23rd July last—two men, Hyde and Whaley, were brought in—I took the charge and read it over to them—they made no reply to it—one of them said to me, "I will give you something when I come out"—they said nothing about Tilbury—I have not been called before.

GEOROE BUSH (Recalled by the Prisoner), I saw you outside this Court last Saturday morning week; I told you the morning fixed for the trial, and said you need not wait any longer, but I would fetch down the notice to you where you lived—you promised me that you would meet me at your house at two for the purpose of receiving the notice—I went that morning and saw your brother—he asked me for the notice; I said I would give it to you—I went to a public-house with him—I had some conversation with him there nothing to do with this case—I served him with a subpoena to attend the Court—I did not say to him, "This case is all bosh; it will end in smoke"—I will swear to that—I went to your place last Friday afternoon, and you were not at home; as I came back I saw you standing outside a shop in Cable Street with two barrow loads timber—there was a public-house next door, and I and you and your brother went in there; I believe I paid for the three—I offered you a notice outside first—we went inside because we could not read it in the street—it was a notice of further evidence to be given on the trial—I read it to you, and said three or four further witnesses would be brought against you; that Mr. Hillyard was one, and Patrick Feeley and Edward Taylor—I don't know why Taylor is not here—it was stated in the notice that they might be called on your trial; the clerk to the Public Prosecutor gave me the notice—I did not say, u I can tell you a point or two; they are committing: perjury against you "; nothing of the sort—I gave you one notice on the Saturday night—that was the first notice; the notice of the time bill being found—I took you into a public-house the day I served you with the notice—these gentlemen don't know what sort of a hovel your place is; I could not take you there, so I took you into the public-house—I passed no remark there, beyond reading you the notice—I did not say to you, "Why did not these people say before the Magistrate, when they were charged, that they were at Tilbury?"

Cross-examined. On the Saturday when the notice of the true bill being found was to be served on the prisoner, I went to his house and saw his brother Patrick, and went with him to a public-house—I had no particular reason for that; I cautioned him with regard to the subpoena I

had served on him—I was aware at that time that I was a possible witness in the case—I had a notice to read to him—it was read outside to him on the evening of the same day I served the notice on the prisoner of the true bill being found—I went into a public-house with him—I had no purpose in going in—I gave him drink—I can see now it was a mistake—I gave him the notice that other witnesses might be called against him on the trial—at that time he was in company with Patrick—I went with them into a public-house then—I have no explanation to offer for that—I did not make any reference to the trial—I read the notice of further evidence to him, and he refused to take it—that was all; I made no reference to the trial or anything else.

GEORGE WILLIAM COOPER . I am a foreman in the service of the London and St. Katharine Dock Company—it is my duty to take on men there to shift goods from the vessels into the warehouses—I have here the book in which I enter the men employed on 19th July last—I took on the first lot of men at eleven—I have the names of three Phillips' here—I took one Phillips on at eleven, and he worked two hours, eleven to one, and was paid on with a shilling (looking at witness Phillips)—I won't guarantee that he was employed that day, it is so far back; I saw that man paid off with a shilling, it was my duty to pay him (Phillips: "That is the man that paid me, the clerk had to tell this gentleman to pay me off")—I had eight men on at 12.30, but no man of the name of Phillips.

Cross-examined. All the three Phillips' were taken on at the same time, at eleven—the other two worked till four—I should not like to swear that this Phillips was one of the three, it is so far back—I took a man named Whaley on from eleven to four that day.

By the Prisoner. I have two Feeleys down at eleven on the 19th, I could not say they were you and your brother—I have nothing to do with St. Bride's Wharf.

DANIEL ADAMS (Recalled by the Prisoner.) I called at your house one night last week; I went there by the direction of the chief clerk at the Thames Police-court—you were at the Police-court the next morning—you followed me along, and said you would not go to the Police-court, that I had got enough to tell the clerk, that you were employed and could not go, and if you were wanted I must send for you—you said you had received a little information from Bush, and as soon as you mentioned him I said, "Feeley, I will have nothing whatever to say about the case."

Cross-examined. He spoke about Bush saying something, and I determined I would not speak to anybody about the case till I spoke before the police or the Magistrate; I did not let him go any further; I stopped him, he only mentioned the name of the Sergeant; beyond that I heard nothing—he did not mention that the Sergeant had served him with a notice; he told me nothing.

PATRICK FEELEY . Last Friday night, about seven, Sergeant Bush came down to your house, and asked for you—he had a paper, which ho said he would not give to anybody but you—he took me into a publichouse, and gave me a glass of mild-and-bitter—he did not speak; a word to me about this case—I walked away from him—he did not tell me anything about this case, or how it was going on—he did not say, "This

case will end in smoke"—on the morning of 19th July I remember following two men, in company with Phillips, from Paddy's Goose to the bottom of Albert Street and High Street, Shadwell—I was standing by Paddy's Goose at the time they came by—we all went along High Street till we came to a coffee-shop in Queen Street, Tower Hill, and we went and had breakfast together, me, Phillips, Clements, and Portlock, who has served five years, and Clements gave me a half-crown—this coffee-shop is about half a mile from the one in Cannon Street, St. George's—I did not communicate with you at all about this robbery—I did not tell you where I had been, or what I had got—I went to work that day at eleven for Mr. Cooper—Phillips went to work at the same time—I got paid off at two o'clock, for going out drinking with the half-crown I got from Clements—I did not speak to you—about twelve you asked me for threepence, and I said I had not got it—I did not tell you the names of the men I had followed.

Cross-examined. The witness Phillips is the man I was with that morning—he was standing outside Paddy's Goose—as we were standing there the two men passed me—I followed them to where they stood at the corner of Albert Street, a distance of about twelve yards—one of them said to his companion, "I think young Dick is nicked"—I heard him say it, and then they walked smartly away. (I afterwards saw the man who said that, in prison at Pentonville, and picked him out as the man that made that remark; it was Edwin Bryce)—I then went back to Paddy's Goose, and in about two or three minutes' time two more men came running past—one of them was Clements, Dick; he parts his hair, and has a fringe on his forehead—he had a flyman's hat on; not a billycock, one that you can fold up and put in your pocket—he spoke to me, and asked if I had seen two other fellows running along the highway—I told him I had, and what I had heard one of them say to the other—upon that he offered me to have a drink with him, and I and Phillips, Clements, and Portlock went in together, and had breakfast; Clements paid for it—after leaving the coffee-shop they shared the money, going up the Minories; 10s. each—it was from that money he took the half-crowns that he gave to me and Phillips—then we went into the Three Crowns, at the top of Mansell Street, and had some beer, which Dick paid for—then we walked to some shop I knew as Gardener's, and then separated, Clements and Portlock going towards the dock, and Phillips and I going back to the dock gates, where I saw my brother—I did not speak to him—that was about ten minutes to eleven—my brother had not been with me in the coffee-shop; he had not been with us that morning till I saw him outside the dock gate—I remember Phillips coming out about twelve to get some dinner—I came out with him—we had got work before that, at eleven—we went and had our dinner at Paddy's Goose—I went and had half a pint of beer—I remember Portlock saying to me, "I was holding a conversation with the barmaid, while Dick was in another compartment round the other side of the house; Dick was getting the money when the woman saw him, and he struck her and ran away"—that was what Portlock told me of his share in the matter—I knew Dick Clements before this—ho used to wear his hat at the back of his head, so as to show his fringe—I heard of Gleeson's arrest—I went to the Police-court on the second and third remand—Phillips did not go with me, he was

inside the Court, with Sergeant Adams, when I got there; I saw him there—I went to give my evidence for Gleeson—I saw Sergeant Adams—he asked me if I had seen my brother Charles; I told him I had not—he then said, as Charlie was not there, he would not require me and Phillips—I did not go to the Court after that—I saw Inspector Boots about this on 20th November last, and made a statement to him in King David Lane Station—on 25th November I was taken to Chelmsford Gaol, where Clements, in his ordinary clothing, was put among fourteen other men; I was in a room waiting to be called, and Inspector Boots told me I should go down and see fourteen or fifteen prisoners, and I was to touch the man I knew, the man that gave me the half-crown, and I touched him; I put my hand on his chest, and Boots walked over and said, "What do you know about him?" and I said, "This is the man that gave mo the half-crown"—next day, the 26th, I was taken to Pentonville, and was asked in the same way to pick out from a number of others any man I knew; I walked up to Bryce; I was asked what I knew about him, and I said, "That is the man that made the remark that young Dick was nicked"—I never knew Bryce till I saw his name in the papers—I knew Gleeson and Whaley—neither of them were at the breakfast that morning; I never saw them at all that morning;—I lived in Russell Street while this case was going on—I did live in Dorset Street, in the same house as my brother.

GEORGE BUSH (Recalled). I have made every endeavour to trace Portlock; from what I can ascertain, he has left the neighbourhood and gone in a vessel abroad—I have made inquiries as to Jefferies, but have not been able to find him.

The Prisoner, in a long address, commented upon what he alleged to he the contradictory statements of the witnesses, and the untrustworthy character of the alibis, and asserted that the evidence he had originally given was the truth,

GUILTY .— Five Years' Penal Servitude.

OLD COURT.—Wednesday, February 12th, 1890.

Before Mr. Recorder

3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-205
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

205. GEORGE THORLEY (43) , Indecently assaulting Harriet Thorley on 17th December and 12th January.

MR. HUTTON Prosecuted,

GUILTY Nine Months' Hard Labour,

3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-206
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

206. HENRY SHORE , Unlawfully taking Emma Ormes out of the custody of her father that she might be carnally known.

MR. HUTTON Prosecuted,



Before Mr. Common Serjeant.

3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-207
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

207. WILLIAM WILLIS (35) PLEADED GUILTY to stealing two pewter-pots, the property of Ernest James Jonathan Banger, having been convicted at Clerkenwell, on 15th July, 1889. Six previous convictions

were proved against him, besides summary convictions, and a warder of Newgate stated that he had torn up hisclothes.— Fiftteen Months' Hard Labour, with solitary confinement the last fortnight.

3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-208
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

208. JESSE MEAKINS (18) , Stealing a blanket, the goods of James Bond.

MR. "WARBURTON Prosecuted.

BETSY BOND . I live at 24, Beckton Road; my husband is a labourer—on 15th January, between 3 and 4 p.m., I had to leave my bedroom, on the ground floor in the front, and go into my kitchen—I shut the bedroom door, which opens into a passage leading to the front door of the house—on my return, in about a quarter of an hour, I missed this blanket from the bed;—it is marked; I have its fellow—I identified it at a pawnbroker's about three-quarters of an hour or an hour after wards.

CHARLES HOWARD . I am assistant to Mr. Benjamin Howett, pawnbroker, of 7, New Road—on "Wednesday afternoon, 15th January, I received this blanket from the prisoner, who gave the name of Alfred "Williams—I lent him half-a-crown on it; this is the ticket—I asked whose it was; he said his mother's—I did not know him—our place is about 100 yards from Mrs. Bond's.

HENRY COOPER (Detective Sergeant). On 17th January I arrested the prisoner at 7 p.m.—I said, "You will be charged with stealing a blanket from Beckton Road"—he said, "I know nothing about it"—he was placed with others, and Howard identified him—I found in paper in the prisoner's boot 1s. 6d. and 11 1/2 d., and in his pocket three knives and two purses.

The Prisoner's statement before the Magistrate." I don't moan to come here any more."

GUILTY .** He then PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction of felony at this Court in September, 1889. Nine Months' Hard Labour.


Before Mr. Justice Day.

3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-209
VerdictGuilty > insane
SentenceImprisonment > insanity

Related Material

209. ELEANOR SARAH JACOBS (24) was indicted for, and charged on the Coroner's Inquisition with, the wilful murder of Emily Louisa Jacobs.


EMILY JACOBS . I am the wife of "William Jacobs, and live at 20, Payne Street, Deptford—I am the prisoner's mother; she is twenty-four years of age—she has always lived at homo with me—she had a child named Emily Louisa; it was four years of age—for eight weeks before the 21st January she had been at home ill—during that time she was not herself at all, but wandering, eccentric, and not in her own mind—she would not go out—on the morning of the 21st I was in bed—she slept in the back room upstairs with her child—about eight she came into my room and called, "Mother!" threw her hands up, and said, three times, very excitedly, "I have done it!"—I said, ""What?"—she said, "I have murdered little Emily"—I jumped out of bed, and ran into the back room adjoining mine, and there I saw the child, weltering in its blood, quite

dead—there was a quantity of blood about the room—I called my son Harry, and he came down—some months before this child was born the prisoner went out of her mind—she was very wild; she would never stay indoors—she destroyed her clothing and her hair, and said most unheard-of things; she frequently spoke of destroying herself—I got her into an infirmary, where she remained some time—when she came out she appeared better for a time, but afterwards got worse, and destroyed her things, and threatened me repeatedly—she was very affectionate to the child—at this time she was very depressed, and cried frequently, and rambled and talked sillily—she was eccentric but not violent before this.

HENRY WILLIAM JACOBS . I heard my mother, call, and went downstairs—my sister was in the passage in an excited state—she said she had tried to strangle the child, but could not, and finished it with the poker—she tried to strangle herself, but was stopped.

ALFRED BUNTING (Police Inspector). I was called to the house—I told the prisoner I should take her into custody for wilfully murdering her child—she said, "Yes"—I asked Mrs. Jacobs where the child was—the prisoner replied, "It was with me in bed; she asked me for a piece of bread, when I brought it downstairs and done it; she will be better off now, and I shall not be long here"—I found this scarf pulled tightly round the child's neck, and on a mangle close by this poker wet with blood.

PHILIP FRANCIS GILBERT . I am medical officer of Her Majesty's Prison, Holloway—the prisoner has been under my observation from the time she was brought there on 21st January—I am aware of the fads of the case—I am of opinion that she is of unsound mind; she has many delusions; she said she killed the child because she thought it would be starved, and that her people would be locked up for something she had done in buying stuff to procure abortion—I nave formed a definite opinion that she is of unsound mind.

GUILTY of the act, being insane at the time. To be detained in Holloway Prison during Her Majesty's pleasure.

Before Mr. Recorder.

3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-210
VerdictsGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentencesImprisonment > hard labour; Imprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

210. MINNIE MARIA LANGFORD (30) PLEADED GUILTY to feloniously marrying John Alfred Ellis, her husband being then living; and JOHN ALFRED ELLIS (21) to being accessory to the fact.

LANGFORD— Six Month's Hard Labour.

ELLIS— Four Months' Hard Labour.


Before Mr. Recorder.

3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-211
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

211. GEORGE JAMES DAVIS and COLEMAN SELFE were indicted for unlawfully obtaining from George William Giles, by false pretences, various sums of money, the property of John Bell and another.

MR. JELF, Q. C., with MR. GILL Prosecuted; MR. WILLIS, Q. O., with MR. GRAIN Defended Davis; MESSRS. BESLEY, BLACKWELL and BODKIN Defended Selfe.

JOHN BELL , I am chairman of a company called Bell's Asbestos Company,

the offices of which are at 118, Southwark Street—I have for many years carried on the business as manufacturers of asbestos in conjunction with my son—during all that time the defendant Davis was in our employment—he entered our employment in 1875; he was our works manager—it continued as a private concern till 1888, when it was turned into a company—during all the time ho was in our employment we had very great confidence in him; he was a thoroughly practical man, who was of great assistance to us in the business—boiler-covering is a large part of our business—it is a branch that has increased considerably of late years; it is covering boilers with asbestos—extra labour was occasionally employed by Davis—the boiler covering was entirely under Davis's control—there was a regular staff under him for carrying on the work, and who were paid weekly wages—I have from time to time seen vouchers for extra work signed by Davis—these vouchers (produced) are in Davis's handwriting—they are for different sums of money extending from January to June, 1889—in every instance they are drawn, "Pay Coleman for wages to this date"—I did not know Coleman as an individual—Davis never spoke to me with regard to these payments, or with reference to Coleman—previous to that Davis gave mo vouchers for payments—Davis had no right to pay any money except for wages—all these vouchers represent money as paid to Coleman for wages—the nature of the employment was boiler-covering, and is in every instance specified on the vouchers—on production of a voucher of this kind Davis would be entitled to receive the money from the cashier—a wages-book was commenced in July, 1888, after the incorporation of the company (book produced)—on the date of 7th July I find an entry in Davis's handwriting of £15 charged to Coleman for "boiler composition under an agreement for work in hand"—on 14th July is a similar entry—week by week, from 7th July, 1888, to 19th January, 1889, there are items of a similar kind charged in the same way, sometimes £15, sometimes £20, and sometimes £10—from January, 1888, to January, 1889, Davis had no right to expend any money except for wages—he never represented to me during that period that he was spending money for any other purpose—he remained in my employment till February, 1889—when I discharged him I wrote him these two letters, one in my official capacity as chairman, and the other in my private capacity. (Letters read: "Dover, 10th February, 1889.—Mr. Davis,—Having carefully considered all that I have ascertained in regard to you and what you have advanced on your own behalf, I have very reluctantly come to the conclusion that you can no longer remain in the service of the company. If I retain you it can only be in your present position, and your misconduct has made that impossible, as your remaining in the confidential post of authority you have held would be destructive of the discipline of the establishment. You must therefore understand that you are no longer in the service of Bell's Asbestos Company, Limited. The solicitors of the company will ascertain what is due to you, and that will be paid to you forthwith.—JOHN BELL, Chairman of Bell's Asbestos Company. ""8th March, 1889.—G. J. Davis, Esq.—Dear Sir,—In reply to your letter of 8th March, I have to say that for a considerable time it had been suggested that you were not loyally serving this company, but that much of your time, when out of doors, was otherwise occupied than in looking after boiler-covering jobs. Means were taken to ascertain what you were doing when you were off

the company's premises, and it was found that a greater portion of the time for which the company paid you was passed by you in public-houses. For this reason you were discharged from the company's service.—Tours truly, J. C. BELL, Managing Director Bell's Asbestos Company, Limited. With regard to your account and the alleged omissions, will you please point out the omissions, etc.?")—about 5th or 6th February I asked him how it was those amounts received under these vouchers had not been properly accounted for and the accounts closed in the books—I called his attention to the absence of the voucher from a person who was stated to have received the money, and demanded an explanation—he admitted he had failed to obtain it, but said he would do so at once—at that time I had no personal knowledge of Coleman—a day or two afterwards Davis brought me this document, and said, "I have brought you Mr. Coleman's receipt; "Bead, "7th February, received of Bell's Asbestos Company, Limited, £620, at various dates from January, 1888, to date, on account of boiler covering, etc.; this includes previous receipts from November. Signed, Coleman"—it bears a receipt stamp—when he brought this receipt I asked what he meant by producing so un business-like a document, as I must have one setting forth in detail the names and addresses of the persons for whom the work had been done, the number of feet on boilers and steam pipes covered, and the several dates on which the jobs had been carried out—he promised to obtain that document; he made no suggestion that the wire had been used for any purpose except boiler-covering—n few days afterwards he brought this account in his handwriting—he laid it on my desk when I was not in—I found it in my office—it shows the amount paid to Coleman, £620, from January, 1888, to date; showing the amount of boiler-covering done, and the price at which it was done—it gives exhaustively details of how the number of feet was made up, the names of people for whom work was done, showing their addresses, the feet covered, and price charged by Coleman for doing the work—it shows a total of 48,167 feet at 3Jd. a foot—I am able to trace all those names in my books—after Davis was dismissed that account was handed to accountants for examination—I first had information that something was wrong with the account, in May—I then went to Messrs. Wontner—I was in bad health at the time, and went to the South of France from February to April; later in the year I went to America—on October 22nd, at a board meeting, there was a resolution to prosecute the two defendants—we had paid gratuities to persons where this work had been done—the work is work of rather a delicate character, and requires looking after—we have paid gratuities to secure special services of the men, that the materials might have fair play—Davis had nothing to do with that money—he never suggested that any of this money had gone in gratuities or commissions, until this matter was at the Police-court.

Croat-examined by MR. WILLIS. I first became acquainted with Mr. Davis in 1875—he remained with me until February, 1889, nearly fifteen years—I had every confidence in him—I never charged him with taking a shilling of my money—the asbestos business increased very rapidly—we started the business of Bell and Sons in 1879—for the first year or so it was confined to about £2,000—I don't recollect whether in 1884 or 1885 it got to something like £30,000 returns, but it is very likely—if you say it increased to about £84,000 it is very likely, but I really cannot recollect the figures—the boiler-covering business becam

very important part of our business—about one-tenth of our returns was in respect of the boiler-covering—supposing the returns were £70,000 or £80,000, the one-tenth would be about £7,000—the wages on that £7,000 would be about £900; no, I am wrong; I have no means of ascertaining the figures here—the £650 would be given to Davis to hand over to Coleman—my son Frank is managing director; he is here—my son looked after the payments and general outgoings—he would see these large payments made for boiler-covering, in addition to the actual persons in our employ—we had a number of men in our employ doing work for us—we had seven or eight men in the boiler covering regularly paid every week—Davis occasionally got orders for us; very occasionally; not frequently—I said at the Police-court, "He was works manager, he was allowed to travel about for the benefit of the company, getting orders for the company;" that was his position—the wages of a boiler-covering man would be about 33s. 6d., and the juniors £1—I did not see these vouchers of Coleman's during 1888; it was not my business to examine these vouchers—the accountants would examine them—I never saw a man named Coleman about the premises—there would be a cheque drawn weekly for wages; the bookkeeper would write out the cheque, and it would be signed by two directors and the secretary; the directors would most commonly be my son Frank and any other director that could be got—he would have a list put before him of what was wanted for wages for asbestos—my son would know what would be paid per week for wages Mr. Giles, the cashier, would get the money for distribution—each man would produce his voucher, showing what wages were required, and Giles would pay on that voucher—Davis would make out the vouchers for the wages for the other departments—that (produced) is in Davis's handwriting—as a rule the wages would be paid to the men who present the vouchers; I did not know the amount paid by Giles to Davis for wages from March 1888, to January, 1889—Giles has not told me, nor has my son—Davis was discharged in February, 1889—my son Frank was then already in the company; Herbert came in later; he did not come in at the time Davis was dismissed, not till June or July, 1889—I got this document in February—I consulted Mr. Wontner in May; I did not prosecute until 22nd October—the names on this blue paper are all real customers; the quantity of work in it is quite correct; I know that Davis joined a rival company; I cannot say at what date; I did not know of it till July; I did not know it in May; I swear that—I knew he was trying to form a company; I knew he was trying to do business with people to whom I had been in the habit of selling—he brought an action against us on 17th May, 1889, for wrongful dismissal—I did not know it till the 25th—I received a note from my solicitor on the 25th, saying that an action had been commenced for wrongful dismissal—a defence to that action was put in by my solicitor—I did not delay putting in a defence to the action until I knew Davis was charged with fraud—I do not know that the defence was not put in till the 18th November; I can't say anything about the date— Messrs. Stibbard, Gibson, and Co. were the solicitors in the civil action—I do not know that there was a counter-claim against Davis for sums I had entrusted to him to lay out for us; I know nothing about it—I don't know what the solicitors have done in the action at all—I do not know that the whole of the sums in

this indictment have been put in the counter-claim—I know nothing at all of what is going on in the civil action—I entrusted no money to him; he got the money by fraud—I have ceased to have much personal supervision of this business for the last year—I had given personal supervision during the year 1888—I had been in close intimacy with my son Frank in that year and in the previous years—I knew that money was being given for the purpose I have already stated—I never knew that money was given to persons to get orders; nothing of the kind—I had a traveller named Perry in my employment—my son never told me he was directing the travellers to promise 10 per cent, commission on all orders received—I knew letters like, this (produced) were leaving my place of business in 1885—this letter was written by my son in 1885—I believe it means Mr. Abury was to be told that he would get 10 per cent, on all orders he gave—"collaring engineers" is giving tips to engineers in the employ of persons on whose behalf they are to give orders—if you don't tip these men, our goods don't get fair play—our travellers did not tell me the men were afraid of taking money lest their names should appear on the business being turned into a limited company—I was there in 1888—I never heard from my son of that letter from Archer; I was very likely in America when it came—I go every year—my son kept me posted up in important matters arising in the business—(MR. WILLIS read the letter from Archer)—I don't know who the R. M. Company are—a traveller in our employment named Elmslie had an account at the Birkbeck Bank into which he paid a cheque which we paid him for commissions; he then drew his own cheques on that bank to the persons who received the commissions—I have heard that—I cannot say when I discovered that; it did not strike me as strange—there was nothing at all in it—there would be no difficulty in tracing the money in his hand from the company's account—our company was formed in May, 1888—it is quite likely that I gave Mr. Elmslie £20 about 28th September, 1888, to be distributed among the employés of the London and South-Western Railway—Mr. Higgs, manager of the machinery department there, may have had £15 for commission'; I have no doubt about it—he looked after the working of engines—he does no labour with his own hands—the commission books were removed from 18, Southwark Street to the Hop Exchange, where we took another office—we did not put our name up till we were summoned—we only took those books there first of all—on the day we did that all the clerks concerned in keeping the books received notice that they need not attend during the day—I know nothing about it—the clerks kept a careful record of all we paid—I never paid much attention to that department—it is highly probable we gave Elmslie as much as £125 to pay away in commission—very likely it would be difficult to see an account of ours wherein we had not given commission—I deny it was for obtaining orders—this "Gas Light and Coke Company, Beckton. Mr. Gilman, storekeeper; you must get this man's orders and palm him well. Get him to send an order for packing and oil "is in my son's writing—-palm means tip—"New River Company, Green Lanes, Morris, superintendent; see this man and palm him if possible"—that is, tip him if possible—it may be that was to get an order from him—I do not know that £5 was given to Mr. Elmslie, the traveller, for Mr. Clark, at the Woolwich Arsenal—I never heard of it till now—I see an entry here,

"W. Clark, £5"—I don't know anything about it—I don't know that Elmslie has paid £125 to one man—we gave him £125 to distribute—travellers had not discretion as to what they should give to the persons with whom they were dealing—they would submit an estimate for what they require for this purpose, and if that is approved, the money is given—the estimate is not brought to me; to my son Frank—in the case of Elmslie, we gave him the money to pay—I believe Perry had money occasionally to convey—you will have to get from my son the names of travellers who have had money to pay for commissions—Mr. Wayland has got orders for us—my son Frank is married to Mr. Wayland's sister—I have not given money to Wayland to pay to men who were to receive it—I do not know that it was done; I know nothing about the details—I do not know of money being sent to Smart for distribution—all this information you can get from my son—among the travellers there was no one who had discretion to promise money to persons who gave orders—Davis had not authority to promise money to persons from whom he got orders—he was not a traveller; he obtained orders for us—he would come and make a proposal—I believe we have a book called the warehouse order-book—I don't think Davis would enter much in that book—I don't think that orders would be entered in that book; Davis would ask as to what he should give; I don't know whether what he gave would be entered in that book; this (produced) is the order-book—I do not know of such a book as the warehouse order-book—if I have given Davis a single shilling, it would be entered in this book—if there is no entry, we could not have paid him the money—it is untrue that he had orders under the name of Coleman—a man named Stuchelschied was in my employ; I believe he took away copies of some of my books and papers; he stole them—I did not suppose that he had got the warehouse order books; I never heard of warehouse order-books—(letter produced)—this is a letter to Stuchelschied from my solicitor, stating that the managing director has instructed them to make application for two warehouse order books; I am not the managing director; this is dated June, 1889—solicitors may make mistakes as to the name of books, as you have done—I don't know who has got them; I knew nothing about it—I don't know what they contain—my son did not employ Davis to try and get the books from Stuchelschied, and to pay him £10 for it; it is absolutely untrue—I gave a declaration of fifty shares in favour of Davis in payment of old service, provided he was with the company five years—that was given in August, 1888, and I dismissed him in February, 1889.

Cross-examined by MR. BESLEY. I never saw Selfe until he was summoned to the Police-court; the only writing supposed to be his are the words over the stamp on the unsatisfactory receipt that was brought to me by Davis a day or two before he left.

Re-examined. At the time the receipt was produced to me I was not aware that the Coleman, whose name is written across the stamp, was the same person as Selfe—up to just before Davis's dismissal I had been perfectly satisfied with his conduct, and had trusted him implicitly—I had not overhauled his accounts, nor found any fault with him, and I had absolute faith in him—the document he produced seemed to me a reasonable one—I did not know at that time that none of the work had been done; I found it out afterwards—as to the commissions, that was left principally to my son—I know nothing about the letters referred to by

Mr. Willis as to getting hold of this or that man—this commission-book was regularly kept, and the sums paid entered, even down to a penny—it contains a list of the customers in the first column, then the invoices, and then a statement of the commission, so much per cent., carried out—that book and every book was regularly submitted to the accountants for audit.

By the COURT. In some cases our travellers were paid by salary, but generally by commission—the larger the order they got the greater their remuneration; that gave them facility in the way of gratuities to obtain orders, and so increase their emolument—Davis was not in the capacity of a traveller; he had permission to get orders if he could—he had a fixed salary of £300 a year, and a commission of 2 1/2 percent, on the profits of his department—his income would not depend on the orders he got; that was a kind of addition to the income he received.

By MR. WILLIS. We provided him with a horse and trap to go round and get orders; he represented that if he had that facility given him he could obtain orders.

FRANCIS CARBUTT BELL . I was engaged with my father in this business for about seven years, and then with the company for eighteen months—this matter of commissions was entirely under my charge—commissions were given as a rule on all orders obtained; there was no difficulty in obtaining the first order, but to retain the account commissions were given, as is the custom in this trade, to the engineer or whoever controls the ordering department; if commission was not given, the goods never went right; if it was given they went right—in that way orders were influenced by the commission given—every invoice was entered in the commission-book, and then the engineer's name was placed against the invoice account and whatever he was to receive; and against the traveller's name was put 5 or 2 1/2 per cent., or whatever it was, to help me to understand the position and amount of importance of the men, and then I filled in what they were to obtain and sent them what I chose—about 4 per cent, a year on the turn-over was paid in that way in commissions—it came to about £4,000—that covered all the business—the proportion for boiler-covering was considerably less than on other portions of the business, because boiler-covering composition is mainly made up in labour—there are wages for putting it on, and I should not pay commission on labour, which is included in the price we do it at; and therefore we only pay commission on the amount of stuff used—if £7,000 was the entire turn-over in the boiler-covering department for a year, probably £300 would be paid in commission all over the jobs—Davis occasionally came to me to recommend persons who ought to have commission—I cannot recollect any specific instances where I let him have the money to do it, but I have no doubt he came to me occasionally, and I certainly carried out what he proposed or recommended, because he had better knowledge about the job than I had—Davis certainly had not authority to give commissions without an order from me—I don't know that I should have objected if he paid a small amount like half-a-crown or 5s, or even a sovereign, if he gave a proper reason; but he never had authority to do it—there is absolutely no truth in the statement that he had authority to pay £620 in one year by £20 or £15 at a time—I did not know he was doing it, or purporting to do it—he produced vouchers to the cashier, and I never saw them—I have only vouchers for

a portion of the money, because it was inserted in the wages-book by himself, and then he would not require a voucher—that was after the system was changed, and instead of vouchers entries were made in the wages-book—I have no doubt that after 2nd June, 1888, the entries appear in the wages-book—the two systems did not overlap—I did not see the vouchers—we trusted Davis, and believed he was correct—we should have trusted him in every respect for any amount; we are sorry now for our confidence—we left it to Giles, who honoured the vouchers presented by Davis, and gave him the money—I demanded no explanation from Davis of what he had done with the money—I never looked into it—I found it out when the accountant asked me what these vouchers were for—sums appearing in the wages-book would be for wages—up to the time I was before the Magistrate I never heard it alleged it was for commission—I never gave him authority to deal with the matter pretending it was wages, it being commission—there was no necessity to do so—we did not, in order to blind the shareholders, let it go under the head of wages instead of letting it go under commission; otherwise, why not have done away with the commission-books?—these books have been open to the shareholders—we are not afraid of anything.

Cross-examined by MR. WILLIS. I have heard it suggested in my father's cross-examination that moneys received under the name of Coleman had been used for the purpose of making presents and paying commissions—I was turned out of the Police court when my father was giving evidence—I don't think I heard it there—I never heard one word of my father's evidence then—I was there on every day this inquiry was held—I heard that the idea of the defence was that this money taken in the name of Coleman was used for commissions, and that my father kept saying he did not know, but his son would know—I don't know that Mr. Grain, who appeared for the prisoner, kept asking that I should be called—after my father's evidence I believe I was told he did—I was not called—I have known Davis a very long time—I gave Davis £10 to give to Stuchelschied to hold his mouth, because Stuchelschied had been in the commission department, and knew so much that he could do us serious injury by publishing the details of the business in the Pall Mall Gazette—Davis represented he had so much power over Stuchelschied (which he has proved since he has) that he would stop his mouth to prevent him doing damage to us, and we gave Davis £10 to procure papers from Stuchelschied—we never sent for Davis that I know of—I sent that telegram to Davis on 20th February, asking him to come at once to see me—I knew he was aware of the way in which the business was conducted; he had the papers already—when I first had an interview with him I knew the papers were in his possession, and I knew I had written very imprudent things which I did not wish to be published, and so I gave Davis £10—I have nothing to do with the defence to the action—there was a warehouse order-book in our business; we have produced everything that can be produced—that book would show any orders which Davis got—I cannot be absolutely certain that every order would be inserted—there were so very few orders that he obtained—I did not write in the order-book the money that was to be paid by him—he may have made notes in that order-book of moneys he had paid away; I cannot say—he did not get an order for us at Whiteley's—we paid money there; I don't know how much; the books will show—I don't think Davis paid

that; I don't swear he did not—I have a slight recollection he came to me about the Whiteley affair, and asked for £5 to pay to the men—if he did the vouchers will show it; the entry would be there, or he would not have obtained the money—I did not enter very fully into a system of bribery—I palmed people right and left in order to retain orders, not to get them—I may have palmed to get orders—I promised if orders were given they should get a commission—I wrote this letter, "North London Railway.—Go and see Weal…. You must see Brigan, assistant to Mr. Parke; he is palmed by me. Don't mention Parke, but work him well for packing, jointing, etc."—we had had loads of orders from the North London Railway then—I have no doubt they came from Mr. Parke, the locomotive superintendent—Mr. Brigan, his assistant, had no interest in the thing; he could not influence an order—I did not palm him to get an order; he has no power to give one, nor to get an order from Parke—"Work him well for packing and jointing" was so that the material might be worked well—I certainly wanted the orders; I wanted nothing else—I wrote, "Gas Light and Coke Company, Beckton; Mr. Oilman, storekeeper. You must get this man's orders, and palm him well, Get him to send an order for packing and oil"—that was to tell him if he sent us orders he would be recognised in the ordinary course of business—I thought of distributing one thousand brace of grouse; I have done it several times—I don't know that Davis has paid for birds that have been distributed among our customers—he did not, I won't swear it; if he did, the firm paid him—my father does not know the internal working of the business—I wrote this letter or gave instructions for it with a list of recipients for grouse, to be sent at the latter end of August to managers of sewage, gas, and water works, and such concerns, and surveyors of local boards—I did not go abroad when the Act of Parliament came in which rendered it a criminal affair to give anything to anybody in the employment of a public body to induce them to give orders—Mr. Goodyear did not complain of having the cigars—I do not know he complained of others having them; I don't know that we altered our method in November, 1889, after the Act came into operation—Mr. Perry used to be our traveller; this is my letter to him. (This enclosed a copy of the abstract of the New Corrupt Practices Act for him to peruse carefully', and said that in future no commission must be paid or any presents made either at Christmas or any other time to anyone coming under the terms of the Act, and that if any commission had been paid or present made to any person coming under the terms of the Act, steps must be taken to get such moneys refunded, and a receipt obtained; and that no deviation could be made from these instructions)—I have the warehouse order-book now—there are the names of the Gas Light and Coke Company, London and South-Western Railway, the Royal Mail Steam Packet Company; large sums—large sums have been paid by us in former years; they are all in the books; very probably the steward of Lord Salisbury has received something—the Great Eastern Railway engineer did not—the Lambeth and Kent Waterworks are there—I wrote, "The storekeeper is right"—the storekeeper is the man we keep right very likely—I palmed Mr. Cleverly—then there are the General Steam Company at Deptford, Taylor Bros and Company's works—J. B. Dakin; that is a splendid account;" the manager is palmed, oil and everything is there"—as near as I can say, we paid about eight per cent, on the turnover for the orders at the sugar

refinery—I cannot say what the total amount is, because Mr. Dakin has gone up a tree; you can refer to the books—my father knows nothing about Woolwich Arsenal; I do—my father's way of putting it was that nothing was given to anybody except he was going to look alter materials, and so on—it is not mine perhaps, and never has been—I don't know if Major Clark had £5—Elmslie evidently had instructions from me to pay Mr. Clark £5—I don't know if that is Major Clark—I should say certainly it was not—he is one of the engineers at the Arsenal, I should say—I believe it was paid to a common man—I wrote, "Gas Light and Coke Company, Pimlico. Square this place thoroughly up"—I know nothing of "Gas Company, Horseferry Road, J. H. Peterson, storekeeper, big thief; get his address; had cigars at Christmas"—"South Metropolitan Gas Company; "Frank Livesey is the chief engineer, and Tanner used to be foreman—I paid large sums of money to the Union Steamship Company on the representation of Elmslie, and I have good reasons to believe he never paid a farthing of it away—I believe Mr. Dusetoy has had nothing—trusting to Elmslie, our traveller, who made representations to me, we paid large sums away—Mr. Dusetoy did not tell me he had received money—he received some for a testimonial he wrote years ago—I cannot say I know of no moneys paid by Davis, but probably I could give information respecting them—I do not recollect his giving anything at Brandon Brothers, Rotherhithe, or at Maudesley, Son, and Field's, or at Harrisons, Barber, and Co., Wandsworth; he never gave anything there I am certain—he never paid anything to my knowledge at Gray, Dawes, and Sons, Austin Friars—he had 2 1/2 per cent, commission on the entire turnover, and on boiler-covering composition; all jobs taken at 18d. a foot—I affixed my signature to the cheques for weekly wages in conjunction with another director—I did not see what was requisite before I drew them—I did not have placed before me the sums of money for which every sum. was required; no statement was laid before me—the cheques were written out by the head bookkeeper, who received instructions from Mr. Giles—I only looked approximately to see what sums I was drawing—I have not the slightest idea what the" wages were in 1888 or 1889 for boiler-covering; and my father knows nothing whatever about it—I don't know if I should have been surprised and looked at it if I saw £20 for wages—I think we had about twenty men to pay every week; my father knows nothing about it—he stated what the books stated—as far as I recollect the wages came to about £80 a week—I don't think my father was correct when he said men worked at boiler-covering at about 33s. a week; various men were employed at different wages, and that department was entirely Mr. Davis's, and I never looked into it, I trusted Mr. Davis implicitly—I don't know how many men there were, there were a great many—Davis might have employed men we knew nothing about; he might have robbed us right and left—I knew we had a great many orders in hand; I did not look to see how many men were required—the warehouse order-book showed what work was in hand, but there were new orders every week—Davis never got more than half a dozen orders—I drew cheques between the third week in June and 7th July, when the wages-book begins, on precisely the same state of circumstances as existed before 7th July—I don't know where the vouchers for that period are.

Re-examined. There was no reserve between Davis and me about tipping people; we discussed it, he knows all the business as well as I do—I affixed my signature to the wages cheque week by week—occasionally I have made inquiries as to the largeness of an amount; I should call in Mr. Giles and ask him, and he would explain it away, and I should sign it—I trusted Davis—if I had known that a cheque included sums realty supposed to be paid for commission, but put down as wages, I should never have signed it—the wages represent wages of workmen, not clerks' salaries—the average of the wages every week was between £80 and £90, including the amount paid to Coleman—here is one week £71; nothing was paid to Coleman then—on 31st July the total of wages is £84, £15 of that paid to Coleman—I never analysed the things, except in the way I have described—I should say we had two dozen clerks in the counting-house altogether, and the business of the counting-house is distributed among them—the heads of the firm rely on the accuracy of the clerks—we cannot go into the detail of every book—I understood Coleman had to procure labour outside if he charged threepence a foot, and our men were not employed to do the job, but, as a matter of fact, we find our men did every job, and no outside labour was employed to do it.

By MR. WILLIS. I never saw Coleman—I did not know of the entries to Coleman in this book till the accountant came to me about it.

WILLIAM FISHER HOPDALL . I am a clerk in the service of Bell's Asbestos Company—I used to live at Kensington—I had charge of the order-book—I produce slips for various jobs and boiler-covering in Davis's handwriting—the slip are pasted into these books, and show the measurements and contract price in every case, I believe, and the names and addresses of the persons for whom the job was done—I have been through the list "Y," furnished with reference to the work supposed to have been done for this, and I find, as far as measurements go, that the items on the list are copied from the slips inserted in these books—in some cases the prices are given worked out from contract prices—I find all the names of customers in these books; that enabled us to work it out.

Cross-examined by MR. WILLIS. My wages were paid weekly by Mr. Giles—I have signed slips for them, and the money was paid to me personally, and I gave a sort of voucher for it.

GEORGE WILLIAM GILES . I am cashier in the employment of Bell's Asbestos Company—I have been in the habit of paying the wages weekly—before July, 1888, I paid on vouchers of Davis and other men who were entitled to receive money—I paid money on these fifteen vouchers (on which money appeared to be payable to Coleman) to Davis—after July a wages-book was kept by Davis, and from that time I paid without vouchers, but in accordance with the entries in the book; and week by week, from 7th July, 1888, to January, 1889, I paid to Davis all the sums that appear to be payable to Coleman—I generally paid in cash, sometimes in notes—I received a cheque for wages; I cashed it and paid with the proceeds—during all that time I never questioned any entry by Davis, but paid from the fact of the entry being there.

Cross-examined by MR. BESLEY. A cheque was drawn for the approximate amount of the wages; it was guesswork, and then the directors signed it—during the four weeks from June 3rd to July 7th I believe the wages were made out on foolscap by Davis, and signed by him till the

account-book could be made up in accordance with the accountant's desire—the cheque for an approximate amount was drawn up from the foolscap—salaries were quite distinct from the wages cheque—labour sheets were not signed by the persons employed—I never saw Mr. Coleman Selfe to know him as Coleman Selfe—I never paid him or got his receipt for anything.

Re examined. I knew him as Selfe about July, 1887, I fancy—I understood he was a veterinary surgeon; I used frequently to see him with Davis, sometimes at his business at Southwark street, and at other times at hotels in the neighbourhood—Selfe was quite independent so far as the company was concerned, so far as I knew—he was never recognised as an employé of the company.

By MR. BESLEY. I saw him with Davis, in 1887, a great many times, at a public-house near; quite four dozen times or more.

"WILLIAM MORLEY FRENCH . I am a solicitor and managing clerk to Messrs. Wontner and Sons—on 5th July, 1889, I went to 47, Bankside, the office of the Standard Asbestos Company, and saw Davis and Selfe—I had with me the receipt for £600 odd and the account supplied by Davis, and in his writing—I had no evidence when I went as to whether that was Selfe's signature—I pointed out those documents to Davis—I said to Selfe these two documents had been presented by Davis to Bell's Asbestos Company as accounting for the withdrawal of £600 and odd, as represented on the documents for extra labour purporting to have been supplied by him, Mr. Selfe, and as he had not been personally referred to in the matter, I was there, representing Mr. Bell's solicitor, to ask him if the documents were his, or drawn up under his authority—he said the receipt was certainly his, but he declined to say anything in reference to the account—he said there were several accounts—I said of course he was at liberty to answer or not; but I asked him whether he had been consulted or not with reference to this account—he again declined to say anything, but asked to be furnished with a copy—I did not do so—he said, "You know my name is Coleman Selfe"—he said he had carried on business in the name of Coleman, but his name was Coleman Selfe—Davis was sittting close by at the opposite desk; but although he tried to enter into the conversation once or twice, I rather deprecated it, and told him I was not there to say anything to him—the conversation ought not to tell against Davis, as it was with Selfe—I got out the account X and Y from the books—I got out a list of the whole of the boiler-covering work that had been done from January, 1888, to February, 1889; then I calculated the actual jobs that appeared in Davis's own account, verifying them by the amount and number of feet, and so on—I marked with a cross those ear-marked in Davis's account—then having identified the jobs, I made inquiries of all the workmen; and then I made the account Y, which gives the names of the workmen for reference—"Y" shows the amount of feet in respect of which Davis was claiming 3d. a foot.

Cross-examined by MR. BESLEY. I saw Selfe on 5th July—I may have heard of the action before—the writ appears to be in May—I was not then employed in the civil action—it seemed to me I went up to the first floor of a small house and knocked at the door; and on opening the door the two defendants were sitting there in a small room—I asked for Mr. Selfe, and Selfe stood up and said it was he—I did not ask them to come

outside—possibly I did not in terms say a word to Selfe about any criminal proceedings; but I explained—I don't know if I should have gone to have conversation with him if I had intended to proceed against him—I did not go to get his acknowledgment that "Coleman" was written by him over the stamp—I went as a matter of fairness to give him an opportunity of giving an explanation about these accounts, because he had not been like Davis—he told me it was his signature, and asked for a copy of the blue paper account—I did not understand by that that he had not seen the blue paper before—I did not ask whether he had seen it before; he declined to say anything about it—I don't know if I gave a card—I am quite certain I mentioned the name when I went in—I did not refer to the action in any way.

Re-examined. I knew there had been correspondence—I am not quite certain if I knew about the action—when I first asked him he said there had been several accounts—I said it was thought fair he should have an opportunity of explanation, and he said, "The receipt is mine; that is my signature, but I decline to say anything in reference to that account; there are several accounts"—I think I held out the account like this—I showed it to him—I don't think he took it into his hand.

ALFRED WILLS . I am a member of the firm of Stibbard, Gibson, and Co., solicitors, of 21, Leadenhall Street, and nephew of the judge—our firm has acted as solicitors for the firm of Bell's Asbestos Company, Limited, since the formation of the company in May, 1888—in 1889 I heard about the dismissal of Davis from Mr. Bell—subsequently I had a correspondence with the solicitors for Davis with reference to the terms on which he was leaving and so forth—I saw Davis once or twice—I believe a letter of 15th March, written by Davis, was shown me by Mr. Frank Bell—I first knew Coleman and Selfe were one and the same person on 15th May—I don't think I ever discussed with Davis the accounts of his boiler-covering work; the amount of £650 was never mentioned—the action was commenced on 17th May—I got an order for particulars in June; they were delivered on 31st October—I believe the action was stayed till he should give particulars—after they were given the defence and counter-claim were delivered—in the defence the original cause of dismissal, going about to public-houses and neglecting his duty, and then that which was afterwards discovered, that there were things wrong in the accounts, were introduced under legal advice.

Cross-examined by MR. BESLEY. Coleman Selfe was not concerned in the civil proceedings at all—I told Mr. Wontner or Mr. French that Coleman and Selfe were the same person—I have no doubt I told Mr. Wontner that when I first saw him—at that time the Standard Asbestos' Company had Davis's services, so I hear to-day for the first time—I did not instruct Messrs. Wontner what to charge them with, and I did not know what they would be charged with.

GEORGE EVANS . I live at Sherrard Street, Canterbury Road, and am a boiler coverer—I have been in the employment of Bell's Asbestos Company for six years—I was employed in pipe and boiler covering at the premises, and also out on different jobs—I was assisted by a lad named Webster, and men named Walker, Saunders, and Jutsum; I was paid as a weekly servant—I was at work at the Italian Exhibition; I followed Jutsum there—I was assisted in that work by Jutsum and Saunders, weekly servants of the company—I left the Exhibition to go to a job at

Mr. Wells' place at Bedford; I did the whole of that work myself—I did the Britannia Company's job at Ilford myself, the job at Dyer and Robinson's, in Woolwich Road; at Day and Son's, at St. Neots; at Bracknell's, Ascot; at Roberts's at Poole; at Arlocks, brewers, Ely; and at Hall's, all by myself; at Murray's paper mills, Wandsworth, with Saunders, Allen, and Costello; at Gray and Dawes, at the Albert Dock with Beeves, Costello, Allen and Green helping me, all regular men; at a boiler job at Greenwich with Allen and Costello; at Buckingham's, Worcester Station, with a traction engine; for Craig and Co., at Shad Thames, with Jutsum and Walker; on the steamship Ningcobo, with Jutsum; at the Chelsea Infirmary, assisted by Hillyard, Costello, and Beeves; at Gorringe's, with Jutsum and Wiltshire; at Deacon's sugar refinery, where I left Saunders and Jutsum working; at Niagara with Costello; at Bircham's saw mills, finishing it after Beeves; at the West India Dock on the steamship Ceylon, with Costello and some others of the company's men helping; at the Regent dry dock, Millwall, with Saunders, Beeves, Elliott, Bush by, and Hillyard, the company's own men; and at Whiteley's for Richard and Co., part of the time—I have seen Selfe with Davis occasionally; he came on one occasion down to the docks with Davis; he did not speak to me—I also saw him at the Italian Exhibition with Davis, when Davis gave me orders to go to Bedford.

Cross-examined by MR. WILLIS. This work is not difficult work when you are used to it; it is good pay sometimes, according to what you did, and overtime—I did not know of the men being paid anything where I was at work; several spoke about receiving nothing; occasionally one would say they had not had anything—I don't know whether others had—they did not tell me that some had, and some had not, never—they merely spoke about not having anything as other firms had—I do not know of their having anything—I knew it in other firms—I worked for my father-in-law, Mr. Catch pool—I did not know of people being paid while I worked for this company—I never knew of any of them having anything.

Cross-examined by MR. BESLEY. I could not say in what month it was that I saw Selfe with Davis; I think it was some time last summer—I only saw them together twice, once for a quarter of an hour at the docks, and once at the Italian Exhibition for an hour.

ALBERT EDWIN SAUNDERS . I am a boiler coverer, and have been five years in the employ of this company—I have kept a record of the jobs I attended at boiler-covering—I went to the job at the Italian Exhibition—I only saw the paid men of the company there—I was on the job at Tomlinson's; there was only me and a boy all the time I was there; no outside labourers—I was at the job at Harrison and Barber's, Barrett Lane, Wandsworth; the people working there were all regular paid servants of the company; also at Spratts at Bermondsey, Prickett and Sons, Griffith's and Sons, the Royal Brewery, Brentford; Rimmell's in the Strand; Leeper's Steam Mills, Sutton; Marknew's, Martineau's, etc.; no outside men at any—I know Selfe by sight; I have seen him in company with Davis many times—I could not say when I first saw him; I think it was about 1886—I have seen them together in the works at Southwark Street many times—I believe Selfe is a veterinary surgeon by profession—Davis told me once that he had made him outside manager;

that was in Davis's house at Wimbledon—I could not tell the date—I think it was about 1886—I saw him at the Italian Exhibition with Davis.

Cross-examined by MR. BESLEY. I saw him there for about ten minutes or a quarter of an hour—I have never been asked about recollecting these things till the present time—I used to take my wages at Davis's house a good many times—Selfe was not present when Davis said this about making him outside manager.

PETER TAPSFIELD . I live at 4, Princes Place, Great Suffolk Street, and am a boiler maker by trade—I was employed to go to a job at Whiteley's, by a person named Overton, a foreman at Bell's—I do not know whether he is a relation of Davis's—I was an extra hand—I worked on the job somewhere about six weeks; we were always paid by Overton at the office in Southwark Street, weekly—there were several other extra men employed besides me—speaking from memory, somewhere about thirteen in all were employed on the job.

WILLIAM COOPER (Detective Sergeant P). At the beginning of 1889 I was in the M Division—I was employed by Messrs. Bell to keep watch on the defendants, with Police-constable Pay—I had Davis under observation from January 31st, 1889—during that time I saw him daily in the company of Selfe; frequently in public-houses—sometimes Selfe called for Davis, sometimes Davis called for Selfe, who at that time was traveller for an oil merchant in the same street, a few doors from Bell's.

Cross-examined by MR. BESLEY. Selfe usually went to the public-house about 11 in the morning—I have seen him with other persons—I had no conversation with him at that time—I went into the public-house—I did not notice what they drank, or who paid—I heard that Selfe was formerly a veterinary surgeon in Newington Causeway.

GEORGE JUTSUM (not examined in chief).

Cross-examined by MR. WILLIS. I have seen Coleman (Selfe) at places where I have done work; he has been at work with me at Champion Hill, and he went with me to the Newcastle Exhibition, and lots of other jobs, and other men as well—I have known Davis a little over three years—he has come to places where I have been at work from time to time—he has several times given me money to give to people where I have been at work; he gave me some at Dakin's sugar bakery, Whitechapel; I forget how much; it was to give to the four stokers—there were two more places where he gave me money, but I can't recollect them; it is some time back—I never made a note of it; I could not swear how much it was.

Cross-examined by MR. BESLEY. The first time he started working with me we were Short of labourers; that was when we went to the Newcastle Exhibition; we were short of stuff and he brought me some; that was in 1887,1 think—we put the covering outside the boiler to keep the heat in; it requires care by the workmen—Coleman came and stopped with me at Newcastle three weeks during the Exhibition—at Champion Hill he came and gave us instructions, and he sacked all the men, bar Evans, and he was to go back to the shop—he came there with orders to sack the men that we took on there—he also came down to me at the Brentford Brewery; that was the year after the Exhibition, I think—we had two or three jobs at Brentford—on one occasion he came and paid Saunders and me—we were all casual men when we were first taken on

—that was before the Limited Company, in Bell's time—he used to come round to very near all the jobs I was at, to see how we got on—he did not do any work with his hands, only at the Newcastle Exhibition; he brought the stuff there—I did not know that he was a veterinary surgeon.

Re-examined. I knew him as Coleman Selfe—I never booked the money that Davis gave me to give to the stokers; I could not swear to the amount; it might have been half-a-sovereign or half-a-crown; I should think it was more than a shilling—I am in Davis's employ now.

By the JURY. Some Newcastle men were employed at the Exhibition; after we started we took on men when we wanted any help; I used to pay them; I got the money from Davis.

A. E. SAUNDERS (Recalled), and Cross-examined by MR. "WILLIS. I have seen Selfe at some of the places of business; I think it was in 1886 that I first saw him—I have seen him at 118, South wark Street many times; I have seen him come in by himself, and inquire if Mr. Davis was in—I nave also seen him at places where I have been at work; he never did anything; he came to me at once at Silvertown, at Mr. Lyle's sugar refinery, and asked if I wanted any more help—I said, "No "; I had nearly finished the job—he was sent by Mr. Davis—I have known him about the premises, and going to jobs for two years—I know on one occasion of a tip; that was at Oxford, it was given to me by one of the travellers named Lee, to take to the taskmaster of the Oxford Workhouse; it was a postal order for 1s. 6d.

JOHN HENRY LEWIS (Examined by MR. WILLIS). I have worked for Bell and Son about four years—I have known Selfe, by that name, since September, 1886; that was when he bandaged a man's hand that was injured, at 118, Southwark Street—I often saw him there—he brought me orders at the Marylebone Baths—he once measured up some work with me—he gave me instructions as to what jobs I was to go to; that was before 1888.

G. M. GILES (Recalled by MR. WILLIS). I believe the vouchers for wages in 1886 are here—I never paid Selfe any money—I paid money to Davis for Coleman prior to 1888—his name appears on the vouchers previous to that, in 1886 and 1887, I think—I had been doing so for about nine or ten months perhaps, as far as my recollection serves me, in the name of Coleman, for wages; it averaged about £12 weekly, I think, in 1887—I am sure it did not begin in 1886; I think it began in 1887.

Cross-examined by MR. BESLEY. I did not know of his going to the Exhibition at Newcastle—whatever was demanded by Davis was paid to him in person—Selfe was never in the establishment having regular wages—what Davis put forward in his name was paid.

Re-examined. This matter had been going on before 1887, exactly in the same way—I did not know Selfe by the name of Coleman at that time—I did not know that Coleman was the same person as Selfe—except what I learnt from Davis I did not know anything about Coleman or his employment.

Evidence for Davis.

WILLIAM GRAY TODD . I live at Bexley Heath—I was formerly in the service of John Bell and Sons for about four years—I left about two years ago; that would be up to about 1888—I knew Davis intimately

during the time I was there—I saw him pay money to people on several occasions, to different customers, persons for whom work was being done—I have seen such sums as half-crowns, 5s, sovereigns, £2, and so on, and I think on one occasion £4—these payments occurred on many occasions—I have known him to stand dinners and that sort of thing to the different employés where work may be done—that occurred frequently—I can hardly say that I have actually known him himself buy things for distribution—I have known of his distributing fame and other things on several occasions—I know that he distributed some spirits at one time, at Christmas-time—this was frequent while I was there, for three or four years.

Cross-examined. I was introduced to the business of Bell and Co. by Davis—I went into their service as near as I can recollect between four and five years ago—I cannot off-hand give it you nearer—I was in the service between four and five years, and left it two years ago—I must have been in the service six or seven years ago—I did not leave as much as four years ago; I will swear that—I was not in the service of Bell and Co. in London in 1884—I never was in the service of John Bell and Co.—I was never in the service of Bell and Co. in the country—I was not in the service of John Bell and Co.—I was in the service of John Bell and Son, at 118, Southwark Street, and at Birmingham—to my knowledge Bell and Son at Birmingham was not separate from Bell and Son in London—I took it to be all one, Bell and Son—I was never in the service of the company—the last time I had anything to do with the London business was, I should think, about four years ago—I was not exactly a traveller; I was a boiler-cover contractor for them—I did not to my knowledge overdraw the account of the money I expended in their service to the extent of £120—they made some statement which I did not believe—I can't say that they alleged it was to the extent of £150; I swear that—they did not to my knowledge try to sue me for that, and fail to find out where I was—I did not disappear—I did not cease to be in their employment after I had overdrawn my account—I left of my own accord; I gave notice myself; it was not in writing—I gave notice to Mr. Watmore; he was Bell and Co., of Birmingham—I did not give notice to either of the Mr. Bells—the £4 was given at Nottingham, I should say about four years ago, some considerable time before I left; I should say more than four years ago—that work was not done for the Birmingham firm; for the London firm—I saw the £4 given to Mr. Leroy; he was in the firm of Alderman Tierney—I cannot remember at this minute the number of sums, or when they were paid.

Re-examined. I am certain that I saw other money given besides that one—I saw it frequently—I. gave notice to leave to go into business myself; there is no truth in the suggestion that I escaped, or went away, or disappeared—I went into business at Birmingham, in asbestos—after I left Mr. Watmore, of the Birmingham firm, I had several letters, now in my possession—asbestos is a common article now, sold by hundreds of people.

By the COURT. I have been out of Bell's employ about two years; that would be 1887.

(For the evidence of Sidney Butler see page 389.)

Witnesses deposed to the prisoners' good character:


3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-212
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

212. JOHN WILLIAMS (21) , Burglary in the dwelling-house of William Hayden, and stealing 44 lb. of beef, his property.

MR. HUTTON Prosecuted.

THOMAS WHITFIELD (Policeman W 228). On January 31st, about 5.40 a.m., I was on duty in Brixton Road, and passed Mr. Hayden's butcher's shop; all was correct then—I saw two men run into the mews at the back of the shop, and the prisoner behind them, carrying a very large piece of meat, which he threw away when he saw me; I was then about fifteen yards from him—I shouted, "Stop!" and chased him nearly 300 yards to Ferndale Road, where I ran him down in a yard; an officer was coming up at the same time, and went into the yard with me, and we found the prisoner lying down in a van—I told him I wanted him respecting some meat—he said, "I know nothing about it; I have been here all night"—I saw him get into the van, I never lost sight of him—he was out of breath—I have known him from a baby—the prosecutor charged him.

Cross-examined by the Prisoner. I did not say that a man said he saw you go into the yard; I saw you.

WILLIAM MAJOR (Police Sergeant W). I was on duty and saw Whitfield with the prisoner in his custody—I went to the mews and found a large piece of meat about twenty yards in the rear of Mr. Hayden's premises—Godfrey identified it.

JOHN GODFREY . I am assistant to Mr. Hayden, a butcher, of 440, Brixton Road—on 30th January I shut up the premises; the windows were all fastened—the front window is plate glass; I fastened that with a bolt—I saw 44 lb of meat at the Police-station next morning, which I identified as being there the previous night.

Cross-examined. The window was forced up, and the meat was on a slab inside; you could take it without going in.

GEORGE ELLIS (Police Inspector W). On 31st January I examined Mr. Hayden's premises—the plate-glass window had been opened by lifting it; it works on sash-lines, which were out of repair, and by lifting the left-hand corner it worked the bolt out of the right-hand corner, and then the window went bodily up, and anybody could take the meat without going in—I went there at two or three minutes before six a.m.; nobody was up till I roused them—the constable on duty examines the vans in the mews during the night.

The Prisoner's statement before the Magistrate. When the constable found me I had been there all night; I had been there to sleep; I had been drinking.

Prisoner's Defence. Some friends gave me some beer; I had got no home, and went there to sleep; the policeman pulled me out head first, and put his lantern in my face, and the other said, "Oh, he will do, let us take him"; I had to turn four corners, and he is an old man, and cannot run.

THOMAS WHITFIELD (Re-examined). I passed and saw the place safe five or six minutes before—the men ran behind me, and the prisoner had the meat.

Cross-examined. When you had work I did not get you out of it; I would not do such a thing—we only had about fifteen yards to go to where he was lying down.

GUILTY .—He then PLEADED GUILTY** to a conviction at Wandsworth in April, 1889, of stealing meat.— Six Months' Hard Labour.

Before Mr. Justice Day.

3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-213
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

213. WILLIAM WINFIELD (73) , Unlawfully attempting to have carnal knowledge of Edith Lathbury; Other Counts, for an indecent assault upon her, and on several other children.

MESSRS. GILL and MUIR Prosecuted.

GUILTY Two Years' Hard Labour.

3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-214
VerdictsNot Guilty > unknown; Not Guilty > no evidence

Related Material

214. ELIZA LEAH LAWSON (32) , For the manslaughter of Eliza Lawson.

MR. GEOGHEGAN Prosecuted.

WILLIAM WOOKEY . I live at 1, James's Place, North Street; I have lived with the prisoner eleven years—we have had four children, including the deceased, who was two years old—I earn £1 a week in a type foundry, and sometimes more, and allow the prisoner 18s.—we live in two rooms—the deceased was in ill-health for about 16 months—she slept in our bed next to the prisoner—on Tuesday morning, 7th January, the prisoner awoke and said, "Oh, Bill, look at the baby, it is dying!"—I said, "What trouble you have brought me to, not going to see the doctor about it! go for your mother"—I went for the doctor, and to the Police-station—when the doctor came the child was dead—on the previous Sunday the prisoner gave the child some potato and gravy from the roast beef which she ate—the room is scrubbed out about once a week—I am out 16 hours a day, and at home on Sundays—I bought the child a pair of boots on the Sunday—the prisoner was a little muddled from drink sometimes—she was sober for a fortnight before this occurred—I have seen the child fed, and sometimes when I have had a bloater for breakfast I have given it the soft roe and a drop of milk—I believe the prisoner looked after it—the other three children are healthy enough.

DR. GEORGE FREDERICK FARR . I am the divisional surgeon, and was called to the child, which I found dead; the room was in a most horribly filthy state, and had not been washed, I should think, for weeks; there was some excrement on the floor—the child was also in a most filthy state, lying on a table in the corner—the clothing was filthy—the child was washed, and I made a post-mortem—it was all but a skeleton—a more emaciated state I never witnessed; it weighed 9 lb.—the average weight of a new-born child would be 8 lb.—the child ought to have weighed four times as much, I should say, as it did—I opened the stomach, expecting to find that the child had been subject to tubercular disease from what I had heard, but I found no evidence of it—the stomach was perfectly empty, and also the whole intestinal canal—there was nothing but fetid matter in the lower intestines, and the child did not appear to have had any food for several hours, and nothing requiring digestion—I also opened the head—the other three children looked strong and healthy, but dirty—I found no marks of ill-usage—before making the postmortem I observed the skin was off the backs of the thighs and buttocks, and I heard afterwards from the grandmother that to remove the dirt the skin had to come off too—the prisoner said it had consumption of the bowels—I said, "How do you know that?"—she said, "The dispensary doctor told me so"—I said, "When did he see it?"—she said she would

get me the letter, and I saw from it that the last time he saw it was 16th June—she said the doctor told her there was nothing to be done for it, and that she did not take further trouble—I said, "That is seven months ago; surely you have seen a doctor or done something'; the child must have been a very strong one if it was in that condition when the doctor saw it; surely you have had someone else to see it?"—she said, "I didn't think it worth while after what the doctor said"—I think it was born healthy, and that the cause of death was starvation.

By the Prisoner. In a dispensary letter you get the nature of the treatment—I do not remember whether it contained a prescription—it might have been on the back of the letter.

By MR. GEOGHEGAN. I remember the Coroner asking for the letter—I think the prisoner said she had lost it; I don't think dispensary letters are copied, or any registry kept.

ANN LAWSON . I am the prisoner's mother—I live in Paradise Street, about ten minutes from the prisoner—I saw the child at its birth—it appeared healthy—it might have been three months old when I saw it again, and seemed as if it would go on all right—I first noticed a change in it when it was about fourteen months old, when it looked poorly—I asked the prisoner if she had taken it to a doctor—she said, "Yes"; and that the doctor said it had consumption of the bowels—that was the spring of 1889—I saw it again about four months before its death, when it appeared to be wasting away—the prisoner fetched me about 6 a.m. the day it died—she said, "Come round, I think baby is dead; I picked it up to give it the breast, and it fell back in my arms"—she was crying—I washed the child and laid it out, and I saw the skin was rubbed off the hips and buttocks—the prisoner said she had given it a rood wash the day before—I only used a soft bit of flannel and soap—at the inquest Dr. Farr asked me, in the prisoner's presence, about the condition of the child's skin—I told him it was so when I washed it—the sores were not bleeding—there were two little narrow strips of skin off the buttocks—the prisoner told me that the child being so delicate, she had kept it to the breast—she was always suckling it when I saw her.

DR. CHARLES WHEELER , M. R. C. S. E., L. S. A. I am one of the visiting surgeons of the Royal South London Dispensary—the first letter the prisoner had was on 18th April—I found the child very anemic, i. e., bloodless, and thin and emaciated, and since I have heard the evidence I have no doubt that I told the mother it was suffering from mesenteric disease, or tuberculosis, and required nourishing diet as much or more than physic—she appeared to be very kind to it—I visited it in June—I saw no improvement—I do not think I should have said there was no hope—all cases of consumption of the bowels are serious—I don't think I continued my visits after 18th May; if I did she got another letter—a letter lasts a month.

SARAH ANN BATROP . I have lived at 5, James's Place, North Street, for about ten months, during which I have seen the prisoner pretty frequently, and have passed the time of day with her—I have seen the child in her arms, and last saw it a week before Christmas, eating a piece of bread and butter very ravenously—I said, "Baby is getting very thin"—she said Dr. Wheeler had told her there was no hope for the child—the other three children seemed very strong—she seemed to give them plenty of bread and butter—I saw her the worse for drink at Christmas-time

—I saw her take the child out once—I have seen her give it the breast—I don't know that the child was too old for that; I suckle mine as long as I can.

Witness for the Defence.

MARGARET PIPER . The other children are all right; I see them every day.

JOHN MCCARTHY (Detective Sergeant M). I was present at the inquest on the second day, when the prisoner was examined—Sheppard wrote down her statement, which I heard read to her, and she signed it—I believe she was cautioned—the Jury returned their verdict, and I arrested the prisoner on the Coroner's warrant on the charge of manslaughter; she made no reply, but appeared very upset.

The Prisoner, in her statement before the Coroner, said that between 5 and 6 a. m., on 1th January, she was giving the child the breast, when it fell back; that Dr. Wheeler saw it in June last, and said it had consumption of the bowels; that it had a warm bath on the Monday and was washed well; that when it was dead she called its father and fetched her mother; the doctor saw it about seven o'clock; that the father earned twenty shillings a week, and gave her eighteen shillings, and their rent was five shillings.


There was another indictment against the Prisoner for misdemeanour, upon which no evidence was offered.


3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-215
VerdictGuilty > lesser offence
SentenceMiscellaneous > sureties

Related Material

215. WILLIAM PAUL (30) , Unlawfully attempting to have carnal knowledge of Frances Cole, a girl under the age of thirteen. Second Count, for an indecent assault.

MR. GILL Prosecuted, and MR. SANDYS Defended,

The child in this case was only six years of age, and she was not sworn.

The RECORDER held that there was no case on the First Count.

MR. SANDYS submitted, that being so there could not be a conviction on the Second Count, as such a verdict could only be found where the indictment charged a felonious assault, and when the evidence given was on oath.

MR. GILL referred to the 4th and 9th sections of the statute under which the indictment was framed, and also to the case of Reg. v. Whelan, tried in this Court, where similar circumstances existed, and urged that if there was any doubt on the point a case might, if necessary, be reserved.

The RECORDER consented to that course.

The JURY found the Prisoner

GUILTY of an indecent assault, and he was discharged on his own recognisances to come up for judgment.

Before Mr. Common Serjeant.

3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-216
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

216. JOHN SMITH (24) PLEADED GUILTY ** to feloniously uttering counterfeit coin, after a conviction of a like offence in March, 1885, at this Court— Five Years' Penal Servitude, having still to work out Twelve Months and Sixteen Days of his former sentence. And

3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-217
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

217. ALBERT EDWARD HOWE (22) , to burglary in the dwelling-house of George Glindon, and stealing three boxes of cigars and other articles— Four Months' Hard Labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]

3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-218
VerdictGuilty > unknown

Related Material

218. WILLIAM JOHNSON (61) , Feloniously uttering counterfeit coin.

MR. WILKINSON Prosecuted and MR. ROUTH Defended.

MARY BOWIE . My husband keeps the London Tavern, Garden Road,

Southwark—on 7th January, about eleven p.m., I served the prisoner with a half of mild-and-bitter, price three halfpence, which he took outside, and came back in a minute or two, Baying, "My friend is rather thirsty; I want another"—he took that out and came back in a few minutes with the other prisoner (see next case)—the prisoner then asked for two two's of whisky, and gave me this florin (produced)—I put it in the till where there were only sixpences, and gave him 1s. 5d. change, the price of the whisky and the other liquor being sevenpence—they remained at the bar a minute or two, and then took the whisky upstairs, where a club meeting was going on, an entertainment and music—they both came down together, nearly an hour afterwards, and one of them, I forget which, called for more liquor, and paid with a half-crown, which I put into the same till—I had not put any other coin in in the meantime—George then asked for half a quartern of brandy in a bottle and some drink, which was drank at the bar, which came to elevenpence-halfpenny, and was paid for with a bad shilling, which I threw in the till—they left shortly afterwards, and the house was closed—my husband and I then went to the till and found a florin, a half-crown, and two shillings all bad—the sixpences were in the other bowl—this (produced) is the shilling which I tossed on top of the till—I put them all on a shelf—next morning, Wednesday, the same two men came in together; one of them called for Somedrink, and paid with a good sovereign; I believe it was George; I spoke to my husband; a constable was sent for, and Williamson and McCarthy came—I then said that William had passed a florin the night before—he said, "I know I did"—I said nothing about the half-crown and shilling—they were given in custody with the coins.

Cross-examined. A great many people came there—both the shillings are bad, but only one of them was tendered by the prisoner—I do not suggest that he made any other payment but the florin.

HARRIS PICKNELL . I keep a coffee-stall in the London Road—on 8th January, about one a.m., the two prisoners came to my stall, which is two or three minutes' walk from Garden Row—I had known George some time—he called for some coffee, and put is on my stall—I picked it up, put it between my teeth, broke it in half, and put the pieces on the stall—he said he was very sorry, and paid me with good money—I threw the pieces into the road later on—they each had a cup of coffee, and George paid for both.

Cross-examined. George asked the prisoner if he would have a cup of coffee, and paid for him—directly he found the money was bad he offered me a good shilling.

WILLIAM WILLIAMSON (Detective Sergeant L). On 8th January, about two p.m., I found the prisoner and another man detained at the London Tavern—Mrs. Bowie said, "These are the men who were here last night; that one, William, uttered a bad florin to me, and the other a shilling"—the prisoner said, "I passed a two-shilling piece, but I did not know it was bad"—on the 15th I said to them at the station, "You will be Further charged with uttering a counterfeit shilling to Mr. Picknell, on the morning of the 18th, at a coffee-stall in London Road "-George said, 'Who uttered it?"—I said, "You did"—William said, "There you are," looking George in the face, "your people are blaming me for putting—it all down; I done the twoer. and will stand to that; they cant end me away for that, at least I hope not"—I searched the prisoner

on the 8th at the station, and found 12s. 6d. in silver, all good, sixpence, a knife, and a ring—Mrs. Bowie gave me this florin, half-crown, and two shillings.

JOHN MCCARTHY (Detective L). I went with Sergeant Williamson to the London Tavern on the 8th—I heard George say, "I did not know the shilling was a bad one"—I found on him twenty-two sixpences, a half-sovereign, and threepence.

WILLIAM JOHN WEBSTER . I am Inspector of Coin to Her Majesty's Mint—this half-crown, florin, and two shillings are counterfeit.

GUILTY .—He then PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction at thin Court on 23rd June, 1884, of feloniously uttering counterfeit coin.

3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-219
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty; Not Guilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

219. WILLIAM JOHNSON was again indicted, with GEORGE JOHNSON (30) , for unlawfully uttering counterfeit coin, to which William Johnson.

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

MR. WILKINSON Prosecuted, and MR. BURNEY Defended.

MARY BOWIE repeated her former evidence.

Cross-examined. I cannot say at what time the other bad shilling was passed; I was not the only person serving; it was not passed to me by either of the prisoners—they only came down once, and that was just before closing-time—I was in the bar the whole time, but I may have gone upstairs for a minute—I only took one shilling—my husband is not here—there was no barmaid—I do not know which of them gave me the half-crown—they remained in the house an hour or more next day before they were taken, but I communicated with the police just after they came in at nine o'clock.

Re-examined. It is a draw-out till, with three bowls, one for copper, one for large money, and one for sixpences—the florin went into the larger bowl—the sovereign was given to me, and I gave it to my husband; he served them.

HARRIS PICKNELL repeated his former evidence.

Cross-examined. I have known George some time as a respectable man—he keeps a boot maker's shop—he was very drunk that night—when I broke the shilling he said, "Is it a bad one? I am very sorry; I will give you another."


GEORGE JOHNSON received a good character.


3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-220
VerdictGuilty > pleaded part guilty; Guilty > lesser offence
SentenceNo Punishment > sentence respited; Imprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

220. THOMAS WILKINSON (60) and EMILY WILKINSON (18) , Breaking and entering the dwelling-house of Charles Henry Arnold, and stealing a coat and other articles. Second Count, receiving the same.

EMILY WILKINSON PLEADED GUILTY to the Second Count.—Judgment respited.

MR. A. GILL Prosecuted, and MR. KEITH FRITH Defended.

CHARLES HENRY ARNOLD . I am a Civil Service clerk, and live at 275, Ivy Dale Road, Nunhead—on 13th January I went out at 9. 40, leaving no one in the house—I pulled the door to, it has a spring latch—I returned at 6.10, and found the staple broken away and the door broken open—I found the place in disorder, and boxes and drawers placed on the bed—I missed a coat, a locket, a silver scarf-pin, and some earrings—this is

the coat and the earrings—the coat was made for me, and has my tailor's name on it, "Josiah Messent, Peckham"—I also lost £3 19s. 6d. in money.

Cross-examined. I have no doubt the earrings are mine, I have had them seven or eight years.

CHARLES BEARD (Policeman A). On January 18th I went with Dugald to Rochester Row, in plain clothes, and at 10.30 a.m. saw the female prisoner leave 6, Brunswick Row, with a bundle, where she lives with her father the other prisoner, and I believe her sister—they have three rooms—the male prisoner was looking out at the shop door—it is a small boot-repairing shop—she got into an omnibus going to Charing Cross, we both got on the top—she got out at the Broad Sanctuary, and we got off, and followed her down Tothill Street, towards St. James's Park Railway Station—we overtook her, spoke to her, and took her to the station, and examined her bundle—it contained an overcoat, nine plated spoons, a pair of sugar-tongs, and a ladle—the female searcher gave me these earrings—I found an acid-bottle which is used for testing jewellery, and a quantity of plated spoons and knives, which have not been identified, and six pawn-tickets; his attention was called to this coat—he said, "Yes, that is my coat, it was pawned in the Kennington Road for 6s"—I took the duplicate to Mr. Moses, in the Kennington Park Road, on the 18th, who produced this coat—Dugald arrested the prisoner on the 20th, for breaking and entering, and stealing a quantity of property, with his daughter—he said, "Oh, I know nothing about that, I have never been out of the house"—his daughter said, "Oh, you know, father, that pawn-ticket that you bought of that gas-factory man out of work, which you gave 1s. for"—he said, "Oh, yes, I know."

Cross-examined. The acid bottle was on a shelf in the shop, not concealed—I do not know that acid is used by shoemakers to take out the stains on leather—he had been drinking—his words were, "Oh, yes, I remember now"—I was examined three times at the Police-court—I did not mention his looking through the panels of the door till the last time—I said, "I did not mention it the first day; it did not affect the male prisoner"—if he had been in the dock I should have given it in evidence—I said, "I spoke to nobody about it; I spoke to the inspector about it just now"—I did not say a single word about it in the witness-box—I made no entry of the occurrence of the man looking through his shop door.

Re-examined. When I first gave evidence, only the female prisoner was before the Court; she was arrested on the 18th, and he on the 20th.

RICHARD MONTAGUE LEONARD . I am assistant to Mr. Moses, a pawnbroker, of Kennington Park Road—on 15th January the male prisoner pawned this coat with me for 6s. in the middle of the day—I asked if it was his—he said, "Yes"—the police came on the 18th, and I described him.

Cross-examined. I do not think I had ever seen him before—I think he had a black coat on—I said, "I do not know whether he had a dark coat or a light coat, or what coloured trousers he wore"—I described him as about forty years of age, but I said I was no judge of age.

Re-examined. I picked him out at the station from half-a-dozen people—when he pawned the coat he had not got the beard he has now.

GEORGINA BRAHAM . I am female searcher at Rochester Row station—

I searched the female prisoner on 18th January, and found this silver sugar-sifter, silver earrings, lace, and silk handkerchief in a pocket under her dress.

WILLIAM DUGALD (Detective Officer A). I was with Beard on the 18th, and saw the female prisoner come out with a bundle, and the male prisoner looking out at the door, which is half glass—I followed her and took her to the station—I went with Beard to search the prisoner's house, and saw the pawn-tickets found—when I got back to the station I asked the male prisoner if the tickets belonged to him—he said, "Yes; and the one for the coat pledged in Kennington Park Road is my own property"—when he was charged at the station he said, "I bought the tickets for 1s. of a man"—I have seen an acid bottle like this before, but never knew of it being used for leather; it is used for jewellery, to test whether it is genuine.

Cross-examined. It was called an acid bottle because it was empty—it was behind other bottles on a shelf, not locked up—I did not say a word at the Police-court about seeing the male prisoner looking out at the door—I know that Beard did not mention it till the very last time he was called.

Cross-examined. When two officers are concerned together, the evidence is not taken from each.

Evidence for the Defence.

HEZEKIAH FLEMMING . I am a bootmaker, of 5, Pye Street, Westminster—on 16th July, about 5. 30, I was repairing, and a small, spare man came in and asked Mr. Wilkinson if he would buy the ticket of a coat—he was a short, spare man, not unlike the prisoner, barring the whiskers—there was such a resemblance that a stranger might be deceived—Mr. Wilkinson said he did not care about buying the ticket—he said he was working at the gas factory, and was on strike, and had nothing to pay for his lodging—Wilkinson said, "On that condition, I will give you 1s. for it"—I never knew him buy any other tickets—I have known him twelve or fourteen years—I went to the Police-court, but was not called.

Cross-examined. I do not know the man's name, and never saw him before—he said nothing about the name on the ticket—I was upstairs when the pawntickets were found—I never heard the prisoner say it was his coat—I never saw the teaspoons and other things—I was willing to give evidence before the Magistrate, but was not called.

By the JURY. I can tell you where Mr. Wilkinson was the whole of January 15th—I was not far from the shop, for I was on the drink—I did not go further than Mr. Florry's, and each time I went in Mr. Wilkinson was there, and I was not away sufficiently long for him to go to Kennington Park Road—we use acid in a bottle like this for cleaning leather, as bootmakers—I can show you how we do it.


He received a good character; but the police stated that he was the associate of thieves.— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour.

3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-221
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour; Corporal > whipping; Imprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

221. WILLIAM JAMES (27) and WILLIAM HAWKINS (28) , Robbery with violence on William Bennett, and stealing £1 11s. 6d. from his person.

WILLIAM BENNETT . I am forty-seven—I was at work at the Gas Works at Vauxhall, and sleeping on the premises up to Saturday, 18th January—on that evening, at 7. 30, I went out, having not long left off work, and being sober—I went towards Kennington Lane, and into one public-house, and had a pint of ale with a friend—about five minutes to ten I went into another public-house, the George and Dragon—I there had a pint by myself—I was sober—I noticed the two prisoners when I came out—I came out with a woman, who walked with me to Spring Gardens Walk, near the Albert Embankment, and by the railway arch there I was knocked down by James with his fist on my temple, I fell on my back—Hawkins gave me a blow on my mouth which made it bleed, as I was lying on my back calling "Police!"—Hawkins took my belt off and James put his hand in my left pocket, and took £1 and half a sovereign, and Hawkins took 1s. 6d. from my other pocket; then they ran away—I got to my feet as soon as I could; I met the police—the woman was gone too—I ran after the prisoners, leaving my belt and hat—the police took me to two public-houses that night—I knew no one in the first—at the second I pointed out James, who was standing up drinking by a tub—I followed the police and James to the station—as we went along somebody went to put something in James's pocket—I did not hear what was said—the officer tried to do something to him—I did not see what was previously going on—on the following Tuesday night I was taken to the station, where I recognised Hawkins among thirteen others—I had previously given a description of him to the police.

Cross-examined by James. I had been looking for lodgings—the policeman called you out of the public-house, and took hold of you after I knew you; he asked me if I knew any man, and I said yes—your face was towards me.

GEORGE MILMAN (Policeman L R 11.) About 9. 50 on Saturday night, 18th January, I was at Vauxhall Cross, one of a number of men there on account of the gas strikes—Bennett spoke to me, and I went with him about thirty yards down Spring Gardens Walk—I saw a belt and hat on the ground in the roadway—I saw no one as I went down—I then took Bennett round different public-houses—there were twenty or thirty people at the Vauxhall Tavern, which is about forty yards from Spring Gardens Walk, and about thirty or forty yards from the George and Dragon—Bennett went in in front of me, and pointed to James, who stood facing him—I went up to James and said, "You will be charged with assaulting and robbing this man"—he made no reply—he was sober—I took him into custody—that was about 11.40—as we were going along Lower Kennington Lane, James said to a man walking by his right side, "Here, old man, is a few coppers for you"—as he said that he put his hand into his right-hand pocket—I seized his hand while it was in the pocket—I afterwards found 15s. 6d. in silver and 1s. 8d. coppers in the pocket—the man was not playing any instrument, or singing—I got a description from Bennett of the other man, and on Tuesday, 21st, I saw Hawkins outside the Elephant and Castle public-house, Vauxhall Cross—I said, "You will be charged, with another man in custody, in assaulting and robbing a man n—I did not say where—he said, "I was in the neighbourhood of Vauxhall Saturday night; in fact, up to Sunday morning"—I took him to Kennington.

Police-station—Bennett was fetched, but he was at work—he came at 10.30—Hawkins was put with thirteen other men of all sorts—there were only two or three tall men; they were your equals—I gave no indication to Bennett—he walked up to Hawkins, and said, "That is the man"—when Hawkins was charged the prisoner said, "You were drunk at the time you came into the public-house and identified the other man"—the prosecutor made no reply—Bennett knew what he was about, and what he was saying, on the Saturday when he first spoke to me—he gave me a good description of the two men—James made no statement at the station—when the money was taken from him he made no reply—I found 2d. on Hawkins on the Tuesday.

Cross-examined by James. I heard no man singing in the streets—he was by your side on the footway—it had been raining—your hat blew off—I did not run after it, another constable did—I never left you.

Cross-examined by Hawkins. I did not see you on Sunday morning or Tuesday afternoon.

THOMAS STACEY (Policeman L 56). I was at Vauxhall Tavern on Saturday night, and saw Bennett point out James, who was standing behind a barrel—thirty or forty people were there—Milman took him in charge—I heard of the robbery at five minutes to ten; from a quarter to half-past ten the two prisoners passed me in company when I was by the lamp at Vauxhall Gross, by the railway-station—five minutes after James was taken I saw Hawkins come put from the same bar that James was taken out of—he was sitting down behind the bar, and must have been there when James was taken—I have known James about five years and Hawkins about eighteen months—I have many times seen them in company in the neighbourhood of Vauxhall.

Cross-examined by James. I saw you proceeding from the Elephant and Castle Tavern towards Vauxhall Tavern—I noticed you because I had heard of the robbery.

SAMUEL BAKER (Policeman W 556). I do point duty near Vauxhall Cross, close to the South-Western Railway Station—I left the station to go on duty at five o'clock; it takes me about twenty minutes to walk to the point—I know the prisoners well by sight—I saw them together on Saturday, 18th January, about 5. 15, outside the Elephant and Castle—I had nothing to draw my attention particularly to them then—about half an hour after I saw them in the same place—I saw them again; they crossed over the road from the Elephant in the direction of the George and Dragon, when I stood under the big lamp, just before I went off point duty at 9. 10—I go off at nine really, but I have to wait till the other men get down—I went away and did not see them again.

Cross-examined by Hawkins. I did not tell the Magistrate I saw you at 11.45 looking in the Elephant doorway, and then run down the Wandsworth Road.


JAMES then PLEADED GUILTY † to a conviction of felony in July, 1888, in the name of William Hopkins †— Twelve Months' Hard Labour, and Twenty Strokes with the Cat.

HAWKINS †— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.

3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-222
VerdictGuilty > lesser offence
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

222. JOHN GANNON (24) , Feloniously wounding David Steward, with intent to do him grievous bodily harm.

MR. HEDDON Prosecuted, and MR. PORCELL Defended. DAVID STEWARD . I am a fellowship porter, of 29, Pepper Street,

Borough—on the evening of 26th December last, Boxing Day, I went to bed about 6 p.m.—about 10 o'clock, we were all in bed, I heard a knocking at the street door—I went and opened the door, and saw the prisoner and two other men and a young woman—when I asked the young woman what she wanted, she said I was a black bastard; I told her if she did not go away I should hit her, and I hit her a light blow with the back of my hand across her face—then the prisoner struck me on the left eye with his fist—I fell down on my side just outside my house, on the kerb—I was only in my shirt and drawers—when I got up I went to get my trousers, and there was blood running from my leg—there was a wound about the middle of my left thigh, about four or five or six inches long and three inches deep; it is healing up now—I was taken to the hospital, where they kept me three weeks and a day.

Cross-examined. When I went to bed at six I left Mrs. Steward sitting up indoors—I was asleep after that—when I went to the door at ten, the girl said nothing about Mrs. Steward knocking her about—I don't know now that Mrs. Steward had been out and fighting with the young woman Lamb—she said in the hospital she had not been fighting—I did not knock the young woman down—I could not say if she went on the ground when I hit her—the prisoner said nothing, but only hit me—he struck me immediately after I struck the girl—I don't interfere with people—the Magistrate gave me two months; the prisoner's wife sat two doors from where I live, and I fell over her foot; I did not knock her about—I did not break a man's nose—a Magistrate gave me a month or £4, and I did the month—the prisoner knocked me once in the eye and knocked me down—I did not say to the Magistrate, "I have no recollection of receiving any blow on the thigh"—I fell half on the kerb and half on the road—I was on the doorstep when the prisoner hit me—the pavement is very narrow—when I got in I found I was stabbed—I recollect being struck in the eye; not in the thigh; it was all done in an instant.

Re-examined. I own four years ago I was convicted of knocking the prisoner's wife about—I have never seen or spoken to either of them since.

MARY ANN STEWARD . I am the prosecutor's wife—on the evening of 26th December I was with prosecutor in bed—we were awoke about ten or half-past, by the knocking at the door—my husband got out of bed and opened the door, and was away about five minutes—then he came to me and sat on the bed and made a complaint, and went off in a faint—I saw blood running down his drawers.

Cross-examined. I had been in bed since nine—I know the woman Lamb—I had seen her, but I had not spoken to her or fought with her that evening; I swear that—I had not just run indoors after fighting with her when this knocking came at the door—I did not see the prisoner till he and two more came to the door—I did not say to the Magistrate his nose was cut, and "I don't know who cut the prisoner's nose"—I said nothing of the kind—I did not see him fighting—I and Steward go as man and wife—I am married to another man, Miller, who deserted me—I have not lived with Landson—I have lived with Steward for twelve months; before that I lived with my husband—I was not drunk on this evening.

Re-examined. I know nothing about the prisoner's nose being cut; he

asked the Magistrate if it could be examined, and said my husband did it; but he could not have done it, he was not at the door long enough.

HENRY WHITE (Policeman M 241). I was called to 29, Pepper Street on this night, and found the prosecutor bleeding from a wound in the thigh—he made a statement to me at the hospital, and gave a description of a man—I gave information.

ARTHUR COX (Detective M). On Friday, 27th December, I went with Otway to a common lodging-house, Bed Cross Street, Borough, where I saw the prisoner sitting by the fire in the kitchen—I said, "I shall take you into custody for stabbing a man named Steward last night in Pepper Street"—he said, "I did not stab him; I am innocent of it; I admit having a fight with him"—he was taken to the station and charged; he said, "I am innocent of it; I did not stab him"—I searched him, and found this pocket-knife on him—I noticed on it a stain; I can't say what it is; the doctor has seen it—I took his waistcoat off, and found fresh blood on the front of that.

Cross-examined. The blood on the waistcoat was hardly dry—the prisoner said, "I was fighting, and that blood was from my own nose and mouth"—he had a bruise on his upper lip; that was the following morning—I noticed nothing the matter with his nose; he showed me his lip; there was a slight cut there—he might have had a swollen eye; I did not notice.

Re-examined. The cut on his upper lip was about a quarter of an inch long; I could not judge how much blood would be likely to come from it.

SAMUEL TYNDAL . I work at a wine merchant's, and live at Orange Street, at the bottom of Pepper Street—on Boxing Night I was outside the Roebuck public-house in Union Street, about twenty yards from Pepper Street, between half-past nine and ten—I saw a crowd of people round the prosecutor fighting him with belts—I did not see Steward there—the prisoner had an open knife with a brown handle in his hand—I wild not swear to the knife—I saw just the end of the handle—there was a good light there—I went away, leaving the prisoner with the knife in his hand.

Cross-examined. The policeman told me the Roebuck was twenty or thirty yards away from where the prosecutor lives—I did not see the prisoner strike anybody with the knife—there were a lot of people having a scrimmage—belts flying about—I was on the pavement, the prisoner was in the middle of the mob—that was the opportunity I had of seeing if he had a knife in is hand.

ARCHIBALD LEWIS DEVENISH MEARS . I was house surgeon at Guy's hospital on 26th December, when I examined the prosecutor there between 11 and 12 p.m.—he had a punctured wound on the side of the left thigh—the skin incision was from one-half to three-quarters of an inch long, and the wound 3 in deep—a sharp instrument such as a knife would use such a wound—I should think it might have been done with this there is a mark on the blade, I cannot say if it is blood or not.

Cross-examined. The injury might have been caused by a fall on some sharp instrument—I think it is rather improbable it was caused by a fall a broken bottle or a piece of glass, but I cannot say it is impossible, if glass was something the shape of a knife.

Re-examined, I think it very improbable it was caused by a fall on a bottle—it was a clean cut—the prosecutor says he fell on his side, and if he fell on glass the injury would be caused in the way it was—it would run through the muscle—it could not have been caused by the kerb—I could not swear as to whether it was blood on the waistcoat.

GUILTY**† of unlawful wounding. — Fifteen Months' Hard Labour.

3rd February 1890
Reference Numbert18900203-223
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty; Not Guilty > unknown; Guilty > lesser offence
SentenceMiscellaneous > sureties; Imprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

223. ANNIE CUNNINGHAM (20), THOMAS MARLOW (23), AMELIA MARLOW (50), and WILLIAM JOHN MALONE (18) , Burglary in the dwelling-house of Ellen Eliza Pettit, and stealing a clock and other articles, her goods. Second Count, receiving the same. Other Counts, alleging the articles to be the property of Sir James Hannen, the President of the Probate Division.


MR. AVORY and MR. BIRON Prosecuted.

ELLEN ELIZA PETTIT . I am now living at 29, Webb's Road, Battersea Rise—up to 8th January I was living as housekeeper to the late Mr. Oakes George Gillett, at 20, Maisehill Road, Plough Road, Clapham Junction—on 8th January Mr. Gillett died, and I left his house about half-past five a.m., after locking it safely up, as I thought—I shut the outside door, but did not lock it—I locked the back parlour door, and took the key with me; and the front parlour door I locked, and left the key in the door—this clock was on the mantelpiece in the front room on that night—I value it at about three guineas—this tablecloth was folded up on the foot of the sofa in the same room as the clock; it was of the value of 5s. or 5s. 6d.—all this property was in the house on 8th January when I left at half-past five—I came back to the house on the 10th, about 8 p.m., and found all the doors open—I missed the clock, the table-cover, all Mr. Gillett's clothes, this dress, of the value of two guineas, a cashmere shawl, which is my grandmother's, and two clocks—I saw this file on the chest of drawers.

WILLIAM DONELLY (Policeman V 377). At half-past one a.m. on 10th January I was on duty in Darien Road, Clapham, which is about 200 yards from the Maisehill Road—I saw Annie Cunningham carrying something bulky, and I said to her, "What have you got there?"—she said, "A clock; two men asked me to carry it to the bottom of Plough Lane"—I examined the bundle, and found it was this clock done up in this table-cover—when I first saw her she was in the company of two men, who were each carrying a parcel—they decamped when I came up to Cunningham—Thomas Marlow was one of the men; I saw his face quite distinctly; he was quite close to a gas-lamp—Cunningham also said the two men were strangers to her.

Cross-examined by Thomas Marlow. You ran away with the other man, who is not in custody—I did not arrest you at Wandsworth Police-court, because I did not see you there—I don't know you were in bed at this time.

Re-examined. I picked him out of a dozen men at the station—I could not arrest him at the time; he and the other ran away; I stuck to Cunningham.

JANE WALSINGCROFT . I am female searcher at Battersea Police-station—I examined Annie Cunningham on 10th January—I found in her dress pocket a key, which I gave to Inspector Dennis at the office.

JOHN DENNIS (Inspector V). This key was handed to me by Walsingcroft at the station, and on the evening of the 10th I went with it to 20,

Maisehill Road, where I unlocked the front door with it—I examined the premises, and found the door of the back bedroom had been forced open—I was shown a file by Pettit, which corresponded with the marks on the bedroom door.

REGINALD REED . I am a pawnbroker's assistant to the executors of the late Mr. Barker, who carried on business at 277, King's Road, Chelsea—this dress was pledged with me on 11th January, about 7 p.m., I should think, by the prisoner, Amelia Harlow; I cannot definitely swear to her—that was the first time I saw her; I don't recognise her as a customer—I next saw her at the station, where I picked her out from about a dozen other women, I should think, of similar build.

Cross-examined by Amelia Marlow. I believe you pawned the dress, because of your features—I don't swear to you—I remember two women pawning the dress.

By the COURT. I asked if it was hers, and they said it was Mrs. Wright's, who had sent her to pledge it.

Re-examined. Both women spoke—the other one was a younger woman, I believe—I don't recognise their voices—I don't think I ever saw Cunningham before.

JOHN THORLEY (Detective V). I went to 122, Speke Road, Battersea, on 28th January, to arrest Amelia Marlow—that house is a brothel, kept by her—I knocked at the front door, someone came to the area, and I and Winzer went into the front kitchen—Amelia Marlow came in—I said, "We are police officers, and are about to arrest you on suspicion of pawning a dress that came from 20, Maisehill Road"—she said, "God strike me dead, I know nothing about it"—I said, "You will have to come along with me to the station, and if the pawnbroker fails to identify you as the person who pawned the dress you will be allowed to go"—she was taken to the station, placed among fourteen others, mostly of her own class, and Reed came into the room and at once identified her—he said, "This is the woman"—she made an observation, I cannot say what it was—she was at the farther end to that where he came in—a man came to the station with her—he was placed with twelve others, and subsequently identified by the constable.

Cross-examined by Amelia Marlow. You were placed in the reserve room with fourteen others.

Re-examined. Malone came to the station and gave himself up on this charge about three o'clock on the morning of the 31st—he made a statement.

JOHN WINZER (Detective Sergeant V). I was at tie station when Thomas Marlow was brought there with his mother, Amelia Marlow—neither of them made any reply to the charge; they were charged at the lame time.

Cross-examined by Thomas Marlow. I was at the house when you were arrested; you were sent on to the station, and I afterwards came and told you the charge—you did not say you knew nothing about it, you were aid up in bed; you made no reply.

Amelia Marlow called the following Witnesses.

MARY MARLOW . I am single—I live at 22, Speke Road, Battersea, tad I am your daughter—on the Saturday before the Tuesday on which the detectives came to take you, you were lying ill in bed; you had been ill a month—I could not go to my work—I went again

on the Monday, the 27th, after the Saturday—I knew nothing of the affair till my adopted brother Malone came on the Saturday night, and said he was going to give himself up, as he did not wish to see the innocent suffer for the guilty—this dress never entered our house—I did not see it—you had never been in that pawnshop.

Cross-examined. I went to work at Belgrave Steam Laundry, Pimlico, for ten months, from nine in the morning till nine at night—I have not been since this case came on—Malone was adopted as our brother when he was two years old, and lived with us till he was married six months ago, and went away from Speke Road, and did not tell us where he lived—we never visited him—I had not seen him till the night he came and said he was going to give himself up, because he read in the papers that my mother was mistaken for his wife for pawning the dress, and my brother was mistaken for him—Malone's wife pawned the dress—she is outside waiting to be called, and so is the woman Kate Russell (or Mrs. Titherley now), who went with her to pawn it—my mother was laid up with rheumatism for a long time—she has not been well for twelve months—she was well enough to go out—for a month before her arrest she went out now and then when she could; she did not often get out—I never heard she went to the Police-court; I can't say if she did.

LAURA MALONE . I am the wife of the prisoner Malone. (The witness was cautioned)—I pawned the dress on a Saturday, some weeks back now.

Cross-examined, It was about seven or half-past in the evening—I knew Amelia Marlow before this—my husband is her adopted son—I did not go to the Police-court—I knew nothing about her being charged; I had not been near them—I knew my husband gave himself up, and after that I knew she was charged with pawning the dress—I did not go to the Police-court—he gave himself up when she had been committed for trial—Mrs. Titherley was with me when I pawned this—I gave the ticket, with the money, to my husband—I think it was torn up; I did not see it afterwards.

MARY ANN TITHERLEY . My husband is a printer—we live at 3, Baker's Place, King's Road (The witness was cautioned)—I went with Laura Malone to pawn the dress—I met her in the King's Road, Chelsea, and she asked me if I would go—she asked 10s. on it—the pawnbroker said he would give her 8s.—she said she would not take 8s, and he gave her 10s.

REGINALD REED (Re-examined). I cannot say one way or the other as to whether either Laura Malone or Titherley pawned the dress.

JOHN DENNIS (Re-examined). The key found on Cunningham was not tried in her own door; we only recently discovered where she lived, as she gave the address Speke Road at first.

ELIZA PETTIT (Re-examined). Mr. Gillett died at ten minutes past twelve on the early morning of the 8th, and I went away the same morning.

Amelia Marlow, in her defence, said she knew nothing about it; that Malone did not live at home, and that she had not seen him for some time.

Cunningham said that Malone gave her the clock and the table-cover, and asked her to carry them home.

Thomas Marlow said, at the time of the robbery he was in bed with a violent cold and pleurisy, and was not out of bed all the week.

AMELIA and THOMAS MARLOW NOT GUILTY —CUNNINGHAM GUILTY of receiving; Discharged on Recognisances —MALONE PLEADED GUILTYto a conviction of felony in October, 1888.— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.

In the case of Davis and Selfe the following evidence for the defence was omitted:

SIDNEY BUTLER . I live at Chelsea Gardens, and I have been with Reynolds and Co., working engineers, for fourteen years—on one occasion I had put in a boiler at Mr. Scrivener's, in Regent's Park, and I told the prisoner very likely if he went there he Would get an order for covering the boiler; I suppose he did so, because he offered me 15s. or 16s.—I did not care about it at first, I thought he was giving it himself, but he pressed it on me, and I thought it was a regular thing, and took it—he gave me that out of his pocket.


View as XML