Old Bailey Proceedings.
11th January 1892
Reference Number: t18920111

ActionsCite this text | Print-friendly version | Report an error
Old Bailey Proceedings front matter.
11th January 1892
Reference Numberf18920111

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, January 11th, 1892, and following days.

BEFORE the RIGHT HON. DAVID EVANS, LORD MAYOR of the City of London; Sir LEWIS WILLIAM CAVE , one of the Justices of Her Majesty's High Court of Justice; Sir POLYDORE DE KEYSER , Bart., Sir JAMES WHITEHEAD , Bart., Aldermen of the said City; JOSEPH RENALS, Esq., WALTER HENRY WILKIN , Esq., GEORGE FAUDEL PHILLIPS, Esq., HORATIO DAVID DAVIES , Esq., JOHN VOCE MOORE, Esq., ALFRED JAS. NEWTON , Esq., Sir JAS. CLARKE LAWRENCE , Bart., Sir JOHN WHITAKER ELLIS, Bart., M. P., FRANK GREEN , Esq., and JOSEPH COCKFIELD DIMSDALE, Esq., other of the Aldermen of the said City; Sir WILLIAM THOMAS CHARLEY , Knt., Q. C., D. C. L., Common Serjeant of the said City; and ROBERT MALCOLM KERR , Esq., L.L. D., Judge of the Sheriff's Court; Her Majesty's Justices of Oyer and Terminer and General Gaol Delivery, holden for the said City, and Judges of the Central Criminal Court.









A star (*) denotes that prisoners have been previously in custody—two stats (**) 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, January 11th, 1892.

Before Mr. Common Serjeant.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-162
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

162. JAMES STEER (26) PLEADED GUILTY to two indictments for stealing £150, £44, and various other sums.

MR. C. F. GILL, for the prosecution, stated that the prisoner's defalcations amounted to £1,522.— Five Years' Penal Servitude.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-163
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

163. FREDERICK MYERS (29) was indicted for indecently assaulting Frances Ellard and Rose Ellard.

MR. ELDRED Prosecuted, and MR. ROUTH Defended.

GUILTY Twelve Months' Hard Labour.

(For other cases tried this day, see Essex Cases.)

OLD COURT.—Tuesday, January 12th, 1892.

Before Mr. Common Serjeant.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-164
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

164. FRANK EDWARD MASLIN (27) PLEADED GUILTY to three indictments for embezzling £10 2s. 6d., £27, and other sums, with intent to defraud.— Nine Months' Hard Labour.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-165
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

165. WILLIAM HILLIER (33) , to unlawfully knowing Lydia Needs, a girl under the age of sixteen — Ten Months' Hard Labour. And [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-166
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceNo Punishment > sentence respited

Related Material

(166). FREDERICK JAMES LAST (27) , to stealing three securities for £49 15s., £1, and £10, of Eardley Bailey Denton and others, his masters.— Judgment respited. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-167
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

167. RICHARD ALBERT HIRST , Unlawfully using violence to William Carver, with a view to compel him to abstain from work. Second Count, for intimidating him. Third Count, for a common assault.

MR. BIRON Prosecuted, and MR. PURCELL Defended.

MR. PURCELL applied to quash the Second Count of the indictment, on the

ground that the Court had no jurisdiction to try it; the First Count was the only one upon which the defendant had elected to be committed, and the Second Count charged a distinct offence of intimidation, and did not include in it the substance of that charged in the First Count. After hearing MR. BIRON the COMMON SERJEANT sustained the objection, and quashed the Second Count.

WILLIAM CARVER . I live at 2, Wiltshire Road, Brixton, and am a bookbinder—I entered the service of Messrs. Shaw and Sons, of Fetter Lane, on 27th October—at that time I knew there were certain disputes going on between Messrs. Shaw and Sons and their employés—there were a lot of men walking up and down, as pickets, to see if anyone came to take work there, and try to persuade them to go to the Society's rooms, and to pay their fare back—I have seen the prisoner there as one of the pickets many times between 27th October and 16th November; he was there nearly every day; I have heard him say, "Come out, and be men"—that was said by him as well as the other pickets—they followed us as we went along the streets, walking by the side of us, calling us rats, and all that, b——old rats, and "You want your d—d b——old heads knocked off"—I was desirous of obtaining lodgings near my work, and on 16th November I spoke to Mr. Gordon, the manager, about it—I went out about half-past twelve—when I got outside I saw the prisoner just alongside the front door—I went out at the front door and turned up Fetter Lane; the prisoner followed, me—he said, "What do you mean by coming and taking work out of other people's hands?"—that was the first thing he said to me—then he called me a b——old rat—I said I did not want to have anything to say to him—I went on, he still following me—he kept abusing me with filthy language, saying, "You b——old rat, you ought to have your d—b—old head knocked off"—he followed me from one hundred and fifty to two hundred yards—I asked him what he was following me about for—he said he would follow me as long as he had a mind, and where he had a mind—finding he was following me in this way, I went back to Shaw and Sons—I came down Fetter Lane; before doing so I went down West Harding Street, thinking he would not follow me there—finding he did not give over following me, I turned to go back to Shaw's, and when I turned the prisoner struck me on the side of the face with his hand—I said, "If you strike me again you will have to pay for it"—he struck me a second time in the same way—I then went back in the direction of Shaw's—I saw Police Constable 434 outside, and I said to him in the prisoner's hearing, "I give this man in charge, he has been striking me"—the policeman said, "Would Mr. Shaw be willing that he should be given in charge?"—I went on and happened to come across Mr. Shaw Bond, and I made a communication to him, and he came out and spoke to the prisoner; I did not hear what he said—it was in Fetter Lane that this assault took place. (A plan was produced, and the witness marked upon it the place where the assault took place as just in West Harding Street)—the new men came by train of a morning, for the first part of the time, and were escorted to work by the police.

Cross-examined. If was unusual for one of the new men to go out in the middle of the day—I asked permission in the morning—I did not see a member of the firm or a clerk watching at the door when I went out—I heard there was a clerk looking out at the door—I believe

thirteen men in this department went out after notice, and thirteen new men were taken on; there was some dispute about working overtime—the new men were not members of the union—the prisoner did not ask me to join the union on the 16th; he had asked me along with the rest—after coming out at the front door I went on towards Holborn; I did not stop—West Harding Street is not the first turning from Shaw's; there is a little turning first—the second time the prisoner struck me was in the face, and on the lip; both blows were on the side of the face—when I spoke to the policeman I believe he said, "Can you show me any mark?"or something of the sort—he did not say, "You have got no mark,"or "I can't see any mark"—he said he had not seen the blow struck—I did not mention to the policeman about my lip being cut—I went to the Mansion House with Mr. Gordon, the manager; he wrote out the information for me; it was written out at Shaw's, one of the clerks wrote it out—I don't think Mr. Shaw Bond was present, or either of the partners—when I told the policeman that the prisoner had struck me, the prisoner said, "I never struck the man at all"—when one of the firm said, "What business have you to interfere with my men, why did you strike him?" I did not hear the prisoner reply, "I did not strike him"—I think nothing was said in the information about my lip being cut—I told the Lord Mayor that the two blows cut my lip just inside.

Re-examined. I first found out that my lip was cut when I got into the shop, I showed it to my shopmates—it could not be seen from the outside; it was just as if it was done by being knocked against the teeth and breaking the skin.

ARTHUR SKEATS . I am a clerk to Shaw and Sons—on 16th November, about half-past twelve, I was inside the premises—I saw Carver go out and walk up Fetter Lane towards Holborn—I saw the prisoner following him—I went out and looked up the road after them—I did not follow them—I crossed over to the opposite side, and saw them as far as the corner of West Harding Street—the prisoner was walking behind Carver and talking to him, not quietly, rather excitedly—at the corner of West Harding Street a cart intervened; after the cart had passed I saw them turning down West Harding Street—I then went into the shop—I afterwards saw Carver come back, I did not see anything about his lip then, I did afterwards; in the afternoon he showed it to me; I noticed that it was cut; I did not see anyone but the prisoner following Carver—I saw Tickner at the Police-court—I saw him on the 16th outside Shaw's, walking up and down as a picket—he did not follow them up Fetter Lane.

Cross-examined. It was mere idle curiosity that took me to the door to look after Carver—the clerks can go out when they please—I did not know that Carver was going out—the new men were brought and taken back by omnibus morning and evening—it was an unusual thing for one of the new men to go out in the day—the other men outside did not follow the prisoner and Carver, they remained about the door—I noticed Tickner that day particularly—there were three men, including the prisoner—I had no motive for watching them—Tickner could not see the prisoner and Carver going up the street; he was on Shaw's side of the way—the cart was in Fetter Lane—anyone on Shaw's side would not have a better opportunity of seeing the cart than I had, he would not

see the cart at all; the road there bends very much—I think this is the first time I have mentioned seeing the cart.

Re-examined. Tickner was on Shaw's side, walking up and down outside the door. (The witness pointed out on the plan the position in which he and Tickner were standing.)

FREDERICK ROBERTS (City Policeman 434). On 16th November, about half-past twelve, I was stationed outside Messrs. Shaw's premises on account of the strike there—a little after twelve Carver came up to me and made a complaint—he said, "I have been assaulted; I give that man (the prisoner) in charge for assaulting me"—I said, "I don't see any marks of violence upon you"—he then went into the shop and came out with Mr. Bond—he said to the prisoner, "Hirst, I know you; I shall apply for a summons against you"—I said I would take him into custody if he pressed it; but Mr. Bond suggested that a summons would meet the case—the prisoner said, "I never struck him"—I had seen the prisoner as a picket outside on several occasions.

Cross-examined. I had been there on special duty for several days, on and off—when Carver came up to me I did not say, "Would Mr. Shaw like me to take him into custody?"—I did not ask Carver if he had got any-marks; I said, "I don't see any marks upon you"—the prisoner said at once, "I never struck him, I only spoke to him."

RICHARD SHAW BOND . I am one of the partners in Shaw and Sons—shortly before 27th October a number of our men went out on strike, Hirst among them—Carver was one of the new men taken on in their place—on the 16th November I remember Carver going out and coming back and making a communication to me; in consequence of that I went to the door and saw Hirst—I asked him if his name was Hirst—he said, "Yes"—I then asked him why he struck Carver or "my man"—he said, "I never struck him"—I then asked why he interfered with him at all—I think he made no observation to that—he could hear what I said—this is a correct plan.

Cross-examined. Hirst had been about two years and a half with the firm; he bore the character of a peaceable man while with us—there had been a difference with the thirteen men about overtime, and some were discharged, and then the remainder of the thirteen men gave notice to leave.

JAMES GORDON . I am manager to Messrs. Shaw and Sons—on 16th November Carver came to me for permission to go out—he went out about half-past twelve—I was not there when he came back—I took down the information in this matter from Carver's dictation.

WALTER GREEN . I live at 149, Penton Place, and am a journeyman bookbinder—I was employed by Shaw and Sons as a new hand—I saw Carver when he came in on 16th November—I noticed that he was rather excited—after speaking to him I noticed that his upper lip was swollen on the right side—I looked inside the lip and I saw a cut; it was a straight cut, just as if it had been torn against a tooth, the result of a knock.

Cross-examined. I know that a summons was taken out against the prisoner for an assault—I knew it from lodging with Carver at the time; I was the only one of the hands that lodged with him—I noticed the cut in the shop, about twenty minutes to one; that was before he went to the Mansion House—I did not go there with him—he did not mention

anything to me about the case after he came back; he told me he had been before the Lord Mayor—I then went to the solicitor and said I had seen the cut; I can't exactly say the day, it was a week or a fortnight ago; Mr. Gordon asked me to go—I told him what I had seen; that was after I had been before the Lord Mayor.

The prisoner's statement before the Magistrate:"I did not strike him."

Witness for the defence.

EDWARD TICKNER . I live at 171, Lynton Road, Bermondsey—I had not been in the employment of Messrs. Shaw; I was employed to attend outside the premises and see the men coming in and out—I was paid to watch about the premises—I was there on 16th November; I saw Carver come out of Messrs. Shaw's; he turned to the right towards Holborn—I saw Hirst there; we were both walking up and down, Hirst followed Carver—I looked over them, and walked towards them; they were talking together; they walked a little way just before they came to the turning of West Harding Street; nothing happened; they stopped there, and Hirst turned round to come back again, Carver came back as well; he spoke to the constable—I did not lose sight of the two men all the time—Hirst did not raise his hand to Carver, or strike him in the face—if such a thing had occurred I must have seen it.

Cross-examined. I was taking part with the strikers against Messrs. Shaw—I am a vellum binder; I am twenty years of age—I earn 32s. a week as a vellum binder—I was paid eightpence an hour while picketing, seven shillings a day, but that was from half-past seven in the morning till seven in the evening—I had been about two or three days picketing at Shaw's; I went on till the society took me off—I am a member of the union—I was a very energetic picket—I kept my attention towards the door—I did not go away from the door; we were walking up and down—I kept my eye on the door; that was my practice all the time—I saw Carver come out—Hirst was speaking to him quite quietly—they did not turn round into West Harding Street, not at any time—there was no cart there while the men were there; the road bends a bit—I was on the right side of the road going towards Holborn, that is the same side as West Harding Street—I was walking up and down as far as the door—if they had gone into West Harding Street they would have gone out of my sight—I walked up to about there (marking on the plan); I could not see into West Harding Street.

Re-examined. It was part; of my duty to look after the other pickets and see what they were doing—the new men never came out in the daytime before that.

By the JURY. There was no cart in the road; it was quite clear.

The prisoner received a good character.


NEW COURT.—Monday, January 11th, and Tuesday, January 12th, 1892.

Before R. M. Kerr, Esq.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-168
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

168. THOMAS SPRIGGS* (32) and HARRY THORNTON (41) PLEADED GUILTY to unlawfully having counterfeit coin in their possession, with intent to utter it.— Twelve Months' Hard Labour each.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-169
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

169. JOSEPH DRAKEFORD (33) , to embezzling £48 8s. 6d., £21 7s. 1d., and £4 18s. 7d., of Felix Lowey, his master.— Twelve Months' Hard Labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-170
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

170. JAMES HOUGHTON (30) , to stealing a post parcel containing a coat and trousers, the property of H. M. Postmaster-General.— Six Months' Hard Labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-171
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

171. HENRY MEAD (21) , to burglary in the dwelling-house of Philip Walter, and stealing a clock and three coats, his property.— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-172
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

172. ISAAC WEIR (47) , to stealing a cheque for £10 1s. 8d., the property of the Daily Bourse Co., Limited, his masters, after a conviction of felony at Lewes on July 2nd 1883.— Twelve Months' Hard Labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-173
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceNo Punishment > sentence respited

Related Material

173. CHARLES NASH (15) , to burglary in the dwelling-house of the Duke of Grafton, and stealing a watch and other articles, his property.— Judgment respited. And [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-174
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

(174). WILLIAM McCARTHY (34) , to burglary in the dwelling-house of William Bishop, with intent to steal.— Four Months' Hard Labour. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-175
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour; Imprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

175. CHARLES BROWN (30) and JOSEPH CHARLES BAILEY (21) , wilful and corrupt perjury.

MR. C. MATHEWS Prosecuted, and MR. HUTTON Defended.

JOSEPH WEBB . I am band-sergeant on board H. M. ship Rodney—on September 2nd I was coming out of the Britannia Theatre, Hoxton, and met a short, thick-set man, with a dark moustache—I went with him to what I now know as the Central Club, St. Luke's—I saw Liddiard and Noll there; they entered into conversation with me, and I remained there some hours—I saw Charles Hastie a very short distance from me, but had no conversation with him—he left about twenty minutes before me—I left about 2 a.m. with Liddiard and Noll—I said good-night to them outside the club, and walked on by myself—when I had got about one hundred yards, Liddiard, Noll, and another man came up to me, and the one who is in prison now, put his hand in my pocket—I said, "Don't try and thieve, because if you are hard up I will give you a shilling, willingly; I have got to travel to-morrow, and want to go to bed"—they got me on the ground and assaulted me, and the one who is missing was on my chest and stole my money, £8 15s.; he got off—I called "Murder!" and "Police!" and some constables came up; Brown came up first and held the two men till Lemoine came up; they took one each, and I went to the station and made the charge—I gave evidence next day before the Magistrate; the two men only were in custody then; they were remanded till 7th September, when I attended, and Hutchinson and Hastie were also in custody—I only saw three men engaged in the robbery—I did not see Bailey at the time of the robbery or on the way to the station, but I saw him at the Police-station.

Cross-examined by MR. HUTTON. I returned to the Police-station during the day—I went about with Brown next day to see if he could apprehend the third man—I believe Bailey had been to the Inspector and told him he knew who the third man was—I said at the station that I recognised Hastie as being in the crowd, but not taking part in the robbery—I think Hastie was taken into custody after Hutchinson—when Hastie was arrested I said that there were only three men there—the Inspector said, "Can you recognise that man as being in the club?"—I said, "No"—I told him that three men assaulted me, not four—I said if the right man was caught and convicted I would reward him—no crowd had collected when Brown came up—I saw nobody but the police, but I was nearly stunned.

Re-examined. I cannot say whether Brown was present when I spoke of the reward to Bailey—I said, "Are you quite sure you know who this man is?"—he said, "Yes"—I said, "If you can find that man I will reward you"—the statement was, I believe, on the day after the robbery; I do not know who was present.

CHARLES HASTIE . I am a bookmaker's assistant, of 22, Galway Street, St. Luke's—I am a member of the Central Club—on September 3rd, about 12.50 a.m., I was in the bar and saw Webb, Noll, and Liddiard there—I knew Noll and Liddiard—I left about 1.15, leaving them there—I went to the corner of Manton Street, and was twenty-five minutes talking to Townsend and Bow, who came out of the club with me—I got home about 1.30, went into the yard, and was in bed at two o'clock—I did not leave Galway Street till next morning—when I got to Galway Street Mrs. Linski let me in—there is no truth in the assertion that on the morning of September 23rd I assaulted and robbed Webb—when Smith apprehended me I said, "What do you want me for?"—he said, "Being concerned in a highway robbery with violence," and then Brown came up and took hold of me—I said, "I am innocent"—I was taken to Old Street Station, and saw Inspector Burnham, and said, "I am innocent of the crime; I don't know anything more about it than you do"—I know Jerry Flynn; he resembles me, but he is much shorter.

JAMES TOWNSEND . On the morning of September 23rd I saw Hastie at the corner of Galway Street, and left him there about 1.35.

CATHERINE LINSKI . On this' Wednesday night I was staying at 22, Galway Street; I did not live there—Mr. Hastie came in about 1.40 or 1.45—I saw him shortly after he came in, and saw him go into his room—shortly after this the clock struck two—he was actually in his room then.

WILLIAM BURNHAM . I was Police Superintendent; I am now pensioned—I had charge of Old Street Station—on September 3rd, about nine o'clock, I heard a charge of robbery when I went on duty against Liddiard and Noll, who were in custody—en the same day I went to Clerkenwell Police-court and saw the prisoner Brown; he said that the two prisoners, and a third man who had got away, had robbed the prosecutor, on the same day Liddiard and Noll were brought before Mr. Horace Smith—I heard no fourth man mentioned then who had been concerned in the robbery—next day, September 4th, Bailey called at the station and asked me for the officer in the case of the highway robbery—I took him into the library and left him with Brown, and in a short time they both came to me, and Bailey mentioned the name of a man who they said was the third man; it was not Hutchinson or Hastie—I gave them instructions, and Bailey left the station—I saw Brown the same evening, and again next day; he went on reporting to me verbally about the case—I did not know of the arrest of another man on Saturday—I was away on Sunday—on Monday the 7th, about 7.45, I was at home, and Brown came to me with Bailey, and said that Hastie was the man wanted, and he wanted me to hear what Bailey had to say—I said, "If you have any evidence to connect Hastie with the case you go and arrest him"—they did not tell me of the arrest of any other man—when they spoke of Hastie I took it that he was the third man—I went to the station and found Hastie there in Brown's custody—we ail went to

King's Cross; Webb was there—I asked Brown what evidence he had before I took the charge; he produced Bailey, who said he saw either Liddiard or Noll take something from Webb's pocket while he was on the ground, and hand it to Hutchinson, who handed it to Hastie—Hastie said, "Speak the truth, man, speak the truth"—I said, "I will take down in writing what you have to say"—I took it down; this is it: "I am innocent, I was in bed at the time; I saw the prosecutor in the Central Club, and left him there with somebody who I can point out. I went out with Jemmy Townsend, and left him at the corner of Langston Street about half-past one o'clock"—Hastie was taken before the Magistrate the same day; he and Hutchinson were charged, and remanded till the 10th—I first heard of Hutchinson's arrest when I got to Old Street station; that was the first I heard of a fourth man—I did not speak to Brown or Bailey—Brown had said nothing to me up to that time about seeing anything taken by the other men handed by Hutchinson to Hastie—on the 10th they all came before Mr. Horace Smith, and Bailey first gave his evidence on oath—I believe Brown followed him in the witness-box; he had been in Court, I believe, during Bailey's examination; that was Brown's first statement in my hearing of his having seen anything pass—they were all committed for trial to the September Sessions of this Court, and a true bill was found—I believe Bailey attended as a witness before the Grand Jury—the case was adjourned to the next Sessions—Bailey afterwards came to the station with Paling, the landlord of the Rum Puncheon; I do not know the date—he said he felt very uncomfortable, and had brought Paling to make a statement—I took it down, this is it, it was read over to him, and he signed it as correct—he left with Paling—I reported the matter to my Superintendent, inquiries were made, and the case was taken up by the Solicitor to the Treasury; and at the October Sessions, I think, the case against the four men came on for hearing before the late Recorder; the prosecution against Hastie was withdrawn, and Liddiard and Noll were convicted and sentenced (See vol. cxiv., p. 1151)—neither of the prisoners were examined as witnesses; some time after a warrant was applied for against both—Brown had been gone about two days; he was suspended, and I did not see him again till he was brought back in custody.

Cross-examined. Brown has served under me about three years, but I have known him seven years; he has been in the force ten years; he has been commended, and was a very good constable—when Bailey came he simply said that he wanted to see the officer who had charge of the case, to give some information concerning the robbery—I took him into the library to Brown—if Brown had further evidence I should say, "Go and arrest the man"—I do not recollect Bailey saying that there were three or four men; I understood from Webb that there were several present—when Hastie was taken in custody he signed the charge-sheet—I cannot say whether he signed it against four men.

Re-examined. He said he did not recognise Hastie—Brown was commended by the Magistrates at Clerkenwell in July, 1889, for tact and forbearance—I do not know that in 1883 he was cautioned and reproved for improperly taking a man in custody—I have been asked whether four persons were mentioned; they were, but not by Brown; Hastie was one of those persons.

HARRY CAVENDISH . I am clerk at Clerkenwell Police-court—on 7th September a charge was made against Hastie and Hutchinson—Bailey was called, he was the second witness—he was sworn; I took down what he said, and he signed it—this is it: "I live at 97, Old Street, St. Luke's, labourer. At 2.30 on Thursday morning last, 3rd instant, I was passing through Central Street, St. Luke's, close to the Central Club, and saw a lot of row outside the club. I saw prosecutor lying on his back on the ground, and the prisoners, Liddiard and Noll, were kneeling on his chest. I saw these two prisoners (Hutchinson and Hastie) standing round, and one of the other men, Liddiard or Noll, handed something to Hutchinson, and he handed it to the prisoner Hastie, and they parted and went away.

Cross-examined. I can't say what the something was; I did not see it, I saw the hand pass it; a policeman came up afterward—I did not like to tell him then, because I did not want to be in the case I could not see who the two men were. One of them handed something to Hutchinson, and he handed it to the prisoner Hastie I never saw the constable Brown until this occasion. The man was stooping down over the prosecutor when he handed the something to Hutchinson; the other man was kneeling on prosecutor at that time. Hutchinson passed the something to Hastie, and they went away I am certain as to the men Hutchinson and Hastie, etc."—the policeman Brown was then called and sworn; he said, "I apprehended the prisoners Noll and Liddiard at the time of the robbery. I saw then the prisoner Hutchinson pass something to Hastie, who put it in his pocket, and I heard it jingle. Hutchinson went away through Lever Street, and Hastie went towards Old Street. I apprehended Hutchinson at 11.30 on Saturday night; prosecutor was with me, and said, 'That is the man who assisted to rob me. 'I told Hutchinson the charge; he said, 'I don't know Liddiard and Noll, I am innocent. 'I apprehended the prisoner Hastie this morning. I told him the charge; he said, 'Believe me, I don't know anything about it; I was in the club, I saw prosecutor and others there, and I left before they did; the prosecutor was drunk, and was paying for half-pints of gin; he had on him £10 in gold, two watches and chains, three rings, and £2 10s. in silver.

Cross-examined. I know Hastie as living in the neighbourhood, not by name. I saw Liddiard kneeling on the prosecutor; I only saw four men round; I saw no others. I pulled Liddiard off the prosecutor, and I never let go of him. Prosecutor had no stick; he was quite sober. Re-examined. I found Noll and Liddiard both kneeling on the prosecutor, and I got hold of them both. Liddiard was wearing the prosecutor's hat. Police-constable 240 came up, and Liddiard dropped the prosecutor's bat and. said, 'Where is my hat?' The prosecutor's hat was then on the ground, and his name was written on it.

Cross-examined. Liddiard was sober; he did not say his hat had been knocked off by the prosecutor. I am sure prisoner Noll was on the prosecutor. I did not know the witness Bailey till he came to the Police-station at about 11.30 on Friday morning, and he then told me what he had seen. Police sergeant Reynolds had given me Bailey's name and address on Thursday night as a witness who had seen the affair. I believe it was Noll who passed something to Hutchinson; he passed it just before I got hold of him; he was then kneeling on the prosecutor, Liddiard was also kneeling on him and holding him down, etc."—on the 10th he was recalled, the evidence was

read over, and he was cross-examined. (This being read, stated that he saw Liddiard kneeling on the prosecutor, and four men round; and that he did not see Bailey at all.)

THOMAS SMITH (Policeman G 215). On September 7th, about 8.30 a.m., I was called into the Inspector's office, Old Street, and saw Sergeant Gooding, and received instructions from him—I saw the prisoner Brown in the charge-room, and left the station with him—as we neared Central Street he said, "Wait a minute, there is a lad over the road I want to see, and went over the road and fetched Hastie, who I had never seen before—I said, "Who is this lad you have got; we do not want him with us"—Brown said, "Will you come and have a drink?"—I refused, and we went towards Hastie's residence—Brown said, "Come into the Royal Oak; you can wait inside, and you will see us bring him by"—I went on to 22, Galway Street, and as I was knocking at the door I saw Brown following me—I found Hastie at home, got him out into street, and Brown arrested him, and said he would be charged with two men in custody for highway robbery with violence, and receiving the money; he said, "I know nothing whatever about it"—we two walked beside him and passed the Royal Oak—as we neared the Police-station I saw Bailey following about ten yards behind, in Central Street—Hastie was detained at the station, and put with other men; Bailey was brought in, and Sergeant Gooding said, "Pick out the man who you think it is," and he went and touched Hastie and said, "That is the man"—he was then taken to Kings' Cross—on a subsequent day I said to Brown, "If I had known I would not have gone with you"—I was afterwards called upon to make a report.

Cross-examined. I think I made the report about September 20th, after the case against Hastie and Hutchinson had been withdrawn—I have left it at home—I did not put in the report, "You wait here, and we shall come by with Hastie. "

Re-examined. This (produced) is the report I made; what I was speaking of is a copy—I was afterwards called upon to make a report, which I did on 15th October—this is it (produced); this is my signature to it.

By MR. HUTTON. I did not tell the Inspector when I got to the station that Bailey was told to wait there while Hastie was brought by.

WALTER GOODING (Police Sergeant J). I am stationed at Leyton now—on 12th September I was stationed at Old Street, and about 8 a.m. the prisoner Brown came in and said he knew the fourth man, who was wanted in the case of highway robbery—I asked him who it was; he said "Charley Hastie"—I said, "Does Sub-Inspector Burdon Know this?—he said, "Yes; he told me to get whatever evidence I have, and to a apprehend Hastie"—I said, "What evidence have you got?"—he said, "I have got a witness, but he is not here; he saw the Highway robbery, and also saw the fourth man receive some money, which was the proceeds of the robbery"—he said nothing at that time about having seen money pass between the third man and the fourth—I sent Police Constable Smith with him, because I thought he might want assistance—three-quarters of an hour afterwards Brown and Smith returned with Hastie, and Brown said, "This is the man"—I asked turn where his witness was, that was Bailey; I said, "Has he seen him?"

—he said, "No; he has not seen him yet"—I said, "You must take care he does not see him, because we shall have to get some people that he may be properly identified—he went to the library, and I went out and got some people as near as possible to Hastie's stamp—I went and saw Bailey, and asked him if he could identify the fourth man who was wanted on the charge of highway robbery—he said, "Yes"—I took him to the charge-room, there were seven or eight men there, he went straight to Hastie and said, "That is the man; I saw him receive the money from the third man"—Hastie said, "I am as innocent as a newborn baby"—I went with him in a cab to King's Gross, where he made a statement in my hearing.

ARTHUR SEWELL (Detective Sergeant G). On 29th October, about nine p.m., I took Bailey in Old Street on a warrant for perjury and subornation to commit perjury, which was read to him at the station—he said, "It was not my fault"—I looked for Brown during October and November, but could not find him; I know his parents' address.

Cross-examined. He lived at the station till he was suspended—it is within my knowledge that he only went to his parents the day before ho was apprehended.

ALFRED GOULD (Detective Sergeant). On 8th December I went with a warrant to Stutton, near Ipswich, to the house of Brown's parents, and saw Brown there—I had been looking for him for some time—he said, "I am pleased to see you come for me, sergeant, as I intended giving myself up in the morning to the county police."

NOT GUILTY on the first Count;

BROWN GUILTY on the Second Count;

BROWN and BAILEY GUILTY on the Third Count

BROWN— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour.

BAILEY— Four Months' Hard Labour.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-176
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

176. ARTHUR JAMES OVERY (22) PLEADED GUILTY to two indictments for stealing post letters containing two postal orders, the property of H. M. Postmaster-General.— Six Months' Hard Labour.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-177
VerdictsGuilty > unknown
SentencesImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

177. JOSEPH THOMAS NIOHOLLS (37) , Unlawfully obtaining, by false pretences, 15s., £6 6s., and other money; also attempting to obtain £50.

MR. P. TAYLOR Prosecuted, and MR. WARBURTON Defended.

PHILIP DELOW . I am a farmer, of Potter's Farm, Stanford-le-Hope, Essex—early last year I wished to borrow £100, and saw an advertisement in the Essex Weekly 'News, in consequence of which I wrote to Mr. J. T. Nicholls, Savoy House, Strand, London, and on February 7th I received this reply. (Enclosing an application form to be filled up and returned)—I have seen the prisoner write; this is his writing—I filled up the prospectus and enclosed a post office order for 15s., and in a few days I called at Savoy House and saw the prisoner, who said he wanted six guineas, and then he would grant me the £100—I gave him £2 and promised to send the rest by post-office order—I went home, and somebody afterwards called on me and I paid him the balance of the six guineas—when I was at Nicholls' office he said he would send me the money on Friday or Saturday, but I never received it—I afterwards received this letter. (Dated February 29th, 1891, from the prisoner, asking the witness to send him the amount of his rent, £50, to April 6th, upon which he would send the loan.)—I afterwards received this telegram:

"Send up the £50 by next post, and will arrange satisfactorily.—Nicholls."—I did not send it—he had asked me to send the £50 rent, so that he could hold it in hand, and then he would let me have the loan—that was after I had paid him the six guineas—I refused—on March 2nd I received this letter. (From the prisoner, stating that he could not proceed further till he received the amount of the rent, and offering to return the amount paid for telegrams.)—I still declined, and received this letter. (Dated March 4th, inquiring whether the witness intended to send the amount of rent, as the landlord had the first claim.)—I again refused, and then received this letter. (Dated March 6th, from the prisoner, to the same effect.)—after that I called on the prisoner with my wife, at Savoy House, and he wanted £15 more for interest on the loan; I paid him £10 down, and sent him £5 by post-office order the same night—he said there was going to be a large committee there, and he would send the loan down early on Saturday morning, if he did not on Friday—I received no money—I wrote to him, and received this letter. (Dated March 10th, from the prisoner, stating that he would write at the end of the week.)—I called at Savoy House on the 23rd, but he would not be seen—he told me two or three weeks running that he would send it on Friday or Saturday—I afterwards got this letter (Dated March 28th, from the prisoner, stating that he would send the cash on Friday, or that the witness could call on Saturday; but it would be better to send it to save the expense of coming up.)—I never received the money—on April 4th I called again with my wife, and the prisoner said that he would send it on Friday or Saturday—I went again, and he would not be seen; his clerk talked to him through a tube, and then said Mr. Nicholls was not well and could not see us to-day—we called again on the Saturday, and he said he could not pay us then, but if we called at three o'clock he would grant us the loan; we called at three, and waited till nearly four, but the office was locked up—I never received any portion of the money—I believed he was carrying on the business of a money-lender, and that induced me to part with the money.

Cross-examined. I live on the Southend line, twenty stations down; someone came down from Nicholls one morning to value my property; he was there about half a day—someone also came down from the Charing Cross Bank; I do not know who or what he came for—the Charing Cross Bank was not named to me—I am not aware that they were to negotiate the loan—the six guineas were not to pay for the valuation—the second valuation did not take a whole day—the prisoner has not offered to pay me £15 on several occasions; he has never offered to repay me or to pay me any money—he did not say he could pay me if I would take £15—I have been farming twelve months last Michaelmas—I began in December, but I took the farm before that—the rent is £50 a year, and the tithe £50; I pay £100—I would not take £150 for my furniture—I received this letter asking whether he should send the £15.

Re-examined. There were two valuations, both prior to my parting with the £15, and prior to his letter asking me for the £50 rent—I had this letter of March 6th before I paid the £15.

ESTHER DELOW . I am the wife of the last witness—I went to the prisoner's office twice with my husband, who paid the prisoner £5 on the first occasion—we did not see the prisoner on the second occasion; he

had locked himself up—I heard his voice speaking to his clerk through a pipe, but could not hear what he said; but it was that he could not see us; we called again on the 3rd, and found the office locked up.

Cross-examined. I was standing against the door when I heard his voice—I saw him against the door, and he locked himself in—he told us to go on the Saturday, and my husband went—the prisoner said he would return the £15 which had been paid for interest, but he would not return the £6 6s. unless we had the £100; he told me once, in a letter, that he would let us have all the money back if we did not have the loan—Mr. Kershaw has the letter—I know that he was trying to get the loan from the Charing Cross Bank to lend to us—I do not know that a valuer came down from the Charing Cross Bank—the valuer did not demur to the furniture and fixtures and say that they were worth much less than my husband stated—I did not speak to him, but he said to me, "Mr. Nicholls will let you have the money"—I was surprised afterwards to see another valuer, but I did not know which bank he came from; he said he had come to value our field—I was told afterwards that this valuation was from another office—I believed we were doing business with Mr. Nicholls.

Re-examined. We received a communication from the prisoner prior to the second valuer coming down—this letter of February 17th states that he had not been able to come down owing to the foggy weather, and here is another of February 7th. (This was to the same effect.)

JOHN WORTHER . I am a clerk in the High Court of Justice, Bankruptcy Department—I produce the file of proceedings in the bankruptcy of Joseph Thomas Nicholls—the petition is dated March 24th, 1891, and the judgment also—the adjudication is May 27th—the prisoner filed a statement of accounts on 14th July, and an amended statement on the 25th, by which it appears that his debts amounted to £2,109 19s. 10d., and the assets were nil.

DANIEL JOHNSON . I am ledger-keeper at the London and County Bank, Covent Garden branch—the prisoner had an account there which ceased in 1890—no money has been paid in since—he had the account two years and nine months.

THOMAS WILLIAM KERR . I am a clerk in the office of the Official Receiver—I produce the books supplied to the prisoner for the purpose of the bankruptcy—I have not examined them; a few entries were made in March, but nothing of any consequence; nothing in the way of substantial business being carried on on the premises—none of the entries in March relate to Delow.

CHARLES GATTAN (Detective Sergeant E). On October 8th I received a warrant for the prisoner's apprehension, and took him on the afternoon of the 30th; I read the warrant to him—he said, "I cannot explain that, I have offered to pay the money back"—I took him to Bow Street; he made no reply to the charge—I found some papers in a small hand-bag.

GUILTY*.— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour.

OLD COURT.—Wednesday, January 13th 1892.

Before Mr. Justice Cave,

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-178
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

178. ELLEN GILES (37) , Feloniously throwing a corrosive fluid upon Charles Goodson, with intend to disfigure. Second Count, to do grievous bodily harm.

MR. POYNTER Prosecuted.

GEORGE DAVID LOWE KNIGHT . I am a surgeon, of 410, Brixton Road—on Monday morning, 14th May, about one, I saw the prosecutor—he was suffering from burns on the right side of the face and neck—his vest and shirt were burnt right through, evidently by some corrosive fluid; I should say it was oil of vitriol, sulphuric acid, that is the only fluid that would do it—I saw the bottle; nothing was left in it but just a film of fluid, which was very acid—the burns on the clothes show that the fluid must have been oil of vitriol.

CHARLES GOODSON . I am a carpenter, and live at 2, Sussex Road, Brixton—the prisoner lived with me as my wife for about three years—on Sunday night, 13th December, about eleven, we were both in the room; I was on the bed with my coat off—my wife was sitting on a chair by the side of the bed—she had come in about eleven, after me—she had had a little to drink, I was sober—she went to a little dressing-table drawer, and pulled out a bottle; I did not know what it was—she put it to her mouth, I thought she was going to take something, then she dashed it in my face; I happened to turn round at the time and it came in my face—as I moved to get out at the door I could feel it was something burning me, and she dashed it at me as I went to get out of the room; it went right down the side of my face, the rest was in the back of my hair, as I was retreating—before this there had been some noise about some woman, unknown to me; she said she was going to do it; I thought she meant burning some pawntickets—I rushed out to go to a doctor, and met the police sergeant—I told him about it, and I gave her in charge; she came back with me—my waistcoat and shirt were injured; I saw the bottle found in the fireplace—I cannot say that it is the same bottle that she took out of the drawer; there had been a label on it, but it was burnt off; it was quite hot when the sergeant took it up—these (produced) are the garments I had on—I had no use for any corrosive fluid in my business or the prisoner's.

Cross-examined. On the Sunday we drank together; I had some four ale, and you had some port wine—you have given me fourteen black eyes in less than six months—you have brought this all on yourself—you have come at night and annoyed me with your drunken fits; was a woman to stand all this and say nothing?

JOHN PALMER (Police Sergeant 55 W). On Sunday night, 13th, I was at Loughborough Park Station, and saw Goodson there; he was without hat, coat or boots—I saw him go to Dr. Powers; he made a complaint to me—I noticed his head was very wet—he was very excited, rubbing his neck—I looked at the back of his neck, it was very red—Dr. Powers examined him—I went with Goodson to 2, Sussex Road; I saw the prisoner there—in her presence he said she did it—he said, "I shall give her into custody"—she said, "I will go with you"—she was taken to the station and charged—when the charge was read over she said, "Yes, I did it; and I wish I had killed him"—I left her at the station, and went back and examined the room—there were signs of a struggle; the bed was in order, and there was a lot of fluid on the bedclothes, and it had burnt holes, and some on the floor

and wall; there were splashes on the wall, and the wood-work and flooring were slightly eaten in with the liquid—there was evidently more than one dash of the liquid, evidently two—I searched for a bottle, and found this one in the fire-place, downstairs, not in the bedroom—there was very slight Are in the fire-place—the bottle was quite hot; there was a label, it was partly rubbed off; I could see distinctly the word "Poison" on the label; it has been rubbed off since.

Prisoner's defence. He treated me very badly, and I could not stand it any longer; I meant to take it myself, only he annoyed me, and I did do it then—I did not know what was in the bottle.

GUILTY, under very great provocation. Nine Months' Hard Labour.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-179
VerdictsNot Guilty > unknown; Not Guilty > no evidence

Related Material

179. EMILY SPRINGALL (42) , Unlawfully neglecting William Walter Springall, aged five months, in a manner likely to cause suffering and injury to his health.

MR. POYNTER Prosecuted.

JOHN JONES . I am assistant foreman on the London and Southwestern. Railway, and live at 4, Alma Road, Larkhall Lane, Clapham—the prisoner came to lodge with me on Friday, 4th November; she occupied one room—she brought with her two children, a baby about five months old and a little girl fifteen years old—on Saturday the 7th, she was drunk, violent, and very abusive, using Very filthy language; this continued till 9 or 10 o'clock at night, she then went out—she came back about half-past twelve so drunk that she fell on the stairs with the baby in her arms—my wife got out of bed and took the baby from her, and kept it for some time, while I carried the prisoner up to her room and put her on the floor—I heard her say several times, "You b——, little b——, I will chop your b——little head off"—on the Sunday and Monday and Tuesday she was very quiet—on Wednesday night she was drunk—I did not see the baby at all during the Week, not till the following Saturday, the 12th, when the prisoner came home drunk at two in the afternoon, using vile language—I had given her notice to leave on the Monday; she had the baby in her arms, and she said, "I will cut your b——little throat"—she threw open her window and was screaming out; the neighbours came round and complained, and I went to the station, and a constable was sent to the house—she went out between eight and nine, and I saw no more of her till she returned at a quarter past twelve—she went upstairs swearing, and she went into her room; I went up after her and tried the door, but could not open it; my wife came up, and then the door was thrown wide open, and I saw a man hiding behind the door—I asked the daughter if it was her father; she said, "No," and I put the man out—all this time the baby was lying, on the bed crying violently—the prisoner was drunk and violent; she had a can of beer in her hand, and said she would break every window in the house—I gave her a push, and she staggered and fell over an earthenware jar; she would not get up, and I said the best thing was to christen her, and I sprinkled some water over her face; at last she quieted down, and went to sleep—I heard noises and bad language in the night, and then a yell, and I went and fetched a constable.

ALICE SPRINGALL . The prisoner is my mother, I live with her—I am sixteen—my little brother was five months old—on Saturday, 12th December, I went out at a quarter to ten to see a little friend home—I

came back at a quarter to twelve—mother was out, she came in about ten minutes afterwards with Mr. Stubbs, to whom she was going to pay some money; she had the baby, it cried once, but nothing to speak of, because I was at home and looked after it; it did not cry when I had it—Mr. Jones came upstairs and threw some water over mother, saying, she wanted christening—she was drunk—she had fed the baby about seven o'clock, and she fed it again that night—in the middle of the night mother roused me and said, "Baby is dead; there is no life," and she asked me to go down and fetch Mrs. Jones—I did so, and she came up and then fetched a policeman, and he fetched a doctor—when Mr. Stubbs was there the baby was not crying; it was lying on the bed asleep—my father does not live with my mother.

Cross-examined. I never saw you strike the baby or do anything to it—you always fed it from the breast, not with any food; it never wanted for anything.

ARTHUR GORING . I live in Clapham Road, and am a divisional surgeon—on 13th November, about twenty minutes past five, I was called to the house, and saw the child; it was about five months old—it had been dead between half an hour and an hour—the prisoner was sitting in a chair, hugging the child; she was drunk, and in a very excited state—I have since made a post-mortem examination—there were no external marks of violence—the body was well nourished—the stomach was quite empty—some hours must have elapsed since it had had food; between three and four hours; that would be a longer time than usual—I did not examine the prisoner to see whether she had milk for the child—the immediate cause of death was pressure on the brain from a clot; there was the rupture of a small vessel at the base of the brain—I could not say whether the child had had a fit—I should say either a fit or screaming would produce such a rupture—want of food would cause screaming.

JOSEPH DUBERRY (446 W). On 13th November I went with Jones to the prisoner's room—she was there, and had the child in her arms—I asked her several times to lay it down; she refused to do so—I asked her if the child was dead—she said it was—I looked at it—the prisoner was very excited, and appeared to be drunk—I fetched the doctor, and he said it was dead—the room was in a very dirty state; the bed was a heap of rags; I did not see a sheet or blanket on the bed.


The prisoner was also charged on the Coroner's inquisition with the manslaughter of the said child, upon which no evidence was offered.


NEW COURT.—Wednesday, January 13th, 1892.

Before Mr. Common Serjeant.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-180
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

180. HENRY JONES** (25) and JOHN SMITH** (22) PLEADED GUILTY to unlawfully attempting to commit burglary.— Nine Months' Hard Labour each.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-181
VerdictNot Guilty > fault

Related Material

181. JAMES FREDERICK NOLAN , Unlawfully converting to his own use £95 13s. 2d., which was entrusted to him with a direction in writing.

MR. ARTHUR GILL Prosecuted, and MR. PURCELL Defended.

The prosecutor instructed the defendant to purchase a marked lot in the catalogue of an auction tea sale, and the prisoner afterwards applied for and received from him a cheque for the money, which he afterwards stated he had used for his own purposes. The COMMON SERJEANT ruled that this did not amount to a direction in writing, and directed a verdict of


11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-182
VerdictGuilty > with recommendation

Related Material

182. CHARLES FLINT and JAMES BROWN , Unlawfully conspiring to steal the goods of John Charles Potter and Co.

MR. GILL Prosecuted, and MR. PURCELL and MR. WARBURTON Defended.

JOHN WOODS . I am manager to C. and C. J. Potter, paper stainers and manufacturers—we employ nearly 2,000 workmen—the basement of our London premises is part store-room and part offices—Flint has been our salesman twenty-seven or twenty-eight years—his wages were 27s. a week—I have seen Brown there—we have three salesmen on the ground floor and one on the basement, each of whom is provided with a book similar to this (produced) which is Flint's book; it is a manifold book in triplicate, two copies being made by the usual carbon paper—the salesman hands the book to the cashier, and the cash boy takes the extension of the items, and takes the cash, and takes one of the triplicates out and puts it on a file, and tears out the second and gives it to the customer, receipted, or. to the salesman for the customer, and the third remains in the book—in consequence of information I had set a watch prior to December 7th—on December 9th Brown came to the warehouse about 12.15 and went down alone into the basement where Flint was"—he then came from the basement with Flint, who had a parcel in his hand wrapped in white paper—he went to the front counter, wrapped it in Drown paper, and tied it with string—I saw him make out the triplicate note in a book which he handed into the office to the cash boy—Gerald Daniels was the clerk at the cash desk—Flint gave the parcel to Brown, who left the warehouse—Detective Saunders, whom I had employed, was outside—I went out to the Bed lion in Cannon Street, and saw Brown; the roll of paper was leaning in a corner close to him—I said, "I think you have just got back the parcel of goods from the firm; can I see it?" I had been to the cash desk and ascertained that it was eight pieces of lining at 4d., 2s. 8d.; he did not answer me, and was very much agitated—I tore the end of the wrapper out, and there were four pieces of sanitary paper in it, six pieces of bedroom paper, and one piece of border, value 9s. 4d.—they were all papers which we manufacture—there was no lining paper there at all—I have seen some scraps of paper produced from a house at Deptford; they were all made by us—I said, "Where is the white lining paper you bought?"—he said, "These are a few pieces that are not lining paper; I have two or three pieces besides"—the detective was outside in plain clothes—I went back to the warehouse and called Flint, who followed me into the office, Brown followed him, and the detective last—Flint spoke first; he said, "They were given in exchange for some goods I had to return"—Brown repeated that and added, "One a piece of border"—one of the partners was there, and they were charged—Flint said to the partner, "I hope

you will look over this affair, it will be a great disgrace to me with your family; the amount is not much, and I will repay it"—I said to Brown, "You were in here on Monday"—he said, "I was not"—I showed Flint the cash paper—this entry is in Flint's writing; "December 7, Mr. Brown, four oil, eight oaks, three lining, at 4d., 1s.; six, numbered 438, at 1s. 6d. Received with thanks, pro C. C. W., E. W."—those are the initials of the witness White—Flint said, "This is not the Brown; it is another Brown"—I saw this counterfoil of the very document found on Brown—at that time Brown had not been searched, and Flint did not know that the invoice would be found on him—they were given in charge and taken to the station—a detective was sent down to where Brown worked—Neville showed me pieces of some of our 1892 patterns—there is no record in our books of 1891 of any cash sale to Brown of papers of this description—Brown bought the cheapest goods we had.

Cross-examined by MR. PURCELL. I have been five years at the London branch of the business—before I was engaged at the mills I was travelling—I have not ascertained that Flint has been in the service of the firm since he was thirteen years of age; we generally send our books to the paper-mill to be destroyed every ten years—there has been a change in the management and in the partnership—customers sometimes desire to change their papers, but we do not always do it; if we do it an entry is made in the rough-credit book, which is open to all the salesmen on the ground floor and basement—we should give you a credit note for the difference, and if you did not like to take it we should give you the money—I am not supposed to know that they make mistakes—if I suspected a man I should be more strict; the difficulty would be less with an old hand, he would know his duty so much better—Flint practically had carte blanche; there was no restriction in the warehouse to his getting goods of every sort and description—I have seen Brown there frequently as a customer during the five years I have been there—he might not say to a customer, "You may have this and bring it back to-morrow,"because we have spoken to him about it very often—we never allow a man to have goods for others which he has not brought back—I have not looked through Flint's book to see whether the entries are put against the lining, but instructions were given to him—all papers bear numbers.

Cross-examined by MR. WARBURTON. I have never seen this card before—I understood that Flint lived at Enfield—I do not know that Brown has been in the habit of dealing with other people in a large way; I have found out nothing about him; I could not find out where he lived, though I asked Flint—this was in broad daylight—he had no bag; I took the parcel and asked him if I could open it; he made no reply.

Re-examined. About eighteen people are employed at Cannon Street; we have three recognised salesmen, but seven or eight people act as salesmen if we are busy—if a cash customer has purchased goods, the number would be specified on the ticket, and desires to exchange them; the number is specified on the ticket, and that would be deducted from the total, and he would pay the difference—if a customer brings back paper and does not make a purchase he gets a credit note—Brown has been during the last twelve months, and has dealt largely in quantity, but not

in price—we have sold him more of one pattern than we hare received from the mill.

WILLIAM SANDERS (City Detective). I was employed on private business at Messrs. Potters, and was there on December 9th, and saw Brown leave with a parcel; he went into the Bed Lion—I told Mr. Ward, who went into the Red Lion, while I waited outside—he came back, and we were passing through the warehouse into Mr. Wood's private office, and as we passed Flint he said to Flint, "Say, change"—I was in plain clothes—I heard Flint say that that was not the same Brown—I found a counterfoil of this entry on Brown.

Cross-examined by MR. PURCELL. Both Flint and Brown went into the office, and one partner was there; Brown never mentioned "Change"in my hearing.

WILLIAM WOODS . I am clerk to the prosecutors—I saw Brown come into the warehouse about 2.30 on the 7th—he came in again at 3.30—he came in again on the 9th—he had nothing with him—he asked for Flint on the 7th, who was not in, and he went out again—I saw Flint there with Brown at 3.30 on the 7th; Hint took four pieces of sanitary paper from the rack, which were made up in brown paper, and I did not see them again—I have seen the invoices found on him, there is nothing about sanitary paper—the price of the paper is from 1s. to 4s. 3d.—I was acting under instructions—I saw Flint, on the 7th, pass his invoice-book into the cash desk.

GEORGE WHITE . I am entering clerk to Messrs. Potter—on December 7th Flint passed me in his book, and this is the fac-simile of my writing by manifold.

GERALD DANIEL . I am entering clerk to the prosecutors—I was at the desk on December 9th when the bill was made out from Flint to Brown for paper, price 2s. 8d.—I handed the 2s. 8d. to the detective—no entry was made to Brown that day but this one, to my knowledge.

EDWARD NEVILLE . I am a traveller, employed at 51, Cannon Street—I accompanied Saunders to Bow Street on the 9th, and saw these remnants of paper which would be sold by Potter and Co.; nineteen out of the twenty were 1891 patterns—I made inquiries about Brown, and went to a house at Rotherhithe where some papering work had been done, and some of this sanitary paper used; the job required more paper to finish it—the paper was of the kind sold by Potter and Co., and a dado border was required to complete it—I saw Brown come to 51, Cannon Street on the 7th and 9th; he brought no parcel on either occasion; to the best of my recollection he had his hands in his pockets.

The prisoners received good characters.

GUILTY.—Recommended to mercy by the fury. Ten Months' Imprisonment each, without Hard Labour.

THIRD COURT.—Wednesday, 13th, January, 1892; and

FOURTH COURT.—Thursday, 14th, January, 1892.

Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-183
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

183. JESSIE LAZENBY (22) PLEADED GUILTY to forging and uttering an order for the payment of £10, with intent to defraud.— Four Months Hard Labour.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-184
VerdictsGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentencesImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

184. FRANK BALDWIN (26) , to obtaining, by false pretences, from Frederick Oatley Bynoe, Robert King, and others, photographic lenses, with intent to defraud, and to four other indictments for forging orders for delivery of lenses.— Twelve Months' Hard Labour. And [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-185
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceMiscellaneous > sureties

Related Material

(185). ARTHUR KING (50) , to feloniously demanding money, with menaces— To enter into recognisances of £20 to come up for judgment when called upon. [Pleaded guilty: See original trial image.]

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-186
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty; Not Guilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

186. FREDERICK SHELL (24), HENRY KING (19), and ROSE SMITH (18) , Burglary in the dwelling-house of Lawrence Bucknill, and stealing four coats and other goods, his property.


MR. KEITH FRITH Prosecuted.

EDWARD JOHNSTON (22 Y). I noticed the shop window broken at 153, Caledonian Road, Islington—the hole in the window was large enough for a man to put his hand through—there was an iron railing in front of the window—I made inquiries—I went with Marony to 44, Pulteney Street, Islington—the prisoners were there—I knocked—Smith said, "Who's there?"—I said, "I want to see your husband"—she made no reply—I knocked again and received no answer—I knocked a third time and said if the door was not opened I would force it—I received no answer—I forced the door—the prisoners were in bed together—on the floor were seventeen shirts, five coats, trousers, vests, and handkerchiefs, which have been identified as having been stolen from the shop—I said, "Get up; you will be charged with committing a burglary at 153. Caledonian Road"—I convened them to the station in a cab.

JOHN AKERS (576 Y). At 12.30 a.m., on 24th December, I saw Smith with Shell in the Caledonian Road, near Copenhagen Street, at a distance of about 150 yards from the prosecutor's premises.

JOHN LAWRENCE BUCKNILL . I am an outfitter, at 153, Caledonian Road—my shop was safely shut up at 11 p.m. on 23rd December—the shop front was quite safe—I was disturbed by the police about three a.m. on 24th—I found my shop window had been broken—the articles (produced) are a portion of those I missed—I was shown them by the police, and have identified them as my property—these things could have been reached by a man's hand being thrust through the window—I knew the prisoners by sight.

STEPHEN MARONY (Police Constable Y). I went with Johnston to 44, Pulteney Street—we apprehended the prisoners—they were taken to the station in a cab—after a statement by Shell, Smith said, "I know who put us away. "

Smith's defence. I never said that I am innocent—it was not my place to get up and open the door—I was at home at 11.30 when they came home—it seems very hard I should be brought into it.


SHELL PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction in September, 1889, and KING to a conviction in July 1889, at this Court.— Five Years' Penal Servitude each.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-187
VerdictGuilty > with recommendation
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

187. THOMAS HAMMOND , Unlawfully obtaining, by false pretences, orders for the payment of £71 15s. 6d., £80 18s. 8d., and £71 17s. 1d.; and other Counts for making false entries, with intent to defraud.

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

ALFRED HODGKINSON . I am a solicitor, and Deputy-Coroner for the

North-Eastern District of the County of London—I keep a diary showing the inquests I hold—the expenses of each inquest are entered on a voucher—at the close of each inquest the prisoner's duty was to pay the expenses, and put the voucher-paper for my signature—voucher 40 relates to an inquest upon the body of Charles Reece—I held the inquest on 19th August, at the Old Ford Smead Road Board school, and not at the Vestry Hall as described on the voucher—I find a charge of 5s. for removing the body to the mortuary, and 7s. for hire of the room for the inquest—those expenses were not incurred nor allowed by me—those figures were not on when I signed the voucher—the total stood at 7s.—it is now £1 19s.—the body was in the house where the deceased died, and the inquest was held in the Board schoolroom—they are in the same street—voucher 49 relates to an inquest on the body of Frank White—I held that inquest at the Shoreditch Town Hall, and not at the Vestry Hall in the Old Artillery Ground as described—on the same day I held two inquests at the Shoreditch Town Hall—there would be only one payment of 7s. for the hue of the room—I find by voucher 47 that 7s. was paid, and was properly charged in the first inquest—the 7s. was not paid on the inquest on the body of Frank White—this voucher of the inquest was not signed by me—I did not authorise anybody to sign it—those are the only two inquests I held in this case.

Cross-examined. The vouchers would be presented to me at the end of the three inquests—No. 40 being one inquest, would be presented at the end of the inquest—I have no doubt I looked at the heading before I signed it—I did not notice "Vestry Hall, Bow," or I should have altered the words—I do not say whether the words were in or out—I am not in the habit of signing without noticing the place inserted—in a document like that with die confidence I had in the prisoner I took it to be properly filled up—in Shoreditch I might sign the document without the place being inserted in it, but not in Bow—the heading is always put before the inquest is held—the place might be changed prior to the jury being summoned—the place might be changed after it is filled in—it might be filled in too soon—I said at the Police-court the place of holding the inquest might be altered at the request of friends—vouchers sometimes have alterations upon them at the time I sign them—I will swear the 7s. and the 5s. were not in when I signed the voucher—I always check the figures before I sign the voucher—I held three inquests on 19th of August, one at Tottenham, another at Hackney, but this was the only one in the prisoner's district—the voucher was shown to me by the County Council early in December—No. 49 also has the wrong address—the body was tying in the Shoreditch Mortuary—the old Artillery Ground is between Spitalfields and the mortuary—that is not in Bow; it is a long way off—Old Ford refers to No. 40—I cannot tell you whether the inquest was held at the Board school at the request of the father of the boy—I never heard of the rule that the Coroner should settle with his officer at the end of each inquest—if the officer wanted money ht would ask, and I would give it him—it was not the Coroners duty to recoup for the expenses incurred after each inquest—Dr. Macdonald would have no knowledge of my expenses, except I made a declaration—on one occasion I made a declaration—I signed vouchers, but not these.

Re-examined. In case of an alteration I always initialled the voucher

—the hire of the hall would not be paid before the inquest, but amounts to be paid might be inserted in the voucher—the prisoner would not get the signature of the witness before the inquest, nor pay the money.

RODERIC MACDONALD , M. D. I am Coroner for the North-Eastern District of the County of London—the London part of the district is divided into three sub-districts—the prisoner is my officer for one district—he was also clerk of the office in which the accounts of the whole district were kept—it was his duty to make out vouchers for each inquest, showing expenses paid—also to pay the expenses—he ought to obtain the signature of the person to whom each item was paid upon the voucher and place it before me to sign—in the office he kept the register—in it he would enter the totals of the amounts paid at each inquest—at the conclusion of each month I send the vouchers to the London County Council, with a statutory declaration that they are correct, and obtain payment from the Council—the prisoner rendered me an account at the end of each month, showing how he stood—I supplied him from time to time with the money he wanted, and settled up at the end of each month with a cheque—voucher 4, of 4th November, 1890, refers to an inquest held by me—it purports to show two sums of one guinea each were paid to Dr. Ryan, one for giving evidence, and the other for a post-mortem examination—it appears to be signed by Dr. Ryan—the signature for the post-mortem is similar in appearance to the first signature—the total is £2 14s.—it appears to have been altered from £1 13s.—the total in the register is entered as £2 14s.—that appears to have been altered—I have the depositions I took on that inquest—I find there was no post-Mortem examination—looking at the voucher 18, 8th November, I did not hold that inquest—the voucher shows two sums of one guinea paid to Dr. Roberts for giving evidence and holding a post-mortem examination—Dr. Roberts' signatures are against the items—the second signature is like the first—the total is £2 17s.—that appears to have been altered from £ 16s.,—the register appears to have been altered in the same way—looking at the depositions, I find there was no postmortem examination—on 13th January, 1891, I held an inquest on the body of William Downs—I find two sums of one guinea entered to Dr. Barber with his signature against each—the signatures are like each other—the total, £2 18s., appears to have been altered from £1 16s. or £1 17s—I find from the depositions there was no post-mortem—it is entered in the register as £2 18s.—I have my original slip of that—it appears to have been altered in the register, but it is not so definite as the others—I made out the expenses of each inquest separate from the voucher—that was checked with the voucher—my slip shows the amount of expenses of the inquest was £1 16s.—these slips have been retained in the office for the purpose of comparison—on 30th May, 1891, I held an inquest on the body of John Smith—that voucher shows two sums of one guinea paid to Dr. Barber, with his signature against each—the total is £3 1s.—that has been altered from £2 1s. registry entry is £3 1s.—I find from the depositions no post-mortem examination—I have the slip showing £2—on 17th June, 1891 I held an inquest on the body of Hannah Rees—a guinea is entered Dr. Phillips for post-mortem examination—the total has been altered from £1 11s. to £2 12s.—it is changed in the same way in the register-for each month in which these inquests

were held I have settled with the prisoner by giving him a cheque to pay expenses—the amounts have been drawn—these are the cheques—these are the accounts which the prisoner rendered to me, showing the total sums due—they are made up on the supposition that the register is. correct—I have paid the larger amounts how appearing on the voucher to the prisoner—I have received those amounts from the County Council—in consequence of an investigation at the offices of the County Council, my attention was called to this matter by the Council.

Cross-examined. I have been satisfied with the prisoner's conduct in every way—I never bad reason to complain of him; I found him a capital servant—these vouchers were prepared in the office ready for the sums to be obtained—rarely an inquest has been changed at the last moment—as to No. 40, the inquest would have taken place at the Vestry Hall, which is in the parish of Bow, had it not been held at the Board School, and the prisoner would naturally fill in "Vestry Hall, Bow"—he would put in the voucher beforehand the expenses which one expects to be incurred, such as 5s. for the Jury, 5s. for removal of body, and 7s. for the hire of the room—there is nothing irregular in that—the place of inquest was changed to oblige the people—the number of my inquests vary, but they average about twenty a week—some days I might have ten or twelve, or even more—there is plenty of time for the vouchers—I do not agree that the vouchers are frequently completed very hurriedly, they may be in Mr. Hodgkinson's cases—I give the same answer when the inquests are ten in a day—we then have always to rush from one inquest to another—I sign the vouchers in batches; not after every separate inquest—one batch may include five, six, seven, or eight inquests—the officer would get the signatures of the witnesses as we were going along—the prisoner would have to continue paying expenses—he could ask for a cheque on account, and occasionally I gave him one—I have seen other alterations in the register—I find some here—there are instances of alteration where the voucher has been accurate—they may have arisen in consequence of witnesses having left the Court without signing, and their signatures have had to be obtained—that has not arisen from hurry—in cases where a post-mortem is held, as a, matter of course Hammond was understood to give the order; but where there was any doubt, Hammond consulted me, and I crave the order—he gave the order in a number of oases—if he had given the order he might insert the amount in the voucher before the inquest; or if he intended, because it was known whether a post-mortem would be held—in most cases he would have authority to insert one guinea for the doctor's attendance, not always—the vouchers would all be in Hammond's 'possession at the end of the day—they would be filed in the office—at the end of the month I would sign a statutory declaration verifying the amounts—I should have the vouchers by me when I signed the declaration—there was nothing to prevent my examining them and detecting a mistake—Mr. Hodgkinson's vouchers were in Hammond's charge—when I signed the declaration they would be included—an improvement would be to write the totals in words, but I had implicit trust in the prisoner—Mr. Hodgkinson had an opportunity of examining. the vouchers, and sometimes the statutory declaration would not be made at his office, but another near at hand—I would not sign for Mr. Hodgkinson unless I knew he had an opportunity of checking the vouchers—

I have known Hammond a very long time, but he has been my officer only three and a half years.

Re-examined. I never critically examined the vouchers at the end of the month; I took it for granted they were in the same condition as when they left my hands—if an item in a voucher had not been incurred it would have been my duty to strike it out—this slip is made out for the day's work—I compare it with the voucher—the alterations must have been subsequent—except one, the alterations are all to larger figures.

WALTER BARBER . I am a licentiate of physic and qualified medical man, practising at Roman Road, Bow—I gave evidence at the inquest on the body of William Downs, held on 13th January, 1891—I did not make a post-mortem examination—that is my signature against the guinea for giving evidence, but not against the guinea for the post-mortem—I did not authorise anyone to sign it—the second signature is a very good imitation—I gave evidence at the inquest on the body of Edward John Smith, on the 30th May, 1891, for which I received one guinea—I did not make a post-mortem examination—I received no guinea for same—the signature opposite it is not mine, nor signed by my authority—it is very like it—I gave evidence on the 17th of June, 1891, at the inquest on the body of Susannah Bees—I made no postmortem examination, and received no fee for it; this is not my signature—I did not authorise anyone to sign it—one guinea was paid me by the prisoner for giving evidence.

THOMAS ROBERTS , M. D. I gave evidence at the inquest on the body of Robert Garrod on 8th November, 1890—I received one guinea from the prisoner—I did not make a post-mortem examination, nor receive a fee for doing so—that signature is not mine, nor signed by my authority—it is like my signature.

WILLIAM JOSEPH RYAN , M. D. I gave evidence at the inquest on the body of Mary Ann Newson, held on 4th November, 1890—I made no post-mortem examination—I received a guinea for giving evidence, but not a guinea for a post-mortem examination—the first of these signatures is mine, but not the second—I never authorised anyone to sign it.

WILLIAM REES . I am a caretaker at the Smead Road Board Schools, at Bow—my son, Charles Rees, died shortly before 19th August, when the inquest was held by Dr. Macdonald, in my house in the school building—the body was not removed—no room was hired, nor any payment made for the room for the inquest.

Cross-examined. The inquest was held at my house, at my own request.

ROBERT LOGAN I am a clerk to the Vestry, at Bow—the offices are at the Vestry Hall—I would be the proper person to receive payments for the hire of rooms at the Vestry Half—I did not receive any for the inquest held at the Board School—the signature, "Robert Logan,"is not mine—I never authorised it.

Cross-examined. I have been paid for inquests held at the Vestry Hall by the prisoner—I used to settle about every three months—I did not wish to receive money in driblets, because I did not give any voucher.

ELIZABETH BEAVIS . I am the daughter of Benjamin Beavis, and live at Fleur-de-Lis Street, Norton Folgate—he is the keeper of the Court

House, Norton Folgate—he is infirm, and unable to attend; he is 67 years of age—I produce a certificate of his illness. (To the effect that he woe offering from bronchitis, and unable to attend)—I have done his writing for him for some time—I or my sister in my absence sign receipts for him—the signature, "Benjamin Beavis,"referring to the inquest on Frank White, is not my signature, nor my father's—my father gave evidence at the Police-court; I was present; the prisoner was there. (The deposition of Benjamin Beavis read at follows: "I live at No. 9, Fleur-de-Lis Street, Norton Folgate. I am the keeper of the Court House, at Norton Folgate. It is also the Vestry Office. I look at voucher No. 49, referring to the inquest on the body of Frank White on 23rd September, 1891, the signature on it opposite 7s. is not mine.

Cross-examined. I believe the money has been paid to me.")

CHARLES GETHEN (Policeman E). On 15th December I went to prisoner's house with Dr. Macdonald and Mr. Hodgkinson, the Deputy-Coroner—I arrested the prisoner on a warrant for unlawfully, by false pretences, obtaining from Dr. Macdonald 3s. and 7s., with intent to defraud—he said, "I do not know what this means, but I suppose I must go. "

The prisoner received a good character.

GUILTY. Strongly recommended to mercy on account of his old age and long service. Defalcations stated to have occurred in about 220 cases in two years. Three Years' Penal Servitude.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-188
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

188. ELIZA DOWLING (36) , Breaking and entering the shop of Louis Senecal, and stealing therein eight necklaces, five albert chains, twenty-six brooches, and three pairs of earrings. Second Count, receiving.

MR. MOYSES Prosecuted.

MATTHEW TIERNEY (238 B). I am a police-officer in plain clothes—on 8th January, at 1.30 am., I was on duty in Pelham Street—the prisoner was loitering about in a very suspicious manner in the Fulham Road—I watched her—I saw her break the plate-glass of a jeweller's shop, 42A, Fulham Road; the glass is 10 ft. by 8 ft.—she afterwards took these articles (produced) from the window, through the broken glass, and ran away—I produce a list of them—it is correct—I rushed out from my hiding-place—when she saw me she turned back into the Fulham Road; I apprehended her, I told her I was a police-officer, and should take her into custody for breaking and entering a jeweller's shop, and stealing the articles mentioned in the charge—she became very violent, in consequence of which I blew my whistle—Kenna came up—with his assistance I took her to the station—she was charged—at the window she had a coal-plate, which was afterwards found to have been missed from a few shops off—I heard the glass falling, and the sound of iron—this is a piece of the glass.

Cross-examined by the prisoner. I did not see you pick up some things.

JOSEPH KENNA (Sergeant B). About 1.35 a.m., on 8th January, I heard a policeman's whistle—I proceeded in that direction—I saw the prisoner in Tierney's custody—she was very violent and abusive—Tierney said he saw her break the window of a jeweller's shop; I took hold of her arms, and a quantity of jewellery dropped to the ground, which was picked up by the constable, and we conveyed her to the station—while the officer was gone to make inquiries I saw her throwing these brooches and

earrings into the fire—I took them away from her—she made no statement.

Cross-examined by the prisoner. It was not a piece of paper you were throwing into the fire.

SARAH REYNOLDS (Female Searcher). I searched the prisoner about four a. m, on 8th January, I found some jewellery in her pocket—it is in the lift produced.

LOUIS SENECAL . I am a jeweller, of 42A, Fulham Road—all this jewellery produced is mine.

The prisoner's defence was that she did not break the window, but picked up the jewellery.


She then PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction at Clerkenwell in February, 1891.— Eight Months' Hard Labour.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-189
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

189. JAMES LEMAN (18) , Robbery with violence on James Cooney, putting him in fear, and stealing his chain and seal.

MR. GREENFIELD Prosecuted.

GEORGE WHITE (Divisional Surgeon of Police). I saw the prosecutor about 28th December—he was suffering from twisted shoulders and a swollen and grazed cut, and complained of pains in the abdomen-jaundice supervened; he is unable to leave his room—I saw him last yesterday—he has been under my care ever since about 28th December.

ALFRED GOULD (Policeman G). On 1st January I saw Cooney examined in the prisoner's presence, the prisoner had an opportunity of cross-examining—I apprehended him on the same day, 31st December—I told him the charge; he replied, "All right. "

Deposition of JAMES COONEY, of 477, Liverpool Road, Hollow ay, builder., read:

"On 28th ultimo, between 3.30 and 4 p.m., I was in Castle Street, and a man came behind me and threw me down and took my chain, with 30s., and ran away. As I was getting up another man put his knee in my buck and threw me again. The prisoner is like the man who first attacked me, but I cannot swear to him."

HENRY BATEMAN . I shall be nine in March—I knew the prisoner prior to 28th December—I saw him that evening running near Whitfield Street, and two boys following, then the old gentleman [Cooney] comes—I heard the same old gentleman give his evidence at the Police-court—I. saw the prisoner run down Wood Street and Old Street, when I lost sight of him—I went to the Police-station and said something to the constable.

Cross-examined by the prisoner. It was the other boy who failed to pick you out at the station—I said I was quite sure it was you.

GEORGE FREDERICK BUSH . On evening of 28th December I saw the prisoner running with two others—an old gentleman followed, whom I afterwards saw at the Police-court.

Cross-examined by the prisoner. I said I was not sure you were the man.

Re-examined. I had previously seen the prisoner hanging about a beer-shop.

The prisoner's statement before the Magistrate:" I was away from eleven in the morning till a quarter-past eight that night."

The prisoner, in his defence, stated that he was at work that day for his.

father, a bootmaker, and woe not the man running, and another boy named Crow failed to identify him.


11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-190
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

190. JAMES FITZPATRICK (25) , Robbery with violence on John Corbyn, and stealing a metal cross and part of a watch-chain.

MR. SANDS Prosecuted.

JOHN CORBYN . I live at 6, Euston Street, Euston Square—early on 24th December I passed up Russell Street into Endell Street—I had a cup of coffee—two men and a woman asked me to treat them—I said, "I have not money to treat you with"—I had two sovereigns, a half sovereign, a watch in my waistcoat pocket, and a shilling in my left trousers pocket, and sixpence in the right—I had a watch-chain—they pushed me down and held me on the ground, and pressed a hand over my throat; I had no power; they rifled my pockets—the coffee stall-keeper came and assisted me, and I called "Police!"who came promptly, and deserve the highest commendation—this is a piece of my chain—I had it before I was robbed.

Cross-examined by the prisoner. I saw you at the station—I was not asked to pick you out.

THOMAS BLYTH . I live at 6, Goldsmith's Buildings, Drury Lane—I keep a coffee-stall at the corner of Bow Street and Endell Street—I was there about 1.30 a.m. on 24th December—the prosecutor came up—the prisoner and two others were there—I served the prosecutor with a cup of coffee at a halfpenny, when the prisoner and the other two asked him for some tobacco; he said he had not any; they kept saying they lived up towards Euston Square, was he going that way, as they would see him home—he told me to give the woman a cup of coffee; I said, "Ton have not paid for what you have had"; he said, "That will be all right, I'll pay you for both"—I served the young woman—he gave me sixpence, and I gave him threepence-halfpenny change—they got one on «ach side of him, and the prisoner behind him, and got him down in the road—he cried for help; I ran and picked him up—the prisoner ran away—I have no doubt he is the man.

HENRY HARWOOD (213 C). I heard a whistle, and went in the direction of Endell Street—the prisoner ran past me—I turned and ran after him, and threw him down—he pulled the buttons off my coat—he put his hand in his pocket and threw something out—I took him to the station—I met Hewitt—I marked the spot and went back to it—I did not find anything—I pointed out the place to Hewitt—the prisoner was charged at the station—he made no reply.

Cross-examined by the prisoner. Other constables came up when I caught you—I did not know what you threw away.

Re-examined. I was holding the prisoner.

JOHN HEWITT (392 E). I was on duty in Macklyn Street on 24th December—I saw the prisoner running—I caught hold of him—he threw me down and fell himself—I afterwards saw him in the custody of Harwood—Harwood told me to go to a certain place—I went there—I found this piece of chain—I showed it to the prosecutor at the station.


He also PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction of felony at Clerkenwell in September, 1887.— Ten Years' Penal Servitude.

OLD COURT.—Thursday, January 14th, 1892.

Before Mr. Justice Cave.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-191
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

191. CHARLES AUGUSTUS BYNOE (30) , Feloniously forging and uttering a warrant for the payment of £7 16s., with intent to defraud.

MESSRS. FORREST FULTON and CHARLES MATHEWS Prosecuted; MESSES. C. F. GILL and BODKIN were instructed on behalf of the Defendant; but upon consultation with the Defendant it was arranged that he should conduct his own defence.

JAMES ADAM KIRK . I live at Walton Villa, East Molesey—I was intimately acquainted with the late Constance Henrietta Potts—towards the end of 1888 she went to reside at No. 1, Endsleigh Gardens—at the same time I went there to reside with her; at that time it was a boardinghouse, kept by the prisoner and his mother, Mrs. Bynoe—I believe the prisoner is a doctor by profession; his practice was conducted at 301, Euston Road, but he lived at 1, Endsleigh Gardens—Miss Potts' health at that time was very feeble—we remained there to the end of 1889, I think—during that time there was a change—I understood the house was sublet to a Mrs. Cock, and the prisoner and his mother left—at the time I left Sirs. Cock was still there—Miss Potts and I went to lodge in Gower Street for a short time—we then removed to Walton Villa, East Molesey—towards the end of February we removed to Endsleigh Gardens—I stayed at Walton Villa till the end of July, 1890, and then tame to London—from July, 1890, down to July, 189), I find that I once returned to East Molesey, I think about August or September; I never went back after that—from that time I never saw Miss Potts again during her life—she died on 29th July, 1891—I went down to see her as she lay dead, but I did not see her, I was only just in time for the funeral, that was early in August—between September, 1890, and July, 1891, I did not see Miss Potts at all—she was a lady of independent means—she was in the habit of consulting me with regard to her business affairs; to my knowledge she had several sums of money invested in different securities—she had £400 invested in the debenture stock of Messrs. Courage and Co.—she consulted me with regard to that investment, and I attested the transfer under which it was passed to her—this is the transfer; it is signed, "James A. Kirk"—that is my invariable signature—I do not believe I ever omitted the initial of my second name—besides that investment, I know generally of three others, in Euston Procter, the Mortgage Company of the River Plate, and some £10 shares in another company—I was with her from February to July, 1890, when I left—I can tell you nothing after that.

CHARLES SPREAG . I am secretary of the London and Universal Bank, 449, Strand—the prisoner came"there on 20th February last; he had with him these four dividend warrants; one of Courage and Co., of 1st October, 1890, another of the Mortgage Company of the River Plate of 15th July, 1890, another of the same company of 15th January, 1891, and one of Euston, Procter and Co., of 30th June, 1890—he asked to have them cashed for Miss Potts—I said we could not cash them, but we would collect them—they were made out to Miss Potts—I asked if Miss Potts had a banking account—he said no, that she was an invalid,

and could not leave the house—I said we should have to send to Endsleigh Gardens, Miss Potts' address, to inquire—I asked her address and he gave it—one was a country cheque, and I said that would have to go away for collection, and would not be cleared for two or three days—he said, "Very well; and when it is cleared you can post on a cheque to Miss Potts, "the other three he could have later in the day—I said when they were cleared—he then left and called later in the day, and I paid him in cash for the three warrants—the fourth cheque I posted; that to 1, Endsleigh Gardens, to Miss Potts, I think on 23rd February—the prisoner came again on 25th with that cheque; it had been inadvertently crossed, and I paid him in cash—I next saw him on 12th March, when he brought this dividend warrant, dated 30th September, 1890, issued by the Buenos Ayres Railway Company—it was valid only for three months after the date of issue—I noticed that it had been re-dated—that was collected the same as the others; he called back later, and we paid the cash for it—on 2nd April he brought this dividend warrant of 1st April, 1891, issued by Courage and Co., for £7 16s.—he was paid for that at the time—he called again on 20th April, and produced this dividend warrant of 17th April, issued by the Buenos Ayres Company, for £4 18s.; he was paid cash for that—I saw him again on 18th July, when he brought a dividend warrant issued by the Mortgage Company of the River Plate, for £8 15s. 6d., under date of 15th July; that was paid in cash—at the time these different documents were presented to me I saw the signatures C. H. Potts to them—I believed them be genuine signatures—I have no doubt that the prisoner is the man who brought them.

Cross-examined by the Prisoner. Someone was sent to Endsleigh Gardens; that was our usual course—I have inquired of our messengers it one did not got the other is not certain—I would not like to swear that I did send—the warrant of Messrs. Courage of 1st April was presented to me on the 2nd; the perforation was the 3rd—the one of 20th February was perforated on the same date; also the one of 12th March—the perforations are made by the bankers, not by us.

JOHN WATT . I am secretary to Messrs. Courage and Co.—on 19th August, 1889, this certificate was issued by the Company to Constance Henrietta Potts, whose registered address in the book of the Company is 1, Endsleigh Gardens; that continued to be her registered address; we never knew any other—the interest on our debenture stock accrued and was paid in October 'each year—in the ordinary course of business these dividend warrants were sent to Miss Potts in April, 1890, October, 1890, and April, 1891; and they came back to the Company through their bonkers, having been paid—the dividend warrants of October, 1890 and April, 1891, were issued to Miss Potts in relation to these holdings of hers on the £400 stock on the dates which they bear—I had no notion on their return to us that they had not been signed by Miss Potts—on 9th March, 1891, I received this letter, purporting to come from Miss Potts—I answered that letter, asking for an indemnity; a correspondence ensued between myself, and, as I imagined, Miss Potts; my letters were addressed to Miss Constance H. Potts, 1, Endsleigh Gardens, N. W.—on 2nd April I received this letter of indemnity enclosed in this letter; it purports to be signed by Miss Constance H. Potts, and attested by Mr. James Kirk—I believed in the genuineness of that document, and sent a

duplicate certificate in a registered letter, addressed to Miss Constance Potts, 1, Endsleigh Gardens, N. W.—a shilling fee was due to the Company on the re-issue of the certificate, which we received—on 9th April I received this letter, purporting to be signed by Miss Potts.

Cross-examined. The letter dated 9th April came to us in the ordinary post on the 9th or 10th, most likely the 9th; the certificate was posted on the afternoon of the 8th—we have received letters which we supposed to come from Miss Potts, the signature being the same—to my knowledge we never received letters purporting to come from Miss Potts with any other signature.

Re-examined. We have in the book before me a record of the issue of fresh certificates—the letter of 9th April acknowledges the safe receipt of the certificates.

WILLIAM JAMES CAPATHERWAITE . I am a postman in the employ of the Post Office—I have been in the habit of delivering letters to 1, Endsleigh Gardens—I believe I know the prisoner by sight—I think I have seen him go into 1, Endsleigh Gardens many a time for about eighteen months from now—on 8th April, 1891,1 delivered a registered letter at 1, Endsleigh Gardens—I have the receipt for it, which I then took; I did not see it written, it was given to me at the door when I delivered the letter—I could not remember the date without referring to this document.

ROBERT JAMES WILLIS . I am manager of the investment department of Mr. John Shaw, of Wardrobe Chambers—I remember the prisoner coming to my department on 17th April, 1891.

This evidence was not pursued, as it was after the date of the offence charged. GRACE TAGG. I am the wife of John Tagg, of 3, Auckland Villas, Dennis Road, East Molesey—I remember Miss Constance Potts coming to live there in February, 1890—Mr. Kirk came to my house for me to go and see her, as she wanted someone—I went and saw her at Walton Villa—I cannot fix the date; it was in February or March, 1890—from that time I continued to be in attendance upon her—I did not live in the house; I slept there occasionally—I was there part of the day—I think Mr. Kirk remained there till about the end of July, 1890—he then left—during the time Miss Potts was at Walton Villa I can hardly say she was ill all the time she was there; she was not well—she died in July, 1891—she was not so very well for some time before her death, because she was suffering from dropsy for six months; she had crutches, and she would take hold of my arm or hold on to the furniture; and if she was out she would walk with whatever she could place her hand on; she used to crawl up and down stairs on her hands and knees, and I assisted her at other times—she went out from time to time for a carriage drive, or be pushed in a Bath chair—she would not walk that I know of—to my knowledge she did not go to London from the time she arrived at Molesey—she died from dropsy, she was stout before and at the time of her death.

Cross-examined. There was no disagreement between Miss Potts and Mr. Kirk that I am aware of—Miss Potts never walked out alone while I was with her—she could not walk unassisted; I daresay she could walk with assistance—I never saw her walk except with her crutches or holding on to a chair—I never saw her walk in the Gardens alone—I knew her by the name of Miss Constance Henrietta Potts, that was the

name I always knew her by, never by any other name—I saw tradesmen's bills come to the house in the name of Kirk, not to Mrs. Kirk—I saw the undertaker's bill, that was made out to Miss C. H. Potts, but I won't swear it—I saw the certificate of her death, the name of dropsy was on it, and some other name which I cannot pronounce, I cannot tell the name—Miss Potts was not a temperate person; she was in the habit of drinking—I never knew her run out into the street when in that condition—I never heard of her doing such a thing.

ARTHUR EDWARD EARL . I am a clerk in the office of the Buenos Ayres Railway Company—the name of Miss C. H. Potts appears in the books of the company as holding ten shares, called U shares—they were purchased by her in July, 1889—her registered address in the company's books is 1, Endsleigh Gardens; I never received any notification of any change of address—the interest accrued, and was payable in October each year; and on 30th September the dividend warrants are dated, to pay the October interest; on 30th September we sent this dividend warrant to 1, Endsleigh Gardens—our warrants are valid only for three months after the date of issue—in March, this year, I received a letter, dated 9th March, purporting to come from Miss Potts, relative to that dividend warrant—I believed it to be a genuine letter, and in accordance with the request contained in it, we redated the warrant 9th March, and sent it to 1, Endsleigh Gardens—on 12th March two further letters came purporting to be from Miss Potts, dated the 11th; in consequence of one of those letters I replied on the 12th to Miss Potts, giving certain instruction—on 13th March I received a letter, and on the 16th I sent to her a form of letter of indemnity and a statutory declaration; on the 2nd April those documents were returned to me—this letter of indemnity purports to be signed by Constance H. Potts, and attested by James Kirk—I believed in the genuineness of that document; enclosed with it was this statutory declaration purporting to have been made before John Evans, a Commissioner for Oaths, of 10, John Street, Bedford Bow—I believed in the genuineness of that document, and issued this duplicate certificate, it is dated 22nd April; it was sent to Miss Potts, 1, Endsleigh Gardens—in April a further dividend accrued to Miss Potts, it bears date 16th April, the date of payment was 1st March.

Cross-examined. I received a letter dated 7th March, 1891; I answered it on the 9th—I also received one dated 11th, which I answered on the 12th; I also received one on the 2nd April, that was answered on the 3rd; the letter dated the 13th I did not answer until the 16th—the stock is not still registered in Miss Potts' name, it is sold—one transfer was registered on 22nd October, 1891, the other on 5th November, 1891; there wire two transfers to make up the seventeen shares—nothing was said at the time of the transfer beyond the letters that have been put in; no letters were written about the transfer—the sale was by Miss Potts as far as we knew—I see by a note I have that it was executed by Mr. Kirk, the executor of Miss Potts—the transfer itself is at our office—as far as I know no question of overdue interest was raised at the sale of the stock.

JOHN EVANS . I am a solicitor and a commissioner for taking oaths, of 11. John Street, Bedford Bow—I did carry on business there—the signature to this statutory declaration, dated 2nd April, 1891, is not mine, or written by my authority; no person of the name of Potts made a statutory declaration before me on 2nd April, or at any time—I have my

call-book here; it contains the name of every person who called on that day—some years back I had in my service a clerk of the name of Bynoe he left me, I think, four or five years ago.

EDWARD OLIVER . I am secretary to Euston, Proctor and Co., engineers, carrying on business at Lincoln—the name of Miss Constance Henrietta Potts appears in our books as the owner of £400 debenture stock—it was not purchased by her, it was applied for through Messrs. Makin, Venables and Co., of London, before the allotment was made in July, 1889—she was not the original allottee; the stock was transferred to her by a deed dated 27th November, 1889; her address being 1, Endsleigh Gardens, N. W.—we had no notice of any change—we sent the first warrant in December, 1889, and the second in June, 1890, to that address—the first warrant was for £5, and the second for £9 15s.—the dividend of June, 1890, was returned to us through the bank about February 9th; after that date a correspondence was opened, and letters came purporting to be from Miss Potts, and I answered them—on 13th March I received a letter announcing the loss of certificates, and applying for new ones; it stated that all the papers were lost—a letter was written to Miss Potts on the subject; after that there was a correspondence with Messrs. Oliver, her solicitors; as the result of that correspondence certificates were issued.

PHILIP HENRY LYNE . I am the registrar of the Mortgage Company of the River Plate, Limited; their offices are at 61, Moorgate Street—the name of Miss Constance Henrietta Potts appears in the books of the company of 1, Endsleigh Gardens, as owner of £400 debenture stock, purchased in August, 1889—I never received notice of any change of address—as the interest accrued, dividend warrants were sent to that address, dated 15th July, 1890, and 15th January, 1891—they are the ordinary dividend warrants issued by the company; one is in my own writing—they have been returned as paid by our bankers—this letter, of 11th March, 1891, was received by us on the 12th, relating to the loss of some certificates; it purports to be signed by Miss Potts, and is addressed from 1, Endsleigh Gardens—that letter was answered the same day; I have the letter-book here, with the press copy of the reply, requesting an indemnity—I think we had a second letter from Miss Potts on 2nd April, 1891, enclosing the indemnity and a sixpenny stamp for the declaration.

Cross-examined. We returned the indemnity on the 2nd April, with the sixpenny stamp, because we had been in communication with her solicitors, Messrs. Oliver and Sons, and they advised us that the certificates were not lost—this is the letter; we heard nothing more from them—it appeared from their letter that a fraud had been attempted—we always return an indemnity if we do not issue a duplicate—the stock was sold by the executor, Mr. James A. Kirk—we were not asked about overdue interest.

FREDERICK WRIGHT . I am a member of the firm of Wright and Odell, sheriffs' officers for the County of London, at 52, Chancery Lane—I knew the prisoner some three or four months ago; at the time I had an execution against his mother, or a Mrs. Bynoe, a widow, on 9th June, 1891—we had to levy against Mrs. Bynoe, of 1, Endsleigh Gardens—in connection with that execution we received these three letters, and on or about 11th June the prisoner came to our office and personally served me

with this writ for trespass—I asked him if he was Mr. Augustus Bynoe—he said, "Yes"—I said, "Are you the same gentleman as wrote these three letters to us?"—he said, "Yes, I am"—they were not produced to him, but they were on the desk, he could not see them—I retained the letters, as they were claims upon the furniture in the house.

WILLIAM NASH (Detective Sergeant). On 29th October last, about eight in the evening, in company with Inspector Field, I went to 301, Euston Road, and there saw the prisoner—Mr. Field said to him, "We are two police officers; this gentleman,"pointing to Mr. Addison, who was with us, "will tell you what we are here for"—Mr. Addison said, "I give this man in custody for forging the name of Mr. Kirk to a transfer of debenture stock for £400 on Courage and Sons, the brewers"—I said, "I arrest you on that charge"—the prisoner said, "Who do you say charges me?"—Mr. Addison said, "I charge you on behalf of Messrs. Courage"—shortly after the prisoner said, "I know nothing about it, more than Miss Potts and Mr. Fork did reside with us at Endsleigh Gardens"—up to that time there had been no mention of Miss Potts' name—I then took him to Hunter Street Police-station—whilst waiting in the charge-room he said, "I don't fear this charge in the least, out it is most unpleasant; this comes of doing a kindness: after Miss Potts left Endsleigh Gardens a letter came for her; I found it open, I afterwards read it, it referred to a transfer of Courage and Co.'s stock. I wrote to Miss Potts; afterwards a great number of letters came for Miss Potts; some were opened; I found one relating to other stock; I wrote to Mr. Kirk, and asked him to call for the warrant—my brother met him and asked him to call for the warrant"—he was then charged—on searching him I found, among other things, some memorandums and this duplicate certificate relating to seventeen Tucuman shares of the Buenos Ayres Company—the prisoner asked to be supplied with the private address of his solicitor—he asked for his pocket-book, and he wrote down the name and address; this is it—I handed it to Inspector Field—I think he made a copy of it for the prisoner's use, and the original was retained and was produced before the Magistrate—I found no warrant on him, only the certificate.

Cross-examined. I don't recollect your calling it a warrant—you said you were not quite sure whether the warrant was on Courage and Co.—you said you had telegraphed to Courage and Co. not to transfer, as Miss Potts had left Endsleigh Gardens—after that you said a number of letters came for Miss Potts, and one of them contained another warrant pi took it that when you said you had telegraphed to Courage and Co. it related to the letter that was first opened; you afterwards said you were not 'sure it was on Courage and Co.—I made a note of the conversation; there is nothing in that about your not being sure.

WILLIAM FIELD (Inspector). I was present at the arrest on 29th October—I have heard Nashs evidence; he has given the conversation with the prisoner substantially accurately—I heard the first part of the conversation—I did not hear that part about having sent a telegram; I was not in the same room at the time.

JOHN WATT (Re-called.) I never received or saw a telegram from the prisoner or anyone else, telling me not to transfer Miss Potts' stock, as she had left Endsleigh Gardens—we had a notice of a transfer in April or May, 1891, purporting to be from Miss Potts—we got a transfer from the broker on the Stock Exchange; I do not fix the date—we did not

send her notice that any transfer had been lodged; it is not usual to do so; we deal with the brokers on the Stock Exchange, not with the sellers themselves—I did not receive any telegram from the prisoner in relation to the transfer of Miss Potts' stock.

MR. OLIVER (Re-called). There was a telegram received by me in relation to a transfer; I believe the date of that was the 17th February, 1891—in acknowledging the telegram, unfortunately the name was left out, although it must have been from Miss Potts, because it was an acknowledgment to her.

MR. WATT (Continued). This is the telegram we got, "Do not transfer debenture from Potts to Philpot, entered at Cannon Street, 1.30, 17th February, 1891;"we acknowledged that telegram to Miss Potts—in consequence of that telegram there was great difficulty created about the £100—we communicated with the broker and Miss Potts about it—afterwards we heard from Oliver and Sons, and I received authority from them to register these deeds which proported to be signed by Miss Potts—the transfer was afterwards registered—there was some trouble before it was registered—we received three authorities before the directors were satisfied; those authorities are here—the first was from the brokers, dated 21st February—we wrote to Miss Potts, and receiving no reply, we wrote again, then we wrote to Oliver and Sons on 10th March, explaining the whole matter; they sent us another authority, which was not accepted, as it was not witnessed—the last authority is dated 18th March, that is missing—the signature to the authority was not like Miss Potts'—I did not say there was an attempted fraud, the difference in the handwriting was the difficulty; I noticed the difference in the handwriting in the letters that came from Endsleigh Terrace and the handwriting to the transfer—we received the letter of 20th February, 1891, and replied to it on the 21st; on 24th February we received another letter from Endsleigh Gardens, I think that was not in the same handwriting as that of the 20th—on 10th March I enclosed the letter received from Miss Potts to Messrs. Oliver—By the COURT. The interest on the warrant of 30th September. was paid in to the London and Westminster Bank, according to Miss Potts' written authority; that is the warrant that the prisoner is charged with forging her name to—on 15th December we had received authority from Miss Potts to pay her dividend into the London and Westminster Bank; we acted on that authority; the other dividend had, gone to Endsleigh Gardens—I received this letter from Endsleigh Gardens: "Dear Sir,—I have been very ill or would have replied before; the other three I have not dealt with, and have lost all the papers; will that prevent me from selling them? Can I get a new certificate?"—that letter is in the same handwriting as all the Endsleigh Gardens correspondence; I answered it to Endsleigh Gardens—from that time I received no further letters from Endsleigh Gardens in connection with this matter—the correspondence was then continued between Messrs. Oliver and myself—they sent me an authority which was unattested, they kept that, and I signed another dated 18th March—that was signed by Miss Potts and witnessed by Grace Tagg; that came from East Molesey.

J. A. KIRK (Re-called). It is not true that I received any letter from the prisoner asking me to call for a dividend-warrant in relation to any of Miss Potts' stock—it is not true that the prisoner's brother afterwards met me and told me of the receipt of that dividend-warrant, or as to its

being at 1, Endsleigh Gardens—I am familiar with Miss Potts' handwriting—this dividend-warrant of 1st April, 1891, is not in her handwriting—this second one of Courage and Co. is not signed by her, nor the three from the Mortgage Company of the River Plate, nor this of Huston, Proctor, or the two from the Buenos Ayres Railway Company—the letters addressed to Courage and Co., commencing 7th March, 1891, are not in Miss Potts' handwriting; none of the letters here are in her handwriting—I have before me the letter of indemnity, addressed to Courage and Co., of 28th March; that is not signed by Miss Potts; the attestation is not mine—I say the same of the letter of indemnity sent to the Buenos Ayres Company pasted in this book; nor is this statutory declaration of 2nd April signed by Miss Potts—this is the genuine signature of Miss Potts to this transfer of 17th August, 1889, and this is my attestation, my ordinary signature—this signature of Miss Potts to the authority sent to Ruston, Procter is her genuine signature; it is dated 18th March, 1891; it is witnessed by Grace Tagg.

Cross-examined. I was residing at Endsleigh Gardens towards the end of 1888—you left shortly after, I think it was the day before Christmas—I think I saw you there again occasionally, certainly once if not more—I could not say if you were cognisant of Miss Potts haying purchased stock in 1889; I should think it very likely, because she generally talked about her affairs pretty openly with many people—I believe she purchased this stock in August, 1889—I have no occupation now—I have been secretary to two or three different companies; one was the Emerald Mines of Columbia, another was the Halifax Cable—I don't think I can give you the dates; it is within the last two or three years—in December, 1888, I think I was secretary to the Emerald Mines—I never was a clerk or employed in a stockbroker's office—my salary as secretary was £120 a year—previous to that I was in a merchant's office for two years; I left that to go to the Emerald Mines—I have no recollection of having said that I left Endsleigh Gardens in consequence of a disagreement—I think it was in consequence of a disagreement—I did not say at Bow Street that it was in consequence of a disagreement with you—when I left there I went to Gower Street—I left no address, because it was Miss Potts' especial wish to cut off all connection with Endsleigh Gardens, because she disliked you and your mother—I left there, I think, in January, 1890—I have not a thorough knowledge of all matters connected with the Stock Exchange—I have very little knowledge—I have speculated on the Stock "Exchange; a friend Knew that it would be wise to buy certain things, and I bought them; that was all I knew about it—I knew all about Miss Potts' business—I also knew Oliver and Sons perfectly—at Molesey, in February, 1890, I suppose I instructed"the post-office about my letters; it is my usual habit, bat I cannot swear to it; Miss Potts did not, because she was never out except in a carriage, and I was always with her if she was—there was no notice of removal to the post-office that I could swear to—I was on most intimate terms with Miss Potts; I suppose, I may say, my relation to her was that of her most intimate friend—she left me, in her will, everything she possessed, with a small reserve—I went to Molesey to live with her—she was known there as Miss Constance Potts; I will swear that—I am a member of the Junior Constitutional Club—I do not remember, at Endsleigh Gardens, promising you to get an

appointment for your brother on the Stock Exchange, or somewhere in the City—I do not remember talking about him at all, or where he had been employed—in February, 1891, no re-directed letters came to me at the club; I am quite certain of it—to the best of my knowledge I have had no re-directed letters at the club—I swear positively that I did not have a letter from you at the club on 17th February, 1891, in which were enclosed several warrants and cheques for interest of different kinds for Miss Potts—I have met Dr. Bedortha once in the street; I can't say the date; I do not recollect speaking to him, I think I merely nodded and passed on—I think it impossible that he could have told me that there were cheques at End sleigh Gardens for Miss Potts, or I should have taken notice of it—I left Molesey, and Miss Potts, in July, 1890—I left because I could no longer control her, and it was very unpleasant; and there was no use in my staying—she drank a little, and the doctor attending her specially requested me to keep it from her; I could not, and in doing so there were often scenes; so I cut it short by going—there was no question as to the use of her money; absolutely none, never—I don't know whether she thought she was defrauded in. the manner she has been; I don't think she had any idea who it was—I don't think she even suggested any name to me—after I left in July I only saw her once—I frequently received letters at my club I communicated with Oliver and Sons after I left Molesey; they knew my club address; I don't know whether they knew any other—they knew Miss Potts' address.

Re-examined. Miss Potts once mentioned to me the name of a person who had defrauded her; that was when she was off her head, after losing her watch at End sleigh Gardens; she suspected everybody, and everyone that came near her was immediately suspected—I can hardly say whether intemperate habits were indulged in at End sleigh Gardens; at first I thought it was hysteria, but from what I knew later on I thought it was due to alcoholic fits; in those fits she would accuse persons, and she would accuse me, but not in her sound senses—I was on extremely good terms with her, and under her will she left me the whole of her property, with a small reserve—the date of the will was 14th February, 1889—I knew of the existence of the will prior to her death; she told me of her intention with regard to her property; I did not write to her after I had left her; she wrote to me many times, asking me to come back, but I never answered, I thought it best not—I think I met Dr. Bedortha at another house kept by Mrs. Bynoe in Upper Woburn Place—I do not remember having any conversation with him after I left Endsleigh Gardens; there certainly was no conversation in which he mentioned cheques or warrants being at Endsleigh Gardens, that I am sure of.

GEORGE SMITH INGLIS . I am an expert in handwriting, of 8, Red Lion Square, Holborn—I have had before me a number of documents in this case, among them the transfer of 17th August, 1889, bearing the genuine signature of Miss C. H. Potts, attested by Mr. James A. Kirk; also dividend warrants of Messrs. Courage and Co. of 1st October, 1889, 1st April, 1890 (Mr. Kirk here stated these to be in Miss Potts' genuine handwriting); those are all the documents upon which my opinion has been founded—I have examined with them a number of documents which have been produced, among them two dividend warrants of Messrs. Courage of

1st October, 1890, and 1st April, 1891; they are not in Mist Potts' handwriting—I have examined these two dividend warrants, one from the Buenos Ayres Railway issued on 13th June, 1891, re dated 12th March, 1891, and one from Huston, Proctor and Co., of 30th June, 1890—I have compared those dividend warrants with the proved writing of Miss Potts—they are not Miss Potts' writing, nor her signature—two are dated 15th January, 1890, and a third 15th July, 1891—I have had before me the correspondence passing between End sleigh Gardens and Courage and Co., of 7th and 11th March, 1st and 9th April, 1891—also letters of indemnity of 28th March—none of them are re-addressed—none are in the handwriting of Miss Potts—I have become familiar with the writing of James Kirk—I have compared Mr. Kirk's signatures on the transfer of the 17th August, 1889, and on the indemnity—the signature is not his—I have also directed my attention to the statutory declaration purporting to be signed by Miss C. H. Potts—comparing the signatures with the correspondence from 7th March to 2nd April, I say they are not those of Mils C. H. Potts—the signature of the attesting witness is not that of Mr. Kirk—the correspondence from February, 1891, has been before me—also the Euston, Proctor dividend warrants of 31st December, 1889, for £5 13s. 2d. (A 1), and 30th June 1890 (A 2), the letters of 20th February, 1891 (A 3), the 24th February, 1891 (A 4), 11th March, 1890 (A 5)—the warrant marked A1 of 31st January, 1889, is genuine, the signature is that of Miss Potts—A 2 to A 5 are not in Miss Potts' writing—I have A 7 and A 8 before me, letters of 11th March and 1st April, 1891—they are not the genuine writing of Miss Potts—I have had letters before me said to have been written by Mrs. Bynoe, and signed by the prisoner—three letters (produced) by Wright, a witness—K 1, K 2, and K 8—I have examined them—I can only find two here and the writ—I had these three letters, 1K, 2K, 3K, and the writ (J), before me in my office, and the pencil memorandum referred to by the police officers as having been written in their presence, and I have compared them with the prisoner's writing, as also the correspondence with the four companies, including the two letters of indemnity, the statutory declaration, and dividend-warrants issued by Courage and Co.—the dividend warrants are written by the same person who wrote the letters K1, K2, and K3, and the writ J, signed ° Chas. A. Bynoe," and the pencil memoranda—the signature to the declaration, "Constance H. Potts,"is in the same writing as also that of the attesting witness, "Jas. Kirk."

Cross-examined. I am not infallible in my opinions; I make mistakes sometimes—Mr. Netherclift and I disagree sometimes—my first report in this case is dated 28th October, 1891, and the second 4th November—did not say at the Police-court that the signatures "C. H. Potts "were written by the person writing those three letters—I came to the opinion, after examining the letters at the Buenos Ayres Railway Company, that they were in the handwriting of the same person who wrote the three letters, and it was not till I examined them there that I formed an opinion independent of anything else—my report of the 28th October was on the document in the Courage case, in which there are some signatures of Constance H. Potts said to be forged—I had those before me before making the report; I should say this writing is disguised (referring to a paper); I should say it is the same writing as the letters—I

should say this letter is in disguised writing, the same as the other letters (referring to the letter received by the prisoner in Holloway Prison)—there is a hesitancy in the writing, the envelope seems to be in the same writing—take that first "from,"for instance, in the letter; there is a shakiness in it which is not natural.

Re-examined. I had thirteen documents before me—three of them genuine signatures—seven I was to investigate, and three of them are the letters produced by Mr. Wright—after making my report I went to the Buenos Ayres office—the Buenos Ayres certificate was found on the prisoner's arrest on 29th October, and then I extended my examination, and I then saw the letter of indemnity and the statutory declaration—on making my second report I had before me the writ and pencil memorandum; and with those, as well as the three letters, I examined the Buenos Ayres correspondence, the Courage correspondence, and that of the Mortgage Company of the River Plate.

FREDERICK GEORGE NETHERCLIFT . I have been an expert in handwriting for many years, practising at 10, Bedford Row—I have examined the documents referred to and the four batches of correspondence—I had before me the admittedly genuine signatures of Miss Constance H. Potts and of James A. Kirk—except one of the latter's, they are forgeries—the letters of indemnity are forgeries, as also the statutory declaration and the dividend warrants.

Cross-examined. I had your admitted writing before me in the documents K1, K2, and K3, and I think a copy of the writ. filled in by you marked J—the letters are forgeries—this is not Miss Potts' writing; it is the same writing as the other documents, I believe—these letters bear characteristics of your writing, disguised—it does not appear to be a woman's handwriting—it is a schoolboy style—I believe it is yours—all expert evidence is an opinion.

Re-examined. These are all written in an acquired hand.

JAMES A. KIRK (Re-examined). After Miss Potts' death, acting under her will, I went to her solicitors, Messrs. Oliver, and then went to the London and Westminster Bank, Holborn branch, where her securities were—I went over the different documents, and found Courage's original certificate—they were left at the bank for safe custody—I also found the Buenos Ayres certificate, and a £400 debenture bond of the Mortgage Company of the River Plate, and three £100 debentures of Huston, Proctor, and Co.—before going to the bank, Messrs. Oliver told me that Miss Potts had sold out £100 of the latter—I did not tell Miss Potts, about the 9th April, that Dr. Bynoe had a registered letter for her.

Further cross-examined. I had no correspondence with Messrs. Oliver. in the early part of last year—I have not been through Miss Potts' banking account for that period—I am her executor and principal legatee.

The folk winy witnesses were called by the prisoner:

ELIZABETH JANE BYNOE . I am a widow, of 1, End sleigh Gardens, and am your mother—you leave home at 8.45 a.m., and go to your surgery in the Euston Road, and see patients from 11 to 1, and visit in the afternoon, and come back to tea, and are usually in the surgery from 7 to 9, and at home from 9.15 to 9.45—you took possession of 1, End sleigh Gardens in October, 1888—Miss Potts and Mr. Kirk came to reside

there at the end of October or early in November, and left the 24th December—they were friendly at that time, and continued to visit us afterwards—a letter came for Miss Potts early in April, I think, or the end of March; she had gone to 58, Gower Street, and I sent my son John to ask for her address, and they would not or could not give it—as I had passed I had seen her sitting at the window of 58, Gower Street, and I sent the letter by my daughter, and she left it there—several letters came for her after that—early in February last one got opened, we could not tell who by, but we believed it was by a man of 70 that you had as resident patient, and I thought it was our duty to sec to it—a letter came for Miss Potts in February; you went to the City, and got the address out of the "Directory,"of Mr. Edward C. Philpot, but you could not gain any information there, and then you got the address of Ruston, Proctor and Co., in the City, and went there; and you then wrote to Mr. Kirk, at the Junior Constitutional Club, for his advice; you nut the letters that had previously arrived for Miss Potts in a largo envelope, and addressed them to Mr. Kirk; they had the names of companies on the backs of them—I afterwards saw an answer, thanking you for sending the letters, and a telegram; letters subsequently came for Miss Potts, and they were re-directed by you, as you said Mr. Kirk objected to receiving letters addressed to him by a lady; I posted some, and my niece some—a letter came for Miss Potts on the evening of the 14th July, which I posted immediately, and you never saw it; you said that you intended not to send any more—one had got opened, and you had written several times to ask Mr. Kirk to send for the letters, or come for them himself—Mr. Kirk wrote threatening to action you for opening Miss Potts' letter and not sending it on to him; that letter contained a duplicate certificate of Buenos Ayres stock; in August you were aware that Miss Potts had died in July, and had left Mr. Kirk all her property.

Cross-examined. I remember the 14th July distinctly—I see now by the evidence that that was the letter containing the dividend warrant from the Mortgage Company of the River Plate—I swear my son never saw that letter—it was posted by me—four or five letters were put by me in a large envelope in February, and addressed by me to Mr. Kirk at the Junior Constitutional Club—the letters accumulated from July, 1890, to February, 1891; a letter had been opened by a resident patient, an old gentleman—we did not see him open it, but he was the only person in the dining-room, 'and the letter was placed on the side table by the man-servant—I have not read the evidence of Mr. Spreag on this point—J heard Mr. Spreag say at Bow Street that four dividend warrants were presented to him by my son—that has not shaken my evidence—I have heard some correspondence that passed between 1, End sleigh Gardens and Messrs. Courage and Co.—Miss Potts was never at 1, End sleigh Gardens from the beginning of 1891—I have heard of a registered letter of the 9th April that came to End sleigh Gardens—if I signed for it and see the signature I shall know if it is mine—this is my signature—I must have received the letter, or I should not have signed my name—my son wrote and told Mr. Kirk that there was a registered letter at End sleigh Gardens, and that he must send a messenger for it, and the messenger came, and I went with him to my son's surgery, and my son delivered the letter—he had put it in his pocket for safety—I do

not know who it was from—I have seen the certificate from the Buenos Ayres Company—it was some time early in the year—my son took possession of it—it was put in a bookcase in his library, and remained there for months—his sister, on arranging his books, picked it up and gave it to him, and he kept it from that time forward—I did not know who Miss Potts' solicitor was—in February a messenger came from Mr. Oliver, in consequence of a telegram my son had sent to stop the sale of some of the Euston, Proctor stock—I did not ask him his address—the telegram was sent, believing it was not sold by Miss Potts to Mr. Philpot, our address being given—Mrs. Koch left End sleigh Gardens in March, 1890—my son was not in partnership with me in the house—he took resident patients after Mrs. Koch gave it up as a boarding-house—the furniture was his—I was constantly there—my second son was employed by Mr. John Evans, a commissioner for oaths, of 10, John Street, Bedford Row—the furniture at 1, End sleigh Gardens was not under a bill of sale, I swear—it is not true there was a sale of furniture there on the 29th September, 1890—I had a house at 22, Upper Woburn Place; there was no sale there—I do not know what you mean by a sale—we sold the house as a going concern to a lady in May, 1891—we have had a bill of sale with a Mr. Tyler—that was in September, 1890—I did not quite follow the date, but there was no sale last year—there was a transfer of the debt to Mr. Alexander, but not a sale—he goes sometimes by the name of Maitland—I believe my son paid one instalment in respect of the hire of the furniture, and then stopped, because Mr. Maitland was going through the Bankruptcy Court; and he and his clerk both wrote for it, and Maitland told my eon that the Receiver in Bankruptcy would not accept the document—that is what my son told me—the house at 22, Upper Woburn Place was my son's—there was no sale at Endsleigh Gardens, or 22, Upper "Woburn Place—there was an agreement entered into with a Mrs. Trencher, in reference to the sale of 22, Upper Woburn Place some few years ago—she gave £160 deposit for the purchase of the house and business—she took possession of the house, and wanted certain repairs done, and insisted on my sending away two boarders that she had fallen out with—she made a great confidant of me—she was addicted to drink, and was quite sure that she could not manage the place, and wanted me to take it back—I remonstrated with her, and said I could not take it back, for I had used her money, and if she would try to give up her habits she could make a good living, for I had brought up my children and educated them there; and she said she could not because of the drink; my son subsequently attended her at four different lodging-houses in the locality for delirium tremens—I took it back, and we undertook to pay her £150—I cannot say how much my son has paid; I know he paid her some in May.

Re-examined. I remember the messenger came from Messrs. Oliver some days after you told me of having sent a telegram to Euston, Proctor, and Co.—I had no opportunity of asking his address—he said he had come in consequence of the telegram and the stoppage of some stock of Miss Potts.

By the JURY. My niece posted the letter to Mr. Kirk containing four or six letters—my son never saw it after it was left in my charge.

CATHARINE PAYNE EMTAGE . I am the wife of Professor Emtage, M. A., Professor of Science, University College, London, and am your

sister—I remember Miss Potts and Mr. Kirk coming in November, 1888, to End sleigh Gardens—we left there on the 24th December, 1888, they remaining—there was no disagreement between them—you took possession of End sleigh Gardens again in March, 1890—I remember letters coming there, and some for Miss Potts—some were opened, or found open, by some members of the family in January last—in March, 1890, I carried some for Miss Potts to 58, Gower Street—the circumstance of the letters being opened was freely spoken of, and visitors knew of it—I came to End sleigh Gardens on the 8th of July, 1891—I left on the 17th—during that time a letter came for Miss Potts—I believe you were out of the house—I saw it. on the table—mother took it up and re-directed it to Mr. Kirk, at the Junior Constitutional Club—I believe it was posted by Edith, my cousin—you had no means of getting possession of that letter—I believe it was on a Monday—it was before luncheon-time—when you came in mother told you she had re-directed a letter of Miss Potts' to Mr. Kirk, at the club, and you laughed and said he would get very much chaffed at a letter coming to him at the club in a lady's writing—in August, 1891, you said that Mr. Kirk had written you threatening to action you for opening a letter to Miss Potts—I remember coming to End sleigh Gardens on the 31st of August, when I found your library considerably upset, and I arranged your books—I found several letters and papers, amongst which was one connected with Miss Potts—I remember opening it and looking at it, and handing it to you; or rather, I said, "Here is something belonging to Miss Potts"—you said, "You had better give it to me," and you took it and put it in your pocket—it was something of this kind: (Referring to a paper)—I do not know that you were aware of Miss Potts' death soon after I came to End sleigh Gardens.

Cross-examined. I lived at End sleigh Gardens up to December, 1888, and returned to it in March, 1890; and about April or May I took a letter round to 58, Gower Street—that was the last known address of Miss Potts—I left in July, 1890, and went to End sleigh Gardens again in September of the same year to stay a short time, and went again in December, 1890—I went again in the spring of 1891, and the summer—I knew letters had accumulated there for Miss Potts, and saw some in July, and some in the spring of 1891—I came to London on the 15th of April, when some two or three more letters came—they were put into an envelope, and I saw someone have them to post—I did not see them put into the envelope—I only heard of their arrival—I do not remember the name on the envelope—I think it was on a Monday that I saw the letter in July—I have only a slight thing to go by—I simply saw the envelope was directed to Miss Potts, and had no information of what it contained—I did not know that these letters directed to End sleigh Gardens were being opened there on the day of their receipt.

PROFESSOR W. T. A. EMTAGE , M. A. I am Assistant-Professor of Physics and Mathematics, of University College, Nottingham, and am your sister's husband—I came to End sleigh Gardens in July last year—a letter came for Miss Potts, which was posted on—I did not see it that I remember.

MARY ANN GOODING . I am generally called Edith—I am your cousin—in March, April, June, and July of last year I was living at 1, Endsleigh

Gardens, and remember letters coming for Miss Potts, and some being redirected to Mr. James A. Kirk, Junior Constitutional dub, Regent Street—I posted some, and remember posting one in July, when Mr. and Mrs. Emtage were there.

Cross-examined. I cannot exactly tell the date—Dr. Bynoe may have been there at the time—I am sure I posted the letter—Mrs. Bynoe generally used to give me her letters to post—I was asked as to this about three weeks ago by Mrs. Bynoe, the prisoner's mother—I have been living with her; she told me I was to be very careful about that letter, because it was about money matters—I did not see if there was the name of any company printed on the back of it—in January or February I had a letter to post, containing four or five letters in a large envelope—I was there when the letters were put in and the envelope closed—the prisoner directed them, and Mrs. Bynoe gave them to me to post—I was at End sleigh Gardens from January to July, and saw a good many letters—the letters addressed to Miss Potts were sometimes opened by the prisoner.

Re-examined. I never saw you open a letter, I did not quite understand the question—I never saw you open a letter directed to Miss Potts—I went home to stay in Gloucestershire, at my mother's, for a little while, and came back last September—you did not have the letters after they were directed to Mr. Kirk—I put them into the post-box myself.

JOHN BRIGHT . I am hall porter at the Junior Constitutional Club—I have seen you somewhere; I cannot remember where—put your hand over your beard (the prisoner did so)—I remember your calling at the Junior Constitutional Club about February last year, and you asking for Mr. James A. Kirk; as a member of the club he has received letters at all times—I cannot swear that he received some letters re-directed about February, but to the best of my opinion he did receive one or two.

Cross-examined. I cannot pledge myself to that positively—I cannot say who it was came.

B. T. BEDORDA. I am manager of a patent medicine company, and live at 50, Upper Bedford Place—I heard in the early part of last year that several letters were at End sleigh Gardens for Miss Potts, and of certain letters having been opened that contained valuables—there was no mention of cheques—I think Mrs. Bynoe said there were coupons in one of them, or something of that sort—I was there at a musical evening in the beginning of 1890 or the latter part of 1889—there was a large company, and Mrs. Bynoe spoke out before them, and asked if anyone knew Mr. Kirk's or Miss Potts' address, when I immediately spoke up, and said I frequently met Mr. Kirk; and she requested me to say to him that there were some valuable letters there—it is easier for me to recollect the incident than to place the time—I attached no importance to the matter, but if I were going to speak of it offhand I should say it was a year or two ago—having been charged with that commission, I should naturally have told him, and I believe I did—I could not say the exact language I employed, but after greeting him in the usual friendly way I said I believed there were letters at Mrs. Bynoe's for him.

Cross-examined. Or in which he was interested—I do practise—we deal in various patent medicines—mine is not an English diploma—it could not have been later than 1890, I think, that this conversation

occurred—I did not attach any importance to it at the time—it is such a strong impression on my mind that I would sooner swear that I did speak to Mr. Kirk about it than not to swear to it—I can swear that I believe I told him.

Re-examined. I associated it with the evenings I spent at Mrs. Bynoe's house.

ALBERT EDWARD PELLING . I am a warder at Holloway Gaol—I think I remember handing you two letters on Tuesday last—I have handed you letters nearly every day—I cannot identify this letter particularly (produced)—these are my figures, B 255—it came in the ordinary way—letters are opened, read, and initialled by the Governor before they are sent to the prisoners—these are the chief warder's initials at Holloway, and the letter was read by the chief warder before you received it; you were anxious to send a telegram to your solicitor directly—I came shortly after for the letter, and handed it to Mrs. Bynoe; paper of that kind is not supplied in the prison—I should say it was impossible for your friends to hand it to you when visiting—visitors are in the visiting box, and are about two feet or rather more from the prisoner—there is wirework each side of the visiting box, and there is a warder present.

Cross-examined. The prisoner might supply himself with such paper outside the prison—the warder keeps the prisoners under his eye, and sees that nothing is passed to them or from them—I do not know how often the prisoner's mother visited him; she frequently came—I have heard of things being introduced into the prison and passed by visitors to prisoners.

Re-examined. I have not heard of a letter being passed in that condition, because that has gone through the chief warder's hands—the wire network I have spoken of is very close—I cannot say the size, I have never examined it very particularly—I should say the squares are less than an inch, so that the paper would have to be folded small; it was not so folded when handed to you. (The Utter was read)—"Sir,—I have only just heard that you are charged with writing some letters and signing some cheques in the name of Constance H. Potts, from February to July last year. I was asked by a young man I am very fond of to write some letters, dated from 1, End sleigh Gardens, and some from Hampton Court, and to sign a lot of cheques in the name of Constance H. Potts, and I did it. He told me it was quite right, as the lady had given him the cheques, but was too ill to be troubled with them. One day early in May, I think it was Tuesday, I went to the City and met him, and we went to the office of 'John Shaw' marked on the window. I was told to write my name on the back of a cheque, and I wrote Constance H. Potts. "(The letter went on to state that the writer's friend received the money, and that he gave her £2 for herself and paid her fare)—it continued, "I would come forward and give evidence for you, but I should get into trouble, as I went to the City and signed cheques and said I was Miss Potts; but if you would like me to communicate with the Judge at the Old Bailey, put an advertisement in the Daily Telegraph to 'Constance,' saying you would like it, and I will do so,"&c.

The prisoner. There is a suggestion in the letter that I should put an advertisement in the Daily Telegraph, which I did; I do not know if any

letter has been sent to any Judge here: I do not suppose your Lordship would have heard of it.


The prisoner received a good character.

Witnesses in reply.

ROBERT JAMES WILLIS . I am manager of the Investment Department of John Shaw, outside broker, of 1, Wardrobe Chambers—the prisoner called on the 17th April and produced this certificate for £400 Courage debenture stock, dated 8th April, 1891 (produced)—I said it bore a very recent date—he said, "This is a duplicate certificate; Miss Potts has lost the original"—he had previously asked me for a price of the stock, and I gave him, roughly, a price—I was satisfied with his explanation, and he asked me to sell the amount of stock—I at once communicated with brokers connected with the Exchange and sold it, and gave him a contract note—on 27th April I directed a letter to Miss Potts, at 1, End sleigh Gardens, enclosing form of transfer for signature, with instructions—on the 28th or 29th April the prisoner called with the transfer which I had sent (produced)—it purported to be signed by Constance H. Potts, and to be attested by James A. Kirk, which I believed to be genuine—the 1st May was Stock Exchange Holiday, and the 2nd and 3rd were Saturday and Sunday—on the 4th he called for a cheque for the stock, and I referred him to Mr. Lane Gieve, the manager—I was present, and Mr. Lang Gieve said, "I will give you a cheque payable to Miss Potts," and I went to see that the cheque was drawn—it was then handed to the prisoner, crossed (produced)—the prisoner looked at it, and said, "I don't think Miss Potts has a banking account; how can she get the money?"—Mr. Lang Gieve said, "If Miss Potts will call I shall be very pleased to open the cheque and make it payable to bearer"—the prisoner took it away with him—on the 5th I happened to go into Mr. Lang Gieve's room and saw the prisoner there with a lady—I felt satisfied that the lady was Miss Potts, and that we were giving the money to the right person—I have no doubt as to the prisoner—I think I saw him before the 17th.

Cross-examined. I feel positive it was you who called—I think it was between twelve and two when you called with the lady—I can't say whether she was young or old—I think she was middle-aged—more gentlemen than ladies come there.

ALFRED LANG GIEVE . I am general manager to Mr. John Shaw—on the occasion in question (the 4th May) Willis said to me, "This gentleman wants to be paid for the Courage Brewery debenture"—I said, "The stock is sold, but we have not had Miss Potts' instructions to give him a cheque," and I explained that I should require Miss Potts' instructions for him to receive the money; "but,"I said, "I will tell you what I will do; I will give you a cheque crossed to the account of the payee only, so that it can only go through Miss Potts' bank," and I did so—I explained to him the consequence of crossing the cheque, and he said he did not know that Miss Potts had a banking account—I told him if Miss Potts would call I would make the cheque an open one, so that bank notes could be got for it—he then left, and the next day called with a lady, whom he intimated was Miss Potts, who had come in accordance with my remark on the previous day, and wanted the cheque

to be altered, so that she could get bank notes for it—he handed it tome and I cancelled the crossing, and marked it "pay cash," and initialed it—it was on the Capital and Counties Bank, Ludgate Hill—it was then either handed to them, or I got the notes and handed them, and they left—I did not particularly notice the lady; she did not appear to be an invalid—I did not see the prisoner again until he was arrested—I did not pick him out at Bow Street first, hut pointed to another man—I have not the slightest doubt as to the prisoner now.

Cross-examined. I was rather too precipitate when I went to Bow Street to identify you; you and the lady were about a quarter of an hour in the office—she was rather short, and I should say medium in build and colour—the whole circumstances were, recalled to my mind when I looked at you carefully—I think if I saw the lady again I should recall her features—I should say they came to the office about twelve o'clock; it was before I went to lunch, and I generally go from one to 1.30.

ROBERT MCGREGOR JOLLY . I am cashier at the Ludgate Hill Branch of the Capital and Counties Bank, where Mr. John Shaw has an account—this cheque for £419 10s. was cashed there on 5th May last—I have the numbers of the notes paid for it—amongst them were these notes (produced).

CHARLES JOHN WILLIAMS . I am clerk in the Bank of England, and inspector of bank notes in the bank-note department—I produce bank notes, value about £415—they were brought to the bank to be changed into gold on 5th May last—five are endorsed "James Kirk, 1, Endsleigh Gardens, N. W. "

By the COURT. I did not cash them—they were all brought by the same person at one time.

JAMES A. KIRK (Re-examined). The signature to this transfer is not Miss Potts', neither is the signature of the attesting witness, "James Kirk,"mine—I always sign "James A. Kirk"—I was not residing at End sleigh Gardens on the 30th April, the date of the transfer—the endorsement on the cheque is not Miss Potts'—the endorsement on the bank notes is not mine—I did not go to the Bank of England on the 5th May.

G. S. INGLIS (Re-examined). The signature to the transfer is not Miss Potts', but the prisoner's; so is this signature, "James Kirk," and the endorsement on the cheque of the 4th May—as also the endorsements on the five Bank of England notes.

F. G. NETHERCLIFT (Re-examined). I quite agree with Mr. Inglis.

The prisoner called further evidence at to alibi.

ELIZABETH JANE BYNOE (Re-examined). You came home about mid-day on the 17th April—there were two gentlemen friends of your brother's there and you went with them into the drawing-room—to my certain knowledge you never left the house again till 4.30—there were present, besides yourself, Mr. Warren, Mrs. Pattison, my youngest daughter, Miss Edith Gooding, and my second son; Mrs. Emtage came on the 15th—you had a dispute with the gas company on 30th April, and they disconnected the gas—on the 5th May you settled it—you were at the gas company's most of the morning—you came home about 1.15—we lunch at 1.30, but we were a little late in consequence of the gas, by which we cook, having been cut off—you went out about 2.15 to visit a patient, and came back

in a cab a little past three, when the gas man came to connect the gas—you did not leave again before 4.30; you had no lady in your company that I know of—you showed me the gas receipt (produced).

Cross-examined. My attention was first called to the 17th April, at Bow Street Police-court—on 30th October, I remembered it was two days after my daughter came from Nottingham, and we arranged to go out that evening to the Mohawk Minstrels—it was my son's usual habit to come in about eleven—the dispute with the gas company was in respect of another house account that we had already paid, and they would not take one account without the other; we went without gas for five days, and then I urged my son to go and pay them the disputed amount, as we could not do without gas—on the 5th May my son came in about 10.45 and remained five or ten minutes, and then went out to see a patient that was very ill, and returned about 1.20—he went out again and returned in a cab about three.

Re-examined. Since my daughter came up unexpectedly on the 15th April I have concentrated my mind on certain dates—your dispute with the gas company was not due to pecuniary pressure; the gas was consumed by the person to whom you let 22, Upper Woburn Place.

CATHERINE P. EMTAGE (Re-examined). After breakfast on the 17th April I went to your surgery with a message from mother, and I went in an omnibus to Oxford Circus, and did some shopping—I returned to End sleigh Gardens soon after twelve, and found you there—we had some gentlemen visitors, and were talking in the dining-room, and then we went to the drawing-room—you did not leave the house again before 12.30—we all lunched together at 1.30—you left at 4.30.

Cross-examined. I remembered this date at Bow Street, the second day we were there, early in November—suddenly remembered the date when I was going through everything I had done, and I remembered going to the Mohawk Minstrels—I came to London on the 15th.

Re-examined. This was the first time I had visited my mother since my marriage—I was a little home-sick, and I came without giving notice, and took you by surprise—I fix the date by several little matters, on talking it over with my husband, which are not convenient to mention in open Court.

ELLEN WOODS . I am a domestic servant, in the employ of Mr. Jeffreys, of 85, Albert Street, Regent's Park, and was so employed on the 3rd, 4th, and 5th May last—on Sunday, 3rd May, Mr. Jeffreys was taken ill, and you were called—on Monday you came to see him between 11 and 11 30, and on Tuesday, 5th, between 11 and 11.30—I did not see you after that.

Cross-examined. That was the last I saw of him.

WILLIAM MARTIN JEFFREYS. YOU saw me on the morning of 3rd May at 85, Albert Street—I was taken ill—I had previously had a severe cold, which apparently developed into an attack of influenza—I had a sudden attack of heart-disease, and fell insensible on the floor—you usually saw me about 11.15—you stopped about half an hour.

Cross-examined. It would take perhaps about half an hour to drive from there to Doctors' Commons.

EDWIN DOWDING . I am clerk to the Gas Company, Horseferry Road—you came there on 5th May, in reference to some dispute, within a few minutes of 12 o'clock—you were a little troublesome, and were there

some time and saw the manager—you were there from forty to forty-five minutes, and left as near as possible at 12.40—directly after you left I despatched a telegram to our district office, instructing them to re-connect the supply—I have a copy of it, taken by means of carbonised paper—I saw no lady with you.

Cross-examined. I was inside the gas company's premises and did not go outside, and did not see how the prisoner came to the premises or left—he would certainly leave about 12.40.

Re-examined. Our office is exactly opposite Broadwood's pianoforte manufactory, about 200 yards from the Middlesex side of Lambeth Bridge—it would take some time to get to Doctors' Commons.

Further Cross-examined. The prisoner paid us on that day—the account had been outstanding for some time.

By the JURY. Our place would be a little out of the way to Doctors' Commons.

EMMA GRIFFITH . I am a domestic servant, and was in your employ in May last—I remember the gas. being cut off and re-connected about three o'clock, I should say, on the 5th May; I also saw you about half an hour about luncheon time; we were a little late that day on account of the gas which we cooked by—I remember you mending a roller blind that day, and your saying, "Mrs. Griffith, the gas is now on"; and I said, Thank your, sir."

Cross-examined. I was a general servant, and am not now in the service—I left last summer—I remember the prisoner's grandmother speaking to me about the gas—the prisoner was generally home to luncheon—I was in the service from March till July.

EMMA SULLIVAN . I was in Mrs. Bynoe's service as cook for some years—I remember going there on the 5th May, when I saw you—it was my birthday, and I was sent by my mistress with whom I then lived—I asked for a drink, and the missus gave me a shilling—I stayed from 1.15 till 2 o'clock.

Cross-examined. I came back to the service, and am there now, and have seen Mrs. Bynoe from day to day—she has mentioned the case to me, and about the doctor being here.

THOMAS CREW . I am in the employ of Mr. White, cab proprietor, and went there last May—I saw you there on the 4th and 5th May, about dinner-time.

Cross-examined. There was no clock in the stable, so I should not know the time to a few minutes.

WILLIAM TOWERS . I know you well as living in the locality for some few years—I am a fitter, in the employ of the gas company, and went to your house about 3.10 on the 5th May, when I saw you there—I connected the gas, and you stood there till I finished—I left about 3.35—I did not see you drive up in a cab.

Several witnesses deposed to his good character.

The prisoner then addressed the JURY at great lengthy commenting upon the evidence, declaring his innocence, and pointing out that other persons were in possession of all the facts of the case, which would enable them more easily than himself to commit the offence with which he was charged.

GUILTY Nine Years' Penal Servitude.

NEW COURT.—Thursday, January 14th, 1892.

Before Mr. Common Serjeant.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-192
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceNo Punishment > sentence respited

Related Material

192. HENRY THOMAS (43) PLEADED GUILTY to uttering a forged cheque for £100, after a conviction at this Court.

Judgment respited.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-193
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceNo Punishment > sentence respited

Related Material

193. EDWARD AUGUSTUS DANDO , Unlawfully obtaining three orders for £100 each, with intent to defraud.

MR. KEMP, Q. C., and MR. H. AVORY Prosecuted, and MR. GEOGHEGAN


SAMUEL SCOTT MCMILLAN . I am a member of the Royal College of Physicians, Edinburgh, but have retired and live at Goldhawk Road, Shepherd's Bush—prior to June, 1891, I became acquainted with the prisoner, and he visited at my house—on June 1, in consequence of a communication I received, I called at his place in Lincoln's Inn Fields, and when I got into his private room he had a letter in his hand—he said, "Here is a letter from a gentleman who wishes to join me at the Munich Theatre at the German Exhibition; it will be a good thing, like the Italian Exhibition; I should like you to take it up instead of him"—he said he had given Professor Herman £600 for his share in the profits of the theatre, and he was to get half the profits; that he had put in £300 and wanted another £300—he read a great part of this document (produced) to me, and said if it was good enough for him to put in £300, it was good enough for me—I wanted to take it to my solicitor, but he said, "Leave it to me, I will look after your interests, as I am looking after my own; will you take it up or shall my friend?"(he had a friend who offered him £50 more)—I said, "I will take it up with you" he said, "I owe you some money, and I shall then be able to pay you off when we work the theatre; the £300 will be repaid before any profit by Herman and myself"—I said I would find the £300, and left, and received this agreement by post next morning—his clerk, Mr. Holmes, called on me, and I tendered him this cheque for £100. (Dated June 4th, 1891); it is endorsed by the prisoner—I afterwards handed him these two cheques for £100 each—they are endorsed by the prisoner, and were paid by my bankers—I parted with them because I believed his statement that he had advanced £300.

Cross-examined. I have lent him money, and he owed me money at the time of this transaction—I had lent him £15 in the May before this June, and he owed me more than that—I have retired from my profession—I have never been to the Italian Exhibition; I have to the German—I heard that the theatre of the Italian Exhibition had cleared £4,000—I have been in Manchester and Ealing—I have lent money on mortgage—I have assisted one or two, but I am not a money-lender—when the prisoner borrowed £25 in July I found out that he had not put this £300 in the theatre, and found that I had been swindled—I went to my solicitor, and he advised me to prosecute the prisoner, and he was written to—if he had paid me I don't mink I should have prosecuted him—this is not the first time I have prosecuted a man to whom I have lent money; a man robbed me of £500, and I put it into Mr. Besley's hands—the solicitors in that case were not the same as my solicitors now—he was sent for trial here, but he was not tried—Mr. Avory asked me

if he was acquitted, and I said "Yes"—my solicitor sent me a cheque for £500; I did not ask him where it came from, I did not want to know—I do not know who signed the cheque, I had not the cheque at all, my solicitor backed it and gave me the difference—that was not much—these proceedings were not taken against the gentleman purely with the view of forcing his friends to pay—he bought my house for £500, and I thought he had got it very cheap—I did not take his money; my solicitor took it-that is not the reason why I waited from July to November in this case—I said to Mr. Avory, at the Police-court, "Not getting my money from the defendant, I put the matter into my solicitor's hands; I was induced to advance the money because of the success he said it would be"—I had other reasons, which I was prepared to give—Mr. Avory said, "Is that your only reason?" and I said, "I cannot think of anything else,"because I had answered the other questions previously—I would not have put £300 in if he had not put money in—I did not ask him where he got the £300 from; I was told by two parties that he had just received £500; one of them was his brother—I did not ask for the money he owed me; he said I should have that after the Exhibition—Mr. Herman went with me to the Police-court to get the warrant—the prisoner was written to several times, and asked what he meant by such conduct, and he promised to pay—my solicitor has his answer.

Re-examined. In the £500 case, what was done was done with the sanction of the Court, but I was waiting downstairs—when I advanced the £300 I was on terms of intimacy with the prisoner, and was not pressing him for the money he had advanced—I never advanced money on any speculation before, but only on mortgage at 4 per cent, and on a life policy.

ANN WESTON . My mother and I have for many years resided with Dr. and Mrs. McMillan—I have frequently written letters for him—on June 1st I went with him to the post-office in Lincoln's Inn Fields—my mother and I waited outside while he went into the office, and next morning the prisoner's clerk, Holmes, came to the house for a cheque—I do not recollect drawing a cheque for £100, but this cheque (produced) is my writing—on, I believe, June 5th I went and saw the prisoner—I wanted to know what he wanted the money for, and said, "I think you are in a great hurry about it"—he produced a deed, and told us about the theatre; I asked him if it would be a safe thing, and he assured us that it would be; he read some of the clauses of it, and said he had invested money in it, and the doctor was going to take half a share—after that visit I drew the other two cheques for £ 100 each—these are them; they are in my writing—on July 7th wrote him this letter. (Complaining that he was not there when the called with her mother the day before)—I received this reply. (Stating that he had had financial troubles, and required considerable funds to meet them, but hoped things would be all fight that week, and that he considered the business would realise a good profit under favourable management.)—on 27th July I wrote this letter, to which he replied on July 28th. (Stating that no one could estimate the terrible trouble he was involved in, but that the Borax Company would answer if successfully floated, but that he was without the means to return the payment for the theatre).

Cross-examined. I have been in the habit of writing Dr. McMillan's

letters for him, and taking an active part in any business lie has to do—before he had the first cheque he received a letter from the prisoner on the 3rd, and there was a difference between Dr. McMillan's version of the interview and the prisoner's version—in spite of that, Dr. McMillan told me to write the cheque, and no step was taken to stop it.

HENRY HERMAN . I am a conjurer—I entered into a speculation in respect to the Munich Theatre at the German Exhibition—I entered into an agreement with the prisoner to advance money—I did not receive £300 under this agreement (produced)—after it was signed I asked him about it, and he said, "It is a matter of form, which is done every day; I do not want to spend more than £300"—I received £185 from the prisoner after signing the agreement—the theatre was artistically a success, but financially a failure—it was only shut up for one day; it was not exactly closed; there were always performances going on; it went on up to the termination of the German Exhibition—my part was not closed; one performance was closed, but I had five performances.

Cross-examined. The theatre at the Italian Exhibition was a great success—I have been connected with theatrical matters since 1847—I got out of this without losing much money; I lost my time—the weather was not artistically a success last year—I estimated the value of the spectacle at more than £1,200; the other exhibition was £4,500—Dr. McMillan asked me to get Dando's share assigned to him; that must have been on 30th July—Dr. McMillan came to see me, and I went and saw Dando in consequence of what he said—on 21st July a meeting of the creditors of the theatre was called at Messrs. Crass' office, virtually by me—they were Dr. McMillan's solicitors—no money was forthcoming then, and on the following Saturday the theatre was closed, and the money returned—that was the only occasion when the theatre was closed and the money returned—Dr. McMillan told me that Dando would assign his share—I swore an information against Dando at the Police-court—it was handed to me in the lobby of Bow Street Police-court, and I read some parts of it—the solicitors for the prosecution wrote me a letter which I think covered more than two pages—it looks like threatening me—this is it—I said at the Police-court that the theatre would have been a success if it had not been for the inclement weather.

Re-examined. The information was in my possession some time, but it was not the same information.

The prisoner received a good character.

GUILTY.— Judgment respited.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-194
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

194. WILLIAM GEORGE (26) , assaulting Mary Ann Duncan, with intent, &c.


NEW COURT.—Friday, January 15th 1892.

Before Mr. Common Serjeant.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-195
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

195. JOHN ALGERNON LATHAM PLEADED GUILTY to unlawfully obtaining money by false pretences, with intent to defraud. Recommended to mercy by the prosecutor.—Two Months' Hard Labour.

(For cases tried this day, see Surrey cases.)

FOURTH COURT.—Friday, January 15th, 1892.

Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-196
VerdictsNot Guilty > unknown; Guilty > unknown; Guilty > unknown
SentencesImprisonment > hard labour; Imprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

196. LAWRENCE WOODBINE CLOETE (41) and HUGH MACPHERSON (44) , Feloniously forging and uttering a transfer of 200 shares in the Simmer and Jack Gold Mining Company, with intent to defraud; two other Counts varying the form of charge.

MR. JELF, Q. C., and MR. HORACE AVORY Prosecuted;



EDWARD GODEFROI . I am a stockbroker, of 11, Copthall Court—I know Cloete—on 30th June, 1890, he borrowed of me, in the name of the Development and Investment Company, Limited, £600—as security he deposited this transfer of 200 shares in the Simmer and Jack Gold Mining Company—No. 3,716, that is executed by Cloete—the numbers in the body of the transfer are on the shares; they are not very distinct—referring to my book I find the numbers are 27,476 to 525, 54,508 to 12, 71,800 to 4, 59,158 and 9, 18,551 to 5, 13,984 to 14,008, 71,795 to 9, 59,160 to 2, and 15,367 to 466—twenty shares—they are the numbers as they originally stood crossed out on the transfer in red and black, and there is a reference "see back"—on the back is another set of numbers—this is my cheque for £600, drawn on my bankers, and made payable to the Development Investment Company or bearer, and that is the cheque that represented those. 200 shares—that loan was repaid, £400 on 16th, £100 on 18th, and £104 17s. 6d. on 22nd July—the extra £4 17s. 6d. is made up by the stamp, £1 15s., and interest at 10 per cent, £3 2s. 6d.—I thereupon retransferred to Cloete or the Development Company 200 shares in the Simmer Company on 80th July—unlike bonds to bearer, you can retransfer any shares—this transfer is numbered 3,715 in the right-hand corner, and is in Cloete's name—these shares are numbered 49,387 to 411, 49,362 to 71, 7,819 to 23, 7,729 to 7,808, 4,871 to 40, 52,563 to 77, 62,888 to 62, 5,580 to 89, and 12,031 to 40—the numbers on the back of Cloete's transfer to me are the same as the shares I transferred to Cloete—so that the original shares which Cloete transferred to me have substituted in their place the shares which I transferred back to him—when I was asked to lend money I did not do it myself, but through Besley, a dealer in the market, and directly the shares were put in my name by Cloete I transferred to Besley, and simply passed the transaction through, interest and everything—that transfer is 3,717—in this book I first find a transfer from myself to Cloete, 8,716; then one from Cloete to me; 3,717 is from myself to Besley, the same shares which I got from Cloete—the numbers are altered in the transfer from myself to Besley—it appears as if I transferred to Besley the actual shares I actually transferred back to Closte.

Cross-examined by MR. GRAIN. I have been repaid the £600 loan—Besley, unless he has transferred them, holds good shares—he had a good title—there was no purchase in the market.

HERBERT FISHER . I am a clerk to Deloite, Dever and Co., accountants by direction of the directors, in December, 1890, I examined the books and documents found at Mr. Cloete's office, which was used as the office of the Simmer Company—I have been able to trace the shares transferred by No. 3,716 transfer to Mr. Godefroi; I have the certificates—Cloete. did

not hold the shares which by 3,716 he purported to transfer—this ledger shows he held none at that time—the total shares he dealt in are 680—he bought shares on 2nd, 5th, and 22nd June, and on July 23rd—I have one certificate in the name of Edward James Burgess, of 1st April, 1889; Nos. 27,476 to 525; next 8th April, 1889, same name, 54,508 to 12, 71,800 to 804, 59,158 and 9, 18,551 to 5, 13,984 to 14,008, and 71,795 to 9; next 20th May, 89,588 to 62, name, Mark L. Laberchini, and one dated 14th July, 1890, 15,367 to 466—the 100 held by Burgess were surrendered to the company in exchange for new certificates—they remained undealt with and in his hands, if dealt with at all, till long after this transaction—I can tell when he got them from the guard-book—I have one transfer here, dated 29th March, 1889, from Alfred Bight, of Kimberley, to Mr. Burgess, No. 431—the next one is No. 464 from Joseph Duncan McVicar to Edward James Burgess, of 29th March, 1889, Nos. 54,508 to 12—465, 29th March, 1889, from Bight to Burgess, Nos. 71,800 to 804; 466, 28th March, 1889, from Francis Charles Matthewson to Burgess, Nos. 59,158 and 9; 467, 28th March, 1889, from Dolera Cohen to Burgess, 5 shares, 18,551 to 5; 468, March 29th 1889, Bight to Burgess, 25 shares, 13,984 to 14,008; next 469, 28th March, 1889, Bight to Burgess, 5 shares, 71,795 to 799; 716, 14th May, 1889, Percy James Russell to Burgess, 3 shares, 59,160 to 162; and 3,413, 30th May, 1890, from Jules Friedlander, of Johannisberg, to Laberchini, of Vienna, 15,417 to 416, and 15,367 to 416—I make one correction; I find at this time Cloete held 100 shares; they are different numbers—I cannot speak of the state of things at Cloete's office—I merely had a few minutes' conversation with Burgess and came away, and the books were immediately afterwards sent to us—I have had a good deal of experience with regard to registration, and I do not think I have seen any set of books in such general disorder—I produce transfer executed by Cloete to Macpherson, No. 3,345 of 6th June—it would be presented at the office with the certificate in the name of the transferor—it transfers 330 shares—Macpherson transfers them to third persons—I have a list of those persons (produced); they are the same numbers—I have traced the numbers, and they correspond—I have a counterfoil of the receipt-book, which shows Cloete dealt with those shares which he had already transferred to Macpherson—a provisional receipt is given to a transfer, which is afterwards exchanged for the certificate—the counterfoil of the receipt-book is 1,976, Cloete to Bailey, 330 shares—there are no details—I have the corresponding certificate here of 28th July—Arthur Cecil Bailey represents the shares transferred—Bailey brought me the transfer—he did not leave it—I have had it since; it was left by the Development Company—also 100 shares were sold; twenty to E. Aldersen, and various other people, by Macpherson—one transfer is in the name of Cloete—Macpherson transfers to Cloete ten shares—the books show those shares had been sold previously—they were already in the names of other persons.

Cross-examined by MR. GRAIN. I commenced my investigation of the books early in 1891—two transfers bear Cloete's signature; one to Bailey, the other to Macpherson—also one to Godefroi—the transfers are filled up with other writings, not Cloete's—the alterations are not made in Cloete's writing—Cook, a clerk of the Simmer Company, absconded—I heard that—I know nothing of Jaffray—I have been told he has gone

—I heard Macpherson make a statement at the Police-court—the certificate is lodged at the company's office, and examined with the register—a borrower would sign a transfer of the shares held as security—all the details would be filled in by clerks, not by Cloete—Cloete's office was a large one—the business of a number of companies was conducted by the Development Company there—Cloete was the managing director of the Development Company—about three clerks were employed on the Simmer Company's business—Macpherson's name does not come into the books as operating clerk on the Stock Exchange—Bailey has not demanded the 330 shares—the certificate was lodged for verification—Bailey's loan was paid off—nobody claims the 330 shares.

Re-examined. I know Macpherson's writing—this is his signature. (Read—Signed H. Macpherson:" Holloway Prison, 7th November, 1891.—I wish, in the interests of justice, to repeat the statement I caused to be conveyed to the Simmer and Jack Company last June, namely, that the only persons responsible for putting in circulation the duplicate shares of the company, to the extent of 630 shares, all I know of, are R. A. Jaffray, W. B. Cook, and myself. These shares were sold through Messrs. Lane Brothers, 17, Tokenhouse Yard, to whom the business was introduced by Jaffray. The proceeds, rather over £2,000, were equally divided between the three of us. The transfers for these shares were put on the books by Cook, in place of a like number of genuine shares which had been sold by me on Mr. Cloete's behalf, the transfers of which were kept back and destroyed. All this was done without Mr. Cloete's knowledge. All the stock and share business of the office was managed by me, Mr. Cloete placing in me the most implicit confidence, seldom ever looking to the accounts. I abused that confidence in the manner above stated. I have also to state that Poster, whose name has been mentioned, had no hand in the conspiracy."

DR. ALLIOTT. I have been attending Arthur Bailey for influenza—have sent him to St. Leonards; he is not fit to come here and giv evidence.

The deposition was read of Arthur Cecil Bailey, on October 29th, 1891:" I am a member of the firm of Wood, Neame, and Co, stockbrokers, of 1, Drapers' Gardens, City. The defendant Cloete and the Simmer and Jack Gold Mining Company had offices in the same building. To the best of my belief the offices were the same. I have had business with the defendant Cloete as to both the sale and purchase of shares. I knew the prisoner Macpherson as Cloete's clerk. I never had dealings with Macpherson as principal. I saw Macpherson from time to time with respect to the business I was doing for Cloete. I have sold shares in this gold mining company on instructions from Mr. Cloete without certificates. In ordinary course, if it was not intended to carry over, a transfer would be lodged at the company's office for verification. The particulars for the filling up of the transfer would be obtained from Mr. Cloete. "Also, on 10th November, 1891: "On the 27th May, 1890, I sold to Mr. Wenkheim 100 shares of the Simmer and Jack Mining Company by direction of Mr. Cloete. I had had previous transactions with Mr. Cloete, of which I kept a record in my books; at the time of that sale he was indebted to me in a balance of £25 18s. 1d. I produce a press copy of the statement of account sent to the accused about the 28th May. I cannot say

by whom it would be posted. The usual course would be to post these letters. I produce a cheque for £401 11s. 5d., dated May 31st, 1890, payable to S. Cloete, Esq., or bearer; that cheque was given to Macpherson. It was copied by us—the National Bank account payee. The amount of that cheque was for the balance due to Cloete after deducting the amount of £25 18s. 1d. owing by him. The course of business is for the broker to whom I sell to give the name of the transferee. I received from Mr. Wenkheim the names of the transferee and the brokers. I received certain names and certain parcels of shares from Mr. Wenkheim. The general rule with Mr. Cloete's shares was to prepare the transfers, as far as we could. They were then handed to Mr. Macpherson, to complete, in accordance with written instructions signed by Macpherson (produced). I have no doubt it was followed in this case; I know of nothing to the contrary According to the usual custom we should then receive them back from Macpherson completed. I received payment for these 100 shares from six different brokers, viz., Krailsheimer, 15 shares; Borthwick, Wark and Co., 20; Greatorex, 20; Lowenstein, 30; Koblyn and King, 5; and Godefroi 10. Against those payments I handed over the transfers; they were all from Macpherson to the different brokers, except the last 10 to Godefroi, which were from Cloete to Macpherson. I find from an entry in my books that the numbers of the 15 to Krailsheimer were 785,016 to 30, of the 20 to Borthwick, Wark and Co., 46,258 to 46,262, and 15,882 to 196; of the 20 to Greatorex, 76,971 to 5, 78,501 to 5 and 78,506 to 15; of the 30 to Lowenstein, 62,513 to 32 and 60,143 to 152; of the 5 to Hoblyn and King, 46,253 to 7; and of the 10 to Godefroi, 78,531 to 40. On the payment of the cheques the transfers would be handed over to the buying broker. On the 27th June, 1890,1 made a loan to Cloete of £1,000. I am quite sure I saw Mr. Cloete himself. It was on the security of 330 Simmer and Jack share. He paid £500 off on August 15th; there was a further loan on September 5th of £250. I think Mr. Cloete saw me nearly always with reference to this loan. In the usual course a fortnightly statement would be rendered. I believe it was Macpherson who delivered the transfers of the 330 shares upon which we made the advance. Lawrence Cloete was the name of the transferor, I was the transferee. I caused it to be lodged at the office of the Simmer and Jack Company. I received a receipt, and in due course the certificate (produced) marked O. I afterwards had a communication from the accountants, and saw Mr. Fisher, and made an examination of the books. I spoke to Mr. Cloete about what I had ascertained; I said I had had a communication from the accountants, Deloite, Dever and Co., and the certificate did not appear to be regular; I should think this was about March last. Mr. Cloete expressed surprise at anything being irregular with the certificate; and ultimately, on the 16th April, 1891, the loan was paid off. We then handed him back the certificate. I produce cheque for £1,000 dated June 27th, 1890, payable to L. Cloete Esq.; it bears his endorsement, I believe. I had no business with Macpherson as a customer. I acted with him as Mr. coete's clerk. When I handed back the certificate to Mr. Cloete I handed him a retransfer for the shares, not a blank transfer; a transfer from me to him. There was no conversation. "Also 16th, November, 1891;".

Cross-examined by MR. C. O. HUMPHREYS, on behalf

of Cloete. I am now one of the partners of Wood, Neame and Co.; I became a partner about March, 1889. I am not mistaken in saying that Mr. Cloete saw me with reference to the £1,000 loan; I was always there, and Mr. Cloete used to call and ask for Mr. Neame, who was seldom there, and I saw him. Mr. Macpherson generally saw me with reference to matters of detail, such as particulars of transfers of shares. I knew Mr. Cloete had interviews with Mr. Neame as to the £1,000 loan; I don't know if Mr. Cloete was a buyer of shares at that time; our firm never bought or sold shares of any kind with the Development Company. It was I who made the loan of the £1,000 on behalf of the firm. I can't say if I have had cheques for the Development Company; we should take any cheques that he paid in. It would be quite an ordinary circumstance for the certificate not to be given to me when selling shares. The instructions for the transfers would be given by a clerk as being matters of detail.

Cross-examined by Macpherson. On the 27th May the 100 shares were sold at £4 6s. 3d. per share. They have been under £3 per share on more than one occasion, I believe."

EDWARD JAMES BURGESS . I live at 40, St. James's Road, Brixton—I was a clerk to the Development Company at 1, Drapers' Gardens—Cloete was managing director—he was connected with other companies, which had offices there and at No. 18—I was there till Christmas, 1890—Cook was a clerk especially engaged on the Simmer Company's business—he was assisted by Foster, Gower, and Eldridge—they were paid by the Development Company, some weekly and some monthly—in 1889 Gower's duties were transferred to another clerk—I was London secretary to the Simmer Company—up to then I was employed by the Development Company—certificates would be brought to me for examination and signature—Cloete instructed me to have the certificates examined by clerks, as he said my time was too valuable to be wasted in examining certificates—from then they were examined by two clerks—I signed them without personally examining them, believing them to be correct—Macpherson was the Stock Exchange clerk of Mr. Cloete—he had nothing to do with the Simmer Company—he sat, when in the office, with his back to the back of Cook and Foster—Cook and Foster went away about August or September, 1890—they disappeared suddenly—I heard from Macpherson they had gone to America from Euston—I saw Macpherson constantly in the office—Cloete also mentioned that—I told Macpherson I heard they had gone to Australia—Macpherson at my request wrote to the landlord of the hotel where they stayed—I knew from Macpherson they were staying at an hotel at Liverpool—he gave me the reply to my letter and the name of the vessel, and said they were gone to New York—I gave that letter to Mr. Gilchrist—the certificates for the 200 shares bear my signature—100 of these were purchased in March and April, 1889, and they were placed in my name as secretary of the Neva Syndicate—they remained in my possession till they were handed over to Dr. Neva in February or April, 1891—I had not the slightest knowledge those shares were being dealt with by Cloete or Macpherson so as to place them in the hands of other people.

Cross-examined by MR. GRAIN. I did not suspect any fraudulent or secret idea—I was too busy as secretary to examine the certificates—I acted as secretary to other companies as well—they conducted their business in the same office—I had to sign a great many certificates—I

know Jaffray—he was secretary to the De Kaap Company, one of the companies whose business was carried on at the same offices—he sat in the same room with the other clerks who have been mentioned—he cannot be found—Cloete signed a great many documents, relying upon their being correct when brought to him for his signature—this certificate is signed by Edward Godefroi, in the presence of H. Gregg, of 11, Copthall Court—Cloete's signature is witnessed by J. J. Ridley, a solicitor—the others are witnessed—the transfer clerk would retain the transfer, and paste it in a book, with which Cloete had nothing to do.

Re-examined. The clerks of the transfer department were in the pay of the Development Company, of which Cloete was the managing director—they got no benefit—no money was traced to them—the forms seem correct.

ALFRED SULLY . I am an accountant—I am the liquidator of the Development Company—that company was wound up in December last year—I believe there will be some assets coming from snares, but very little, £1,000 or less—I have examined the pass-books of the company with the National Bank—cheques were operated upon by Cloete, and countersigned by Evans, "pro"secretary—Cloete, from the books, owes the company £12. 000—agreements were entered into with Cloete, Burgess, and the Colonial Syndicate—these are copies—they come from Somerset House. (These were entered into in July, 1888, and reciting that certain cash and shares are paid to these persons in consideration of their transferring certain property to the Development Company)—I do not see any payment in the books to these people—I see a minute of shares allotted to Burgess—I have not seen any transfer or trace of scrip—most of the shares, rights, and interests of the company have been transferred to another company. since the agreements and before I investigated, in consideration of shares and cash paid to the Development Company—that consideration has been received by the Development Company—much of it has gone.

Cross-examined by MR. GRAIN. Cloete is disputing the claim made by me on behalf of the Development Company—the books were not well kept—Cloete has a counter-claim against the Development Company of £12,000 to £15,000—in that £12,000 is included £5,000 as salary, and another £4,000; but on the other side there is an amount owing by him—I am told Mrs. Cloete has wealthy connections—the company's assets consist of a largo number of shares which have not been realised—the transfer of the Development Company's business to another company was about July, 1890—the assets were transferred to the new company, and part of the arrangement was that the Development Company should go into voluntary liquidation.

EDWARD JAMES BURGESS (Re-examined). This is the agreement I entered into with the Development Company when it was first formed. (Transferring the witness's shares in the Butter and Bassett Tin and Copper Company to the Development Company, in consideration of £6,500 in cash and £6,000 in paid-up shares of the Development Company)—I had no shares in the Bassett Company at that time—I was to receive them from Cloete—he promised me them for my services as his nominee—I never had them—I never transferred any to that company—as secretary I received my salary, but I never received any shares—nor £6,500 in cash—I do not know who the Colonial Syndicate consisted of except Cloete.

HENRY TAYLOR (City Detective Inspector). On the morning of 26th

October I went with a warrant to 7, Drapers' Gardens, with Inspector Seager, who told Cloete who we were—I handed Cloete the warrant to read—he read it—he said, "I have been robbed by my own clerks"—on the way to the station he said, "You do not suppose I should be such a d-d ass as to commit myself for this paltry sum? I have twenty companies in my office, and my confidential clerk frequently lays papers before me for my signature; I have never signed a certificate for these shares"—shares were mentioned in the warrant, which is not here—it was for fifteen shares in Simmer and Jack Gold Mining Company—on 27th October I was at the trial of Cloete before the Magistrate—a communication was made to me; I went to the corridor of the Court and saw Macpherson—I said, "Is your name Hugh Macpherson?"—he said, "Yes"—I said, "Have you come here to surrender yourself to me to-day?"—he said, "Yes"—I read the warrant to him and said, "Are you the person mentioned in that warrant?"—he said, "Yes"—he was conveyed to the station, the charge was entered, and I returned to the Guildhall—there I was asked by the solicitor for Cloete, when I was giving evidence, "Is it not a fact that Macpherson has stated that he would take all the blame upon himself?"or words to that effect—I answered, "No; not to me"—I was not in Court when Macpherson's statement was made—I saw Macpherson go from the dock to the cells, the same place as Cloete had gone—on 11th November Macpherson handed me the statement which has been read.

Cross-examined by MR. GRAIN. I believe Macpherson attended the Police office in the old Jewry to surrender (Macpherson here denied this); I was under the impression he had done so.

ALBERT HARRIS . I am the gaoler at the Guildhall—I was present when the defendants were before the Alderman—I heard the question put to Taylor as to Macpherson having made a statement exonerating Cloete—Taylor replied that he had not done so—when the Court adjourned at midday the defendants were taken to the cells—I heard them talking together—I did not hear what was said—after the adjournment Macpherson said to the Alderman, "I wish to state that Mr. Cloete is not guilty, he knows nothing of this matter at all. "

HERBERT FISHER (Re-examined). The number of shares duplicated was 960.

Cross-examined. That does not include the 200—960 is the total outstanding certificates; 200 having been returned by Godefroi, that matter was cleared off—Messrs. Lane Brothers informed me Macpherson sold 630 through them—Lanes are brokers—I do not know what money went to Cloete—no special claim has been made in respect of the 330 transferred to Bailey, but certificates have been lodged at the office for verification, which in any other case would be a claim—the 330 are not in duplicate—the difference, 630, remain unaccounted for—as to the 200 there has been no actual loss to anybody, because it is put right.

Re-examined. The subject of the Guildhall charge was about 15 or 20 shares sold by Macpherson through Messrs. Lane—part of the 630—300 of the 630 sold through Lanes are not fraudulent—330 are stolen, but the 300 balance are genuine—the 200 transferred to Godefroi were sham shares—Godefroi returned genuine shares, and the bad ones were struck out—Godefroi passed them to Besley—Godefroi noticed the numbers were

different, and went to the Company's office for an explanation—a letter was written, I believe, and the numbers were cancelled at the Company's office—up to June 24th Cloete held 360 shares, up to June 30th he had sold 360, so that he held no shares.


CLOETE, GUILTY Six Months' Hard Labour.

MACPHEESON then PLEADED GUILTY to forging a transfer of fifteen shares in the Simmer and Jack Gold Mining Company ,— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour.

NEW COURT.—Saturday, January 16th, 1892.

Before Mr., Common Serjeant.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-197
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

197. ALFRED HONBOLD (23) , Indecently assaulting Jane Louisa Morris and Lucy Lawrence.

MR. DE MICHELE Prosecuted, and MR. C. BEARD Defended.


11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-198
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

198. ANDREW CARTER (52) , Committing acts of gross indecency with John Harris and Samuel Jarvis.

MR. RAVEN Prosecuted.

GUILTY .— Three Months' Hard Labour.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-199
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

199. EDWIN GRIMAUD (49) , Indecently assaulting Rosina Batchelor.

MR. HUTTON and MR. SANDS Prosecuted, and MR. THOMPSON Defended.


11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-200
VerdictNot Guilty > non compos mentis

Related Material

200. SAMUEL GAMBLE WHITE (54) , Indecently assaulting Maud Ridley.

MR. ABINGER Prosecuted, and MR. GILL Defended,

NOT GUILTY, being insane.

FOURTH COURT.—Saturday, January 16th, 1892.

Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-201
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

201. WALTER SHUTTLEWORTH , Unlawfully and with intent to defraud omitting material particulars from the account-book of his master; other Counts varying the form of charge.

MR. JELF, Q. C., and MR. A. GILL Prosecuted; MR. COCK, QC, and MR. ABINGER Defended,

JOHN CHANDLER . I am one of the firm of Plack, Chandler and Co., hide and tallow brokers, 17, St. Mary Axe, City—up to 30th March, 1890, I had another partner, who then went out—the defendant had been confidential clerk and book-keeper for about twelve years—his duties were to keep the books, to pay wages, to receive from the wharf at Stony Lane moneys due from charges there, to pay them in to the head office, or the Imperial Bank where we bank, and enter the items into the books—after March, 1890, my attention was directed to the freight and to the charges account—in

consequence of looking into the matter I spoke to the defendant about it—I first made an examination of the books at Stony Lane in June, 1890—Mr. Child is our warehouse keeper there—books were kept there showing charges received by Child on account of the firm—the prisoner initialled Child's book for the charges paid over to him—the prisoner kept, in the petty cash-book, the payment of wages—he was authorised to draw the sum necessary for wages at St. Mary Axe and Stony Lane—in June I made an extract from Child's book—I took out amounts to the total of £256 5s. 4d. initialled by the prisoner as received by him—I then examined the cash-book and found a deficiency of £114 odd—in consequence of that result I had the amounts for the two previous quarters taken out, and found a deficiency on both those quarters—I called in the assistance of Mr. Moore, an accountant—I spoke to the prisoner about it, and he was suspended about the 23rd June—he said he knew he had allowed his books to run into arrears, and that his conduct had been abominable in allowing things to get into such a state, but he could not give any information with regard to the deficiency—we told him to make up the books, which he failed to do—after his suspension correspondence took place, and an appointment was made for him to come to the office of Messrs. Carpenter, my private solicitor; he came with his solicitor, Mr. Wire—I asked him to explain the deficiency of £114 11s. 5d., the figures of which were given him beforehand in writing, to give him time to make the explanation—he said there were slips (which were handed to me) which would show the money had been paid in wages; I said, "If these charges have been used to pay wages, how do you account for the fact of your having drawn from petty cash £750 and the total amount paid out for wages r"—he had debited petty cash from day to day; he said the wages had been paid out of these charges—the whole of the wages he had charged against petty cash—he would still have a balance in hand—his solicitor said, "Stop; don't go into petty cash; you came here to go into charges"—that was the end of the interview—the following day I received a letter from his solicitor threatening an action for slander—I was still examining the books—about 25th September I saw Messrs. Wontner—the result of the information from the books and that interview was that I charged the prisoner at the Guildhall with falsification—that charge came before one of the Aldermen on 7th October, 1890—the prisoner was represented, and an application was made for a postponement pending the civil proceedings—then another action was commenced against me for wages—those actions were consolidated, and came on in the High Court in November last—then the falsification charge came on before the Alderman, and that., accounts for the lapse of time.

Cross-examined. The prisoner had a large number of transactions through his hands—he was cashier, and under the supervision of my third partner, Mr. Baron, and occasionally my own—Mr. Baron is not here—he ceased to be a partner in March, 1890—the falsifications were continued till June, that is when I found them out—I knew slips were used—I did not swear before the Magistrate I did not know of their existence—nor before Mr. Justice Denman—the slips have nothing to do with the falsification—I cannot tell you when they were first used, it was such an irregular proceeding—I swore I did not think the slip system was in existence before the prisoner came into the office—I had no

knowledge of their use then—I deny that the prisoner gave me slips—I said I did not know of their existence—the money received by Child would be used for wages—Mr. Child's charges-book and wages-book would show the slips every day—I did not see all the slips before I suspended the prisoner—I deny that moneys were paid into the bank amounting to the deficiency—sums were paid in—they could be traced—the prisoner prepared a balance-sheet to March 31st, 1890—the balance-sheet was generally a couple of months after the quarter, but our books are balanced every quarter—the statement was approved in June—after Mr. Baron had left—the prisoner had a great deal of domestic trouble—I believe he worked late at die office; all the clerks were there occasionally late—in some years a million to a million and a quarter would pass through the books—there are a large number of items—criminal proceedings were in course when the action for slander was threatened—they were not actually taken.

Re-examined. The prisoner produced more slips at the civil trial—I knew nothing of those till the trial came on—the balance-sheet to 31st March, 1890, was based upon the books which the prisoner kept—on that balance-sheet I should have lost £480—the money he paid into the bank did not represent the total moneys he had received—supposing he ought to have paid in £50 in December, he paid in January £50 to meet that £50, having in the meantime received other £50 for other charges.

THOMAS CHILD . I am superintendent for Messrs. Chandler of the Stony Lane Wharf—I have been in their service nearly eighteen years—the slips were used to avoid money passing backwards and forwards—another reason was I could not always get money in time to pay men by 6 p.m.—charges were paid in by money and cheques—I used what cash was required, and adjusted it on the slips—once adjusted, the slips were done with, and the balance of cash was sent to St. Mary Axe—the slips showed the charges and the wages paid—the books show the settlement—the prisoner signed the wages-book for the day, I having paid him the money, and the charges-book, as having received the charges—a wages-book was also kept at St. Mary Axe by the prisoner—the wages for the 22nd October amount to £8 3s. 9d.—his summary shows that was paid to him—the total wages for the week was £56 8s. 3d. by the cash-book—that is kept by him—that sum is debited to the firm—moneys are shown to be drawn against that.

Cross-examined. The slips had been in operation possibly ten years—I keep the charges-book—it shows the money received at the wharf—it shows the money handed to me by the prisoner—he signed as having received money—this book does not show the balance—the slips did that—the slips ought to have been destroyed every day, they are of no value—they were to show the money received by me from the prisoner—he could refer to no other document for that purpose.

Re-examined. When the prisoner debited himself with the amount received, the slips were done with—the balance only of the money received and paid passed between us.

FRANCIS JOSEPH THOMAS MOORE . I am a chartered accountant, of 98, Cannon Street—on 19th August, 1890, I was called in to examine the books of Messrs. Chandler—I have prepared the statement produced, showing the transactions—the prisoner has signed the charges-book on October 22nd, 1888, for £29 4s. 8d.; 25th, £21 1s. 1d.; 30th

£19 19s. 6d.; November 2nd, £30 6s. 5d.; 8th, £18 6s. 11d.; December 10th, £22 11s. 3d.; and for 26th May, 1889, £37 8s. 5d.; August 23rd, £27 13s.; 27th, £25 7s. 3d.; September 20th, £26 3s. 1d.; October 7th, £18 14s. 4d.; 24th, £17 0s. 11d.; 26th, £32 17s. 4d.; December 27th, £18 9s.; 18th March, 1890, £13 7s. 10d.—this document shows £118 18s. 7d. in three payments, from 22nd October to 8th November, entered in the cash-book; between 8th November and 2nd January inclusive it shows there sums of odd £22, £41, and £33 further received—this paper shows all the sums put in the cash-book—there is no entry of an amount corresponding with the exact amount received—the total received is £980 6s. 2d., credited in the cash-book £506 6s. 4d.—that is debited to himself—the deficiency is £473 19s. 10d.—that is omitted from the ledger—I have examined the paid cash-book for the same period, 22nd October, 1888, to 31st March, 1890—the amounts in the wages-book embrace all the wages as summarised—the prisoner has credited himself with them—the same system of falling into arrear was followed after 31st March—between March and June the deficiency is £157 16s. 3d.—during the whole of that time he had full funds and petty cash—in the cash-book petty cash is entered, £124 3s. 4d. and £40, making £164 3s. 4d.—in the petty cash-book the £40 is not entered—he had £67 14s. 9d. and £40 petty cash the same day—he has posted £40 from the paid-out cash-book to the debit of "Paid Cash"in the ledger; and in making up the balance-sheet he writes, "By suspense account, £40"; then he transfers it out of the petty cash, reducing the balance to £60 15s. 7d., to make it agree with the small petty cash-book—the 40 sovereigns are not shown again.

Cross-examined. I have had a balance-sheet in which that item must have been introduced—the prisoner has debited himself with it—by "sums received by the prisoner,"I mean sums for which he signed on Child's book—cheques received for wages appear as petty cash—those items I take from Child's book—I found about twenty-five slips—none relating to October 22nd, 25th and 30th—I have the slips with the figures, making up the £118 18s. 7d.—they are made up of cheques and money—money received from the wharf would be generally small cheques and money—I have the slips relating to the items of 10th December, 1888, but not 25th May, 1889—the slips I have were handed me by Chandler and Co.—I have cheques for £7 0s. 10d., £2 7s. 2d., and £4 19s.—those were paid in—the slip shows how the amounts signed for in Child's book are made up; the £7 0s. 10d. and £2 7s. 2d. cheques were paid into the bank, then the £4 19s. 2d. and £20 16s. 10d. leave £34 4s.—that was the amount signed for on 10th December—the cheques were paid in on 17th—I have the slip of 26th October, which deals with the £32 17s. 4d.—it are made up of wages £19 12s. 4d. and £5 10s., making £25 2s. 4d.; the balance signed for is £7 15s.—on 20th September, £26 3s. 4d.; that shows wages £24 12s. 8d., giving the details, and charges £26 3s. 1d.; and £1 10s. 5d. is the amount received by Child from the prisoner.

GUILTY Three Years' Penal Servitude.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-202
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

202. HENRY CONWAY (35) , Feloniously entering the dwelling-house of George Austin, in the night-time, with intent to steal.

MR. JONES LEWIS Prosecuted.

GEORGE AUSTIN . I am a baker, of 13, New Street, St. Martin's Lane—on 29th December, about 10.45, I unlocked the door and went in, having been out—I found the prisoner concealed under the barrows which I keep in the shop—I asked him what he was doing there—he said he had been knocked about by some men outside, and rushed in for safety—I told him I did not believe him—I locked him in and went for a constable—I asked an employé to look after him—as I was returning with the constable the prisoner broke open the door and rushed into the street—the constable made a grab at him and missed him—the shop was shut for the night; he must have entered by turning the handle of the private door.

Cross-examined by the prisoner. I saw no kicks on you—I may have left the street-door open in the hurry to got a constable.

JAMES MURRAY . I am a journeyman baker, and work for the prosecutor at this shop—about 9.45 the prosecutor called me upstairs and asked me to take care of the prisoner—I saw the prosecutor go out—I was left in charge—the prisoner said he had been assaulted, and asked me to let him go out at the back—I said there was no back-way; he said he must go out; I said he could not go out till the prosecutor came back;—he pushed me on one side and burst the door open and ran away—the door was locked—I was in baker's clothes and could not go out.

GEORGE DEACON (197 E), I was called by the prosecutor, about 10.45, to his shop—I was on duty about twenty yards away in St. Martin's Lane—I saw the prisoner run away from the door—I tried to catch him at the door—I caught him in Hogarth Street—he asked me to let him go—I said, "You had better come back with me first to the shop"—I found the door broken.

Cross-examined by the prisoner. You told me you got in the passage out of the way.

The prisoner, in his defence, said he went into the shop for defence, as he was knocked about, and his leys would show the marks; but he had no wrong intention.


11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-203
VerdictGuilty > lesser offence
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

203. JAMES COBB (27) and JOHN MASON (30) , Forging and uttering an order for the payment of £3 2s. 6d., with intent to defraud.

MR. WARBURTON Prosecuted.

EUGENIE MOY . I am the wife of George Moy, the landlord of the Northumberland Arms, Well Street, Oxford Street—on 5th December, a little before eight p.m., the prisoners were in the bar—Cobb asked me to put this cheque through the bank, and lend £2 on it—I told him I would—on the Monday night he fetched the remainder of the money—on the Wednesday morning the cheque was returned, marked "No account"—this is the cheque, endorsed "George Cobb"—Mason assured me the cheque was all right, and I should find Alexander Hutton and Co. 's name in the Directory—the prisoners were always in company when in my house—they lived next door, but had gone when we took the cheque—I have seen the prisoners since, about a month back.

EDWARD PEARSE . I am a book-keeper to Alexander Hutton and Co., insurance agents, 138, Leadenhall Street—my firm does not bank at the London Trading Bank, Coleman Street—this cheque does not bear my firms signature.

JOHN KANE (Sergeant D). About four p.m., on 12th December, I arrested the prisoners at the Victoria Hotel, King's Cross—I told them the charge—Cobb said nothing—Mason pointed to Cobb and said, "I do not know the gentleman"—they were drinking together—they were taken to Tottenham Court Road Police-station; Mr. Moy was there—Mason said, "If you do not charge, Mr. Moy, I will get you the money by Monday;" Cobb called out, "I'll go and get it now"—the prisoners refused their address—when charged they made no reply—I searched Cobb, and saw Mason searched—I found on Cobb a cheque-book of the Middlesex Ranking Company between his shirt and drawers—on Mason was found a blank cheque from the same book as found on Cobb.

Cross-examined by Cobb. I did not ask "for your address—the officer taking the charge asked three or four times for your address, and you refused; and I said, "It does not matter, I know the men."

Cross-examined by Mason. You never said you could prove Cobb had the money—it was never mentioned.

Cobb's defence was that the money was paid him in discharge of a debt; and Mason's defence, that he had only hen four weeks in England before his arrest. He was an artist decorative painter, knew nothing about the cheque, and refused his address to avoid a scandal.

GUILTY* of uttering. There was another similar indictment against the prisoners.— Five Years' Penal Servitude each.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-204
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

204. WILLIAM GRAHAM (27) , Feloniously assaulting William Wettstein, with intent to rob him.

MR. WOODGATE Prosecuted, and MR. LAWLESS Defended.

FREDERICK BARAM (Policeman). On the night of 8th December I was on duty in Fleet Street with Police Constable Brooks—I saw the prisoner with another man, and two men following—the prisoner turned up Hind Court, and a woman stood at the bottom—just after I heard a cry of "Stop thief!"—I ran up the court, and saw the prisoner standing over Wettstein, who was lying on the ground; the prisoner was in the act of striking the prosecutor—he ran away—I ran and caught him—Brooks followed—the prisoner said, "It is not me; it is a tall man"—I had not spoken—I had hold of his right arm—I was 17 to 20 yards from him when I first noticed the prisoner—I know him by sight—I have seen him in Fleet Street—the prisoner was taken to the station and charged.

Cross-examined. There are five ways out of Hind Court—I ran about 80 yards before I caught the prisoner—the time was about 9.45 p.m.—the prosecutor said, "He is like the man," and "I do not know who it is; I cannot charge anybody"—the prisoner did not ask me to get some of the crowd as witnesses.

WILLIAM WETTSTEIN . I am superintendent of the Court Restaurant, Strand—on the evening of 8th December I went to Hind Court to make water—a man rushed down the court at my chain and watch—I exclaimed, "Stop thief!" and "Police!"—someone came behind and pushed me on my back; my nose bled and my arm was hurt—the man was the prisoner's height—I was struck from behind.

Cross-examined. I have said, "I do not know the man; I cannot charge anybody."

WALTER BROOKS (459 City). I was with Baram—I was in plain

clothes—I saw the prisoner with a tall man—we watched them go up Hind Court—shortly I heard cries of "Police!" and "Stop thief!"—I saw the prisoner running from Wettstein, who was lying down—I ran and caught the prisoner—he said, "It's not me; it's the other man"—I think Baram caught him first—we ran up together—I made inquiries, but could find no other man.

Cross-examined. I asked the prisoner what he ran for; he said, "To catch the man"—the prosecutor did not identify the prisoner.

The prisoner's statement before the Magistrate: "I am not guilty of this offence. "

GUILTY.* The prisoner pleaded to a conviction at this Court in February, 1886.— Three Years' Penal Servitude.

FOURTH COUET.—Monday, January 18th, 1892.

Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-205
VerdictsGuilty > pleaded guilty; Guilty > unknown

Related Material

205. WILLIAM CLARKE (24), CHARLES HAWKINS (21), and JAMES DAVIS (31) , Breaking and entering the dwelling-house of Alan Duffus, and stealing his goods. HARRY CLARKE (25), FREDERICK CLARKE (32), WILLIAM JONES (31), FREDERICK WEST (19), and HENRY CLAPHAM (40) , Receiving the same, knowing them to have been stolen.


MESSRS. C. MATHEWS and GILL Prosecuted; MESSRS. BEARD and SANDS appeared for Hawkins; MR. PURCELLF or item; MESSRS. GEOGHEGAN and SANDS for Frederick Clarice; MR. LAWLESS for Jones; MR. KEITH FRITH for West; and MESSRS. BURNIE and SANDS for Clapham.

JOHN CHANDLER (Inspector Y). On Sunday, 8th November, about 4.40 p.m., I was on Blackfriars Bridge—I saw a trap with a grey pony in it—William Clarke was driving—Hawkins and Davis were with him—they were going towards Clapham and Balham—I afterwards saw the pony and cart in the hands of the police—I had the men under observation—I was in communication with Inspector Leach about the matter.

Cross-examined by MR. SANDS. Davis was in the middle of the cart, and Hawkins on the near side to the kerb—I was on an omnibus going to the Elephant and Castle to meet Inspector Leach—the trap was driving very quickly—I had the box-seat, and a good view—the prisoners had dark clothes and hard felt hats; not over their eyes, I had a good view of their faces.

Cross-examined by MR. PURCELL. I took a note of it—I had not seen the cart before—I have seen Davis with Hawkins—I afterwards met Leach.

JOHN CHANDLER (Police Constable G). On Sunday, 8th November, about three p.m., I was with Kydd in Wharf Road, City Road, keeping observation on the Queen's Head public-house—I saw a trap with a grey pony in it drive from the Queen's Head—William Clarke, Davis, and Hawkins were in it—I saw the same trap return about 8.50 p.m. the same day with the same men—it pulled up at the Queen's Head—I saw them get out and go into the public-house—I was present afterwards when the arrest was made.

Cross-examined by MR. PURCELL. I did not hear Davis tell Kydd and

Scott that he had seen them come to the public-house, nor say he had walked into the house just before the police went into it—I was from 20 to 100 yards from the public-house when the traps drew up, on the opposite side in the shade—the cart did not pass me—they went quickly into the house after the potman came to see to the horse.

Cross-examined by MR. SANDS. I have known Hawkins two or three years, not intimately—I have spoken to him when I have seen him loitering—I believe they were dressed as they are now—the ground rises, but they went a smart pace towards Islington when they left the house to go towards the City Road—I believe William Clarke was driving—he was sitting on the off-side, the side of the public-house—Hawkins was in the middle—he had that reefer jacket on.

ALAN DUFFUS . I live at 21, Sheepacre Road, Balham—on Sunday, 8th November, I left my house with my wife about 6.30 p.m.—we left no one in the house—it was securely fastened—I noticed Davis standing at the corner about 30 yards from the house, talking to a girl—we came back about eleven p.m.—we had left a small glimmer of light—the gas was then full on in the top front bedroom, that aroused my suspicion—I spoke to a neighbour and went into the house—I found the place ransacked—in the dining-room things were taken from the sideboard—the two best bedrooms were completely ransacked, turned over as if by an earthquake—I missed an aneroid barometer, gold brooch, six silver tea-spoons, silver tongs, six dessert-spoons, two silver jam-spoons, a Waterbury watch, a looking-glass, two coats, and one ulster coat—I identified that property the next day—this is the ulster.

Cross-examined by MR. PURCELL. I gave evidence at the Police court on 10th November—the prisoners were placed in a room at the Police-station for me to charge them—after that I said Davis was the man I had seen.

JAMES SMITH . I keep livery and bait stables, at 8, Ridley Road Dalston—I let to William Clarke a trap and grey pony on 8th November—he has had it several times—he said he was a commercial traveller—I went to the station, King's Cross, and got the trap from the police.

ALFRED LEACH (Inspector G). For several days in November I had observation upon the Queen's Head, Wharf Road—Harry Clarke was the licensee and landlord—just before nine p.m., on Sunday, 8th November, I was with other officers in the Wharf Road—I saw Hawkins, William Clarke, and Davis drive up to the Queen's Head—they appeared to take something from the trap into the house—the potman then came out, looked in the trap, and tended the pony—soon after I went in—I closed all. the doors, and went into the back parlour; the men appeared. confused—I saw in the parlour behind the bar, which is like a little bagatelle room, Jones, Davis, William Clarke, and Hawkins, Frederick Clarke, and two others not here—I said I was a police officer, and they had better not move—Constable Keith handed me a Waterbury watch—he found it on the floor; Marony said there was a lot of property in another parlour, and the landlord was missing; I saw Maude Forde with a gold-headed umbrella; I took that from her, and a scent-bottle, and in consequence of her actions I sent her to the station; I said, "You will be detained; do any of you know anything about a pony and trap standing outside?"—they all denied knowing about it, and knowing each other: "I don't know this man,""What am I here for?" and so on, and tried to get

away—Jones said he was a working man, and came to have a drink—Duffus identified the Waterbury as his—I went to the trap, and found a looking-glass in the bottom of it—that Duffus identified as stolen from him—we searched, and Marony found some of Pickford's property—I took charge of the prisoners—For de made a statement, in consequence of which I spoke to Frederick Clarke—Harry Clarke was not there—he was arrested on November 23rd—he made a statement at the station—Clapham was brought to the station on 8th December—he there made a statement to me—I asked him questions—I told him he would be charged with being concerned with other men in custody with housebreaking and receiving, mentioning Mrs. Wilson's, of Chelsea, and that property had been stolen worth £100—I read to him statements made by Harry Clarke, and called his attention to some goldsmith's scales—he said, "Yes, they are my scales"—I took down what he paid—"I lent them to Harry Clarke, I sent them to be repaired, and whilst they were being done Clarke asked me if I had a pair of scales; I said, 'Yes; but they are being repaired; if you like to pay the money for them being repaired you can have them'; from that time I have not seen them until now"—I asked him if he wished to give any explanation regarding the silver; he said, "Not at present"—he was charged, and said, "It is false"—the umbrella and scent-bottle were subsequently identified—I took down particulars of what the prisoners were.

Cross-examined by MR. PURCELL. Kydd and Scott were acting under my orders—I did not hear Davis say at the Old Street station that he had seen Kydd and Scott in Lever Street, nor Kydd reply, "You must have been following us about"—Jones asked something about the Wharf Road—Davis did not say he had not been in the trap, and had come into the house just before the raid—the trap did not pass me, it came towards me—I was twenty or thirty yards from the trap when it stopped—White joined me about 5.30 p.m.—we did not go nearer the trap till the prisoners had gone into the house—Davis was known by sight.

Cross-examined by MR. LAWLESS. There were twenty-five or thirty men there—I had three other officers—after inquiries I let some go—two other men and a woman were in the room—Jones said he was a bricklayer and came to drink—he gave a correct address—I searched him, I searched his house—I found no stolen property.

Cross-examined by MR. SANDS. I did mention this offence to Clapham when arrested—there was a full bar—I am known at the house—we have made one or two raids on it for gambling—there was confusion, and some said, "You are taking a liberty with me, guv'rner," and so on; we expect that—I did not question each individual, "Do you know these men?"—I was hard pressed for assistance; I had eight men to hold the house.

Cross-examined by MR. LAWLESS. Jones had a dog when arrested—I believe it was returned to his wife.

Cross-examined by MR. K. FRITH. I found nothing on West connected with the robbery.

ANDREW KYDD (Policeman G). I followed the inspector into the Queen's Head—I heard something drop in the parlour behind the bar—I picked up a Waterbury watch—Hawkins was nearest the door—I

searched William Clarke at the station, and found on him £28 10s. in gold, £1 10s. in silver, and 6 1/2 d. in bronze—he said his mother sent it to him—he described himself as a traveller for the Shackle well Photographic Company—I found these ten photographs on him—I searched West—I found on him £2 in gold, 8s. 6d. in silver, and 1s. bronze—I was not in Lever Street on that evening.

Cross-examined by MR. PURCELL. I know Davis by sight—he suggested at the Police-court he had seen me in Lever Street at seven p.m.; that was a mistake—he did not say, "You must have been following us up then"—I was about 200 yards off the trap when it drove up—I could not distinguish the faces of the men in it.

Cross-examined by MR. FRITH. The money found on West was handed over, by direction of the Magistrate, on the second remand, to his solicitor for his defence.

Cross-examined by MR. BEARD. I was about two yards from Hawkins when I heard the watch drop—he was to the right of me—others were near—he was in front of me.

JAMES SCOTT (Policeman G). I was present at the arrest at the Queen's Head—Frederick Clarke said to me, "I do not know any of these men; they are all strangers to me"—he was taken to the Police-station—I told him the charge—he said, "It has nothing to do with me. I bought and paid for the things; I paid for Maude Forde"—he described himself as a farrier—West said, "I am innocent. I only went into the house to have a drink; I did not know there was anything there. I do not know the others"—he was charged—he described himself as a tailor.

WILLIAM SARGEANT (Policeman G). I was in company with Leach when these arrests were made—I picked up this tab of an ulster coat off the floor—Mr. Duff us identified it.

STEPHEN MARONY (Detective G). I assisted taking the prisoners to the station—I know the room where the Waterbury was found—I found some property in the room communicating by a door—that has since been identified by Mr. Duffus—at the rear of the bagatelle-room I found these two jemmies—I find a distinct impression of the smaller one on Mr. Duffus' door—I saw the umbrella and scent-bottle taken from Maude Forde—I also found some crucibles broken up.

FRANK PICKFORD . I am a gardener, of 161, Manor Street, Clapham—I lived at 13, Crescent Lane,. Clapham Park, on 8th November last—about 1.30 p.m. I went out, leaving the house fastened up—I came back at 9.30 p. m—I found the street door broken open—I missed jewellery, value £6 10s.—this is it.

STEPHEN MARONY (Re-examined). I found this jewellery in the same room at the Queen's Head as the other property was found in.

MAUDE FORDE . I was barmaid to Harry Clarke at the Queen's Head from last August to November—two of the prisoners used to come there—they addressed each other by their Christian name.

Cross-examined by MR. LAWLESS. I was there three weeks before the arrest.

FREDERICK WATSON . I live at 59, Britannia Street, New North Road, Hoxton—I was formerly employed by Clapham—I left him and went to Harry Clarke as barman—I was there two months or nine weeks—before 8th November—I saw Harry Clarke there.

Cross-examined by MR. LAWLESS. I was originally charged, then I was discharged—I knew. Tones four or five weeks; I only noticed him in the concert-room when he used to sing—I said before the Magistrate, "I only noticed Jones sitting there"a month or five weeks back—he attended concert nights and at boxing exhibitions—he was dressed like a bricklayer.

Cross-examined by MR. SANDS. Hawkins used to sing there, and attend the boxing entertainments.


11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-206
VerdictsGuilty > pleaded part guilty; Guilty > unknown; Guilty > pleaded guilty
SentencesImprisonment > penal servitude; Imprisonment > penal servitude; Imprisonment > penal servitude; Imprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

206. JAMES DAVIS , WILLIAM JONES , FREDERICK WEST , and HARRY CLARKE were again indicted for a burglary in the dwelling-house of Arthur Wilson, and stealing twenty-two ladles, spoons, and other goods. JONES, CLARKE, and HARRY CLAPHAM were also charged with feloniously receiving the same, to which HARRY CLARKE PLEADED GUILTY.

MR. C. MATHEWS Prosecuted; MR. PURCELL appeared for Davis, MR. K. FRITH FOR West, MR. LAWLESS for Jones, and MR. BURNIE for Clapham.

NELLY WILSON . I am the wife of Arthur Wilson, of 34, Sidney Street, Chelsea—on October 26th I left the house securely fastened, and went to Devonshire, leaving the house empty—when I drove away I saw a man walking up and down, who, to the best of my belief, was the prisoner Davis—when I came back on the following Friday the police were in possession of the house, and I missed plate, jewellery, and other articles, value about £1,200—I have identified a large number of articles—there were marks where the front door had been prized open.

Cross-examined by MR. PURCELL. I heard that my property had been found at a public-house, and that some men were taken in the house—I was not shown a number of men together—I saw Davis and said, "That is the man I saw walking up and down. "

HARRY CLARKE (the prisoner). I was the licensee of the Queen's Head public-house up to November 8th—on that evening I got some information which induced me to leave the house somewhat suddenly—I was arrested on November 23rd, and made a statement to the police—on Tuesday night, 27th October, I believe, Harry Clapham came to my door about 9.30 and said that somebody was waiting for me upstairs; I went up, and found West, Jones, and another man—they had a quantity of silver and plate in a sheet, which they said they brought in a van, which they had sent home—there were silver spoons, forks, and plated articles, a watch, some silk handkerchiefs, a silver tea or coffee pot, two cruet-stands, a toast rack, and several other articles, about 150 altogether—they asked my permission to leave the property till the next morning; I said yes, and they left it—they returned the next morning, and Clapham joined then afterwards—they brought a pair of scales from Kettermarter, a butcher, in which I weighed the silver—it came to 140 ounces, and Clapham and I agreed to buy it at 2s. an ounce—I paid them £28, and they left, but West and Jones stayed—Clapham and I cut the silver up with a pair of shears, and afterwards put it in a crucible, which we sent for—we melted it at my house, in an ordinary fireplace, and Clapham took it to Roper's next morning, and brought back £23 odd and the ticket, which was destroyed at the time—it was sold at 3s. 5d.; it was fine silver—some plated goods were left behind and put upstairs, in one of the bedrooms, under the flooring, where the police

Found these silk handkerchiefs, a large silver ladle, gravy-spoon, and a considerable number of articles—West said that Mrs. Wilson's house was furnished very well—Jones and West stayed for some hours—I believe Jones had money after the transaction—I once had potman in my service named Mike Hawbridge; I do not know whether he is here—Watson, the potman who succeeded Hawbridge, brought the scales; they were returned the same day.

Cross-examined by MR. LAWKESS. I have not been told by the police that it would be better for me to give evidence, and I do not think it will—I come forward in the interest of justice—I do not know whether to expect a heavier sentence by giving evidence—I known that this was the evening of the 27th, because we had a club meeting that night—I got to the public-house something after nine o'clock, and found them there—I returned next day, Wednesday, about eleven o'clock; Jones was there, he remained two or three hours—the money was given to them on the following day, Thursday, about twelve o'clock—Jones was there then.

Cross-examined by MR. FRITH. I am twenty-five years old—when the police made the raid I ran away to avoid arrest—my wife was taken up and was in prison for a week—I did not come forward to save her, I was taken in custody—we have been married four years—I came to you and paid you money to get here off—when I was arrested I made a statement to the police as to what I could say, but not on the night I was arrested—I pleaded guilty at the Police-court, but not the next day—I first made a statement about a week after I was arrested—that was at the Clerkenwell Police-court; two officers were arrested—that was at the Clerkenwell Police-court; two officers were present, and one of them took it down—I do not expect to get better off by making this statement—I saw Inspector Leach again when I was in Holloway Prison; another officer was present.

Cross-examined by MR. BURNIE. Clapham was present the following morning before the silver was melted—I did not tell him I was hard up, and had some silver I wanted him to take to the assayers—I paid the money after it was brought back from the refiners; I gave Clapham 15s. for it, but he had more than that—I did not tell him I wanted the scales for weighing tobacco.

Re-examined. I paid the money to one man, the man not in custody.

FREDERICK KETTERMARTER . I am a baker, of 5, Shepherd's Walk, Brixton—I know Harry Clarks as a customer—I lent him a pair of beam scales in October—he fetched them himself, and brought them back the same night.

WILLIAM HAWBRIDGE . I am now a brass-finished—I was potman to Harry Clarke at the Queen's Head—I have seen the prisoners there speaking to each other—I recollect taking my horse and empty van to the Queen's Head—I left it with the owner.

Cross-examined by MR. LAWLESS. I agree with what Watson said; he had only seen Jones four or five weeks before November 8th—he was principally there on the nights of the concerts, in working men's clothes, as a builder.

FREDERICK WATSON . I formerly did odd jobs for Clapham—I took a pair of scales for him to a shop in Goswell Road to be repaired; I paid 5s. for them, and took them away to the Queens' Head, and left them

with Harry Clarke, the landlord—I afterwards went into Clarke's employment as potman five or six weeks before the arrests were made.

EDWARD BURDON (Police Sergeant K). On 23rd November I arrested Harry Clarke, and charged him with receiving stolen property—he said, "If you had not caught me very soon I should have made away with myself; I have been led into this by a man who used my house."

SAMUEL ROPER . I am a gold refiner, of 7, Gardner Street, Clerkenwell—I have known Clapham four years—throughout the year 1891 I was purchasing gold and silver articles from him, watch-keys, chains, and rings—I knew him as a pipe-mounter—on 30th October he brought me four lumps of molten silver, and asked me to give him an estimate—I said it would have to be re-melted and assayed, and if he would call the next day I would give him the price; he did so—the weight was 129 oz. 5 gr., and I paid him £23 5s. 6d., and gave him a ticket with the amount on it—I had made other purchases of him during the month.

Cross-examined by MR. BURNIE. I saw nothing improper in the transaction—he always behaved as a respectable man in my office.

STEPHEN MARONY (Police Sergeant). I assisted in the prisoner's arrest-r—I searched the house, and found under the floor of the first-floor landing the property which Mrs. Wilson identifies—I also found two jemmies which had apparently been used—I compared them with the door of the house—I found these shears (produced) at the public-house.

PHILIP WILLIS (Policeman G). On 8th December I arrested Clapham, and told him he would be charged with others in custody for housebreaking and receiving—he said, "All right"—I sent him to the station—he gave his address, 17, Taplow Street—I went there; he occupies the first-floor fro at—I afterwards went to Britannia Road, Islington, to a shop which had been used by Clapham; I know that from his brother—Clapham gave me an address and a key, but the door was unlocked—I asked him if he wished to make any reply; he said, "Not at present"—these shears and four crucibles were brought to the station.

MR. LAWLESS called

JOSEPH HINTON . I am foreman to Mr. Dove, a builder, of 131, Euston Road—in October the prisoner Tones was working under me—he commenced on October 5th at St. Saviour's Church, Aberdeen Park, Highbury Road; I was working on the job myself—he worked till Saturday, November 7th, for 10 £ hours a day—he went at six a.m. and left at ten, excluding meals—on 26th, 27th, and 28th October he was at work; he was away on Tuesday, October 13th, that was the only day he was absent—he was not absent on any other day, so that he could be in the City Road at twelve o'clock; I have got the time-sheets—he is a bricklayer.

Cross-examined. I have not been listening to the evidence to-day, I was out in the passage, I was called in and sent out again—I only just spoke to the counsel, and went out into the passage again—I was subpœnaed last week to come here—I went to the Police-station, and was told that I must come to speak to Jones' movements—to prove he was at work—I looked at the time-sheets on Friday; they are in my governor's possession; I have not brought them.

Re-examined. A constable spoke to me, and sent me out of Court—a friend of mine said, "If I were you I would go to the inspector and ask

him"—I told him Jones worked with me five weeks—he said, "You will have to come round and prove it."

Evidence in Reply.

JAMES SCOTT (Police Sergeant G). I have been in Court during this ease—I have seen the last witness in Court standing by the side of his counsel—I called the constable's attention to him, and he turned him out—he was in Court quite ten minutes.


Jones then PLEADED GUILTY** to a conviction at Clerkenwell on March 9th, 1885; Davis** to one at Clerkenwell on June 3rd, 1887; F. Clarke to one at Maidstone on 12th January, 1884; and W. Clarke** to one at this Court on January 13th, 1890.

Frederick Clarke then PLEADED GUILTY to another indictment for unlawfully receiving stolen goods ,

WILLIAM CLARKE, HAWKINS, DAVIS, GEORGE CLARKE, and WEST— Ten Years' each in Penal Servitude. CLAPHAM— Seven Years' Penal Servitude. JONES— Five Years' Penal Servitude. HARRY CLARKE— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour.

OLD COURT.—Tuesday, January 19th, and Wednesday, 20th, 1892.

Before Mr. Justice Cave.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-207
VerdictGuilty > with recommendation
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

207. ARTHUR EDWARD SMITHERS was indicted for that he, being an officer of the English Bank of the River Plate, did apply to his own use £200, the moneys of the bank; other Counts, for omitting certain entries in the books of the-bank, and for making false entries in the said books.


WILLIAM JAMES WARLEY . I was chief clerk. to the Official Receiver; I have since been appointed Assistant Official Receiver—I investigated the books of the English Bank of the River Plate, by order of the Court, in August, 1891, founded on a petition of 17th July, 1891—that bank was established in London in 1881, incorporated as a company, and registered at Somerset House in that year—the head office was at 15, St. Swithin's Lane—the filing of the petition was in July, 1891—it had three branches, at Monte Video, Rosario, and Buenos Ayres, and two agencies at two different places—among the books of the bank which I examined I examined the ledgers for 1884 to 1891 inclusive—I also examined the journals over the same years—I had before me in detail the account at Glyn's and a rough cash-book, also two other books in use at the bank from 1884 to 1891, one called office cash-book and the other called "Private account, A. E. Smithers, "from September, 1890—this book was obtained from Mr. Smithers by Mr. Stewart, the Official Receiver—I think there were three or four applications to Mr. Smithers for it—in the journal all the sums advanced to Mr. Smithers out of the office are omitted—I compared the contents of the office cash-book with the contents of the ledger—all the sums in the office cash-book advanced to Mr. Smithers are absent from the ledger—I find that on 9th August, 1884, the office cash was deficient to the extent of £6,799 4s. 6d.; on 81st August, 1884, it was deficient £323 8s. 6d.; by 30th September, 1884, that deficiency had been made good by payments in—the financial year of the bank terminated on 30th September each year; at that time the

deficiency of office cash was £1,187 6s. 3d.—by 30th September that again had been balanced by payments—on 31st August, 1886, the office cash was short £4,361 8s. 2d., as shown by the books that were balanced by payment on 30th September the same year; on 30th June, 1887, there was a deficiency of £5,611 18s. 3d.; by 31st August that was reduced to £397 7s. 3d., and by 30th September the deficiency was balanced by payment—on 31st August, 1888, the office cash was deficient £2,415 2s. 8d.; that was balanced by payment—on 22nd August, 1889, the office cash was short by £9,207 4s. 4d.; that deficiency was wiped off by payment on 30th September, 1889; on 26th July, 1890, the office cash was deficient £7,697 15s. 2d.—in the ledger there is an account headed, "General suspense account, "under that same date in the ledger there is an entry "To general suspense account, £7,697 15s. 2d."—the entry is "Amount to be received from J. C. Dalcaine, Buenos Ayres, on account Mr. A. E. Smithers, as per Mr. Smithers' instructions" this amount is debited to the general suspense account on that day, and credited to the office cash by this entry in the journal—on 10th September I find a bill for £4,000 credited to the general suspense account, and going in reduction of the £7,697; the entry gives the journal folio 669—at page 669 it is charged to "Bills receivable account"; and when the credit is given on suspense the entry was as above, and the entry above is in the journal, "Draft on Baring Brothers and Co., £4,000"; that is under "Bills receivable account,"10th September—"The branches' floating entries account"is a separate account in the same ledger—on September 30th there is an entry of the transfer from the suspense account, balance of amount to be received from J. C. Dalcaine, on account of Smithers, £3,679 15s. 2d.—it is debited to the branches' floating entries account—it has gone to the credit of the suspense account—the branches' floating entries account purports to relate to sums correctly described by the name of the account; sums coming forward to be paid to the floating branches"account, the three places in America—no purely London transaction had any business in that account—from my examination of the books that sum has never been paid—on 10th October, 1890, it appears £200 was drawn out to office cash, and upon the same day that sum appears first to the credit of Smithers' private account at the London and Westminster Bank, drawn out from Glyn, Mills and Co., and the same day a similar sum was paid away by cheque to Mr. Jacks—on 10th October, 1890, a sum of £1,000 was drawn out by cheque to office cash, and upon that same date £1,000 appears to the credit of Smithers' account, and was paid away on the same day to Mr. Hodgkinson—on 27th November I find this cheque to office cash for £2,500, signed by Smithers as one of the signatories; on that day it appears to the credit of Smithers' private account in the first instance, and on the same day a cheque for the same amount is drawn out of the London and Westminster Bank to self—this is the counterfoil. (This contained the items McColl £2,000, Walton £200, Dominiquez £255, and other names and sums, amounting in all to £2,500, and was initialed W. Rand A. E. S.)—I have examined other counterfoils in this counterfoil-book, sufficiently to say that of latter years it has been the custom to place on. the counterfoil the object for which the cheques are drawn —the initials W. R. stand for William Rogers, one of the directors, and A. E. S. are

the prisoner's initials—I have examined the counterfoil of cheque 7215,. on 1st November, 1890, for £1,000; among the particulars on that counterfoil I find the name of McColl with £200 against it—the gross amount of cheque 7221, on 3rd November, 1890, is £1,000; on the counterfoil is Dominiquez £186 and £369, making £555, and Walton £287—the gross amount of cheque 7274, on 15th November, is £1,000; on the counterfoil is Famini £100, Walton £170, Ridd £100, Randall £100, and Wrenberg—the 27th November's counterfoil purports to show £200 as against the name of Randall, and not £100 as appears on the counterfoil of 15th November, and a sum of £300 against Walton as distinct from the £287 on 3rd November"; except in those instances the same sums are entered against the same names as appear on the counterfoils of 1st, 3rd, and 15th November—on 12th December, 1890, £400 was drawn to office cash from Glyn Mills, and on the same day a similar sum was paid into the prisoner's account at the London and Westminster Bank; next day that sum was paid to one Ripley—on 2nd February, 1891, a cheque for £350 was drawn to office cash; that does not seem to have been put into the bank in any lump sum, or any sum like that about that date—this book is marked "A. E. Smithers, Esq., private, No. 2"—on 28th April I find £200 drawn from Glyn Mills to office cash—it was paid into the prisoner's private account at the London and Westminster Bank on that day, and drawn out on the same day—I have traced all the sums I have mentioned in private account-book No. 2—on 2nd May a cheque for 350 was drawn for office cash from Glyn Mills; there is an entry in "Private account No. 2"of that sum—I do not see that that went into the bank—these are two cheques of 9th May for £931 13s. 5d., and 11th May for £122 12s. 1d., making together £ 1,054 5s. 6d.—on the counterfoils of those cheques it is stated they are to meet some branches' sight drafts; that of 9th May is initialed W. R. and A. E. S.; and that of 11th May is initialed W. R. and M., I think; of the 9th May cheque W. Rogers and A. E. Smithers are the signatories, and have initialed the counterfoil—in private account-book No. 2, in the prisoner's banking account, I find under 9th May £950 appearing to the credit of the account—the prisoner's credit balance stood the day before at £40 2s. 7d.—on 27th November, 1890, his credit balance was £362 14s. 10d.—these cheques are drawn on Glyn Mills, were cashed at Glyn Mills, and the notes with which they were cashed were paid into the prisoner's account at the London and Westminster Bank—on 13th June, 1891, £200 was drawn to office cash, and appears in private account-book No. 2, and the same day it was paid into the prisoner's private account at the London and Westminster, and drawn out; it appears as £200 received from the London and Westminster Bank on that day—on 1st July £60 was drawn to office cash; it appears in the books, and I can identify it—it was paid either to or on account of Mr. Wilfred Smithers, the prisoner's son—this is a receipt of 1st July for £60: "Received on account of A. E. S., £60; W. A. S,"—on 14th July, 1891, I find the office cash was deficient £7,146 7s. 2d.; by examining the private account-book I find that sum had been employed by Mr. Smithers for his own purposes—on the same date I find an entry to the debit of Office loan account of £7,146 7s. 2d.; the entry is, "Balance of your account in office cash per pass-book, per now debited to this account per your instructions"—among other papers which I found on

the premises at the bank was this marked "exhibit F,"-with an entry charging "A. E. S. Joan account; balance to his account of office cash, £7,146 7s. 2d.,"marked by a clerk's initials—it is also credited in the office cash book, and debited to loan account, under the same date, 14th July—between 1st June, 1888, and 30th August 1890, it appears by the loan account that Smithers had borrowed from the bank £28,749 11s. 3d., and against those advances he would seem to have lodged securities—on 5th December, 1890, according to this book, the bank made him a further advance of £12,767, against various securities: I believe there is a charge on his house and some land at Gods tone, some life policies, and his life shares—no part of the £7,146 has ever been paid—no securities were lodged against that advance; nothing except his monthly salary—I find entries of the balance of Mrs. Smithers' account running throughout the private account, purporting to show the sums of money paid to her in the course of each month—there is a varying balance, but it very nearly exhausts the amount of his salary.

Cross-examined. I find that in October, 1890, Mr. Smithers paid £1,000 in deduction of the money drawn from cash—I hare thoroughly gone into the affairs of this bank so far as I was able; so far as relates to this prosecution—the defendant was one of the founders of the bank; he was made managing director under the articles of association of the company—previous to his connection with this bank he had been for thirteen years manager of the River Plate Bank in London, and abroad also, I believe—the company was in every way a respectable company, and the directors responsible men of business—Mr. Burke, chairman of the Central Argentine Railway; Mr. Cator, Hon. S. C. Glyn, a director of the Bank of Egypt; Lord George Hamilton, Mr. Moses, of the firm of Moses, Levy and Co.; and Mr. Best, Liverpool—this bank was founded in 1881, with a paid-up capital of £750,000, and a subscribed capital of as much more—Mr. Smithers held about £2,000 worth of shares, speaking from memory, it might be £3,000—he continued td hold that up to the time of the winding-up of the bank; that carried with it and included liability for as much more as had actually been paid—the shares continued to stand in his own name—I found that the bank had been exceedingly prosperous—it appears that the balance-sheet of 30th June shows gross profit to amount to £265,000, after making provision for bad and doubtful debts—the auditors are well known in the City, Mr. Vanderline, and Mr. Kemp, of the firm of Ford and Co.—in 1888 the divisible profit was £120,079, the gross profit close upon £200,000; in 1889 the divisible profit was £197,326, the gross profit close on £300,000; in 1889 the divisible profit was £188,725, the gross profit above £200,000—the amount of the reserve fund was £350,000; that was invested in English securities, or India stock, in good securities—in the balance-sheet of 1890, after paying 10 per cent., there was carried to the reserve fund £75,000—what brought about the downfall of the bank was the state of things in the Argentine Republic, and that was followed by the failing of Messrs. Barings—a law was passed by which the debtors in Buenos Ayres were absolved from liability for a time from the payment of debts, so that no action for the payment of debt could be brought for a certain period—no doubt that deteriorated very largely the original securities, it has not yet fully recovered—the depression was in some cases even more than 25 or 30 per cent.—I know generally that

Mr. Smithers was interested in Argentine securities, and very probably suffered when the crash came—a call has been applied for on the shareholders of the bank, it has not been actually made at present—it would be rather a bold thing to say that the bank will be able to pay its debts—I daresay we have put that forward—Mr. Stewart, the Official Assignee, is not in Court—I attended the meeting the other day—I agree with the statement then made, that the gross liabilities were stated at four millions, of which three millions were expected to rank; so that upon this estimate the capital of the bank would, if realised; prove to be intact; but I may explain, as regards the branches, the uncertainty of all the values of the property would to some extent diminish the profits—assuming the values should turn out as we hope, there would be an estimated surplus of a million, £40,000—I have had access to the minutes of the company—I believe in the case of each loan by the bank to Mr. Smithers a proper minute was made, and a proper entry in the accounts—I have in my hand the office cash-book, that is one of the regular books of the bank, open to inspection to any officer of the bank, and might be called for at any meeting of the board, and by the auditors if they desired to see it—I find in this book, under the date of 10th October, 1890, this entry, "A. E. S., £200,"with a blue tick—on 29th October, 1890, there is "A. E. S., £1,000,"ticked in the same way; on 27th November, 1890, there is "A. E. S. £2,500,"ticked, and with the number of the cheque, 7361—the next entry is 12th December, 1890, "A. E. S., £400,"ticked; then 2nd February, 1891, "A. E. S., £350"; the next is 28th April, 1891, "A. E. S, £200,"ticked in the same way; then 2nd May, 1891, "A. E. S., £350"; and on 13th May, "A. E. S., £950,"ticked in the same way; on 13th June, "A. E. S., £200,"ticked; and 1st July, "A. E. S., £60"—those items exhaust the sums charged in the indictment—the result is that in this bank-book there is correctly recorded the sums Mr. Smithers got from the cash, the sums now charged against him—these entries are not all in one handwriting; there are four or five handwritings of different clerks in the office—there was no secrecy about the payment of these sums, as far as this book is concerned; it must have been known to the persons making the entries—the principals and clerks have been continued in the employment of the bank, which is in course of reconstruction—they are men against whose character nothing is alleged—Mr. Smithers did not in any way seek to deny the receipt of these items from the cash, after he was asked about it—I have only been able to find two of the books called "private"—I believe all the sums are entered there which have been entered in the office cash-books—the private pass-books are in different handwritings, so that those books must have been known to a number of persons in the office—the books anterior to October, 1890, had similar entries in them; the system had continued for a number of years—I have not traced a single penny paid to Smithers that has not been entered in the proper cash-book of the bank—one of the two private account-books is numbered 2; that goes from 11th January, 1890, to July 14th, 1891; that gives the balance from a previous book £3,200 odd—all the items are properly entered and debited; they are a number of minute items (the item were read by Sin CHARLES RUSSELL); it goes up to July, 1890, when the Argentine difficulties began; in 1884 he paid in £6,799 4s. 6d. to square the

account—in Journal No. 11, folio 669, there is an amount stated to be received "from J. 0. Dalcaine, of Buenos Ayres, on account, on 24th July, 1890, as per A. E. S., £797 16s. 2d."—that is in a book which the auditors would have before them; farther on there is an entry of the £4,000—if £7,000 odd came from Buenos Ayres through the branch there to Mr. Smithers, it ought not to have gone on the head office suspense account; it ought to have gone on the floating branch entries account—it appears under "Suspense account"—if that amount was expected from J. C. Dalcaine, it should come to the account of Smithers—in the next page £4,000 is entered, leaving a balance of £3,697; Dalcaine's name does not appear in that entry; that balance is transferred from the suspense account to the branches' floating interest account; in Journal No. 12, under date of 30th September, 1890, there is this item, "Transfer from suspense account, per contra, 24th July, 1890, balance of amount to be received from J. C. Dalcaine, on account of A. E. Smithers, £3,697"—it appears by that entry that £3,697 was expected from Dalcaine; there is not anything wrong on the face of it—I don't see how it could be entered in any other way, except it went to the man direct—I take it that the real objection is that there was no separate account opened, showing at a glance the amount that had been received by Smithers from the cash of the bank, except of course that he ought not to have had that money in the first place at all—the winding-up proceedings commenced before 14th July, 1891—that entry correctly states that Mr. Smithers did owe to the office cash £7,146 7s. 2d., which he could not repay; and it refers to the office-book, the items in which correspond with the items in the office cash-book—I should say that it should have been opened in his own name as a fresh account, as money taken from the cash-till, and called by its proper name, as withdrawn from office cash; that would represent the transaction—that is certainly the purport of the entry; however it was entered it would not affect the position of the bank or the position of Smithers—stating it in that way, and making reference to the pass-book, would necessarily call attention to how the account was made up; it did call my attention—I can only say that it ought not to be in an account which is called at the top "Loan account"—that might deceive; it might show to the ordinary inquirer that he was authorised to take moneys from the office cash, or that there was an express authority given him for the loan; that was the inference that I think most would draw—the moment reference was made to the cashbook it would appear what the real character of the transaction was—the rough office cash-book does not contain any of the entries which appear in the office cash-book, it is really only a copy of the account with Glyn, Mills and Co.; I should not expect payments of cash to Smithers to appear there—in addition there were ledger and journal—comparison between ledger and office cash-book would have shown at any time the deficiency in cash, and would have shown that there had gone a considerable amount out of cash that did not appear in the ledger—that, if looked at any time over this period of year, would have been disclosed to any intelligible observer, except on that date when it was all balanced and cleared up at the end of the financial year—the entry of 14th July, 1891, under head of "Loans account"shows it was on the prisoner's instructions that it was made, and that is corroborated by the actual instructions—this is the slip I found in the office; in pursuance of

it the entry was made—after I assumed the supervision of affairs at the bank, certain deeds relating to a house of Mr. Smithers, at Brighton, came into my possession; I believe it was freehold—the deeds are not entered in any bank book, so far as I have been able to ascertain—in the securities-book securities lodged against each loan are entered; these deeds do not appear anywhere, but they were in possession of the bank and in the safe at the time of liquidation—the property comprised in them realised £4,000, and that sum the prisoner has been given credit for in his general account—I should think about a month after the money was received he objected to it, and said he was entitled to get credit for it against the cash—since liquidation £4,000 has been realised in that way—I was present at the Police-court when the prisoner was called on as to whether he had anything to say, and I heard what he said.

Re-examined. The deeds of the Brighton house were found by Mr. Byrne, a clerk in the Official Receiver's office; I have not been told where it was found—there was no entry in the bank-books, nor any indication that it had ever been taken as security—the only thing that has been realised in connection with the account are the deeds of the Brighton house, so far as I am aware—other securities remain in possession of the official liquidators—I should say there was no probability of the securities lodged against advances producing a surplus—the general amount of loans and deficiencies comes altogether to about £66,000; of that sum £41,000 is attributable to loans which were sanctioned in regular course by the directors—every one of those loans was regularly earned through the books by a minute of the directors authorising it, and by the proper entries in the books, and the securities received against those loans were duly entered in the register of securities held by the company—there was no minute authorising the deficiency on 13th. July entered in the loan account, and no entry suggesting it was a loan or treating it as a loan, except the one which the prisoner ordered to be made—no securities are entered as held against it—the deeds of the Brighton house were not entered as security in any bank-book, as far as I know—if money had been taken from the till and not entered anywhere it would have been detected directly we came to make up the balance at the end of the month, if we compared the office cash-book with the amount of office cash in the ledger—a certain amount of money comes from Grlyn Mills into the till, and that must be accounted for when the cash is balanced at the end of every month—the office cash-book shows these entries to A. E. S.—there is nothing in these books to show that they have been before the auditors of the company, I can see no auditors' marks in them—the amounts paid by Mr. Smithers in order to enable the balance to agree for the audit on August 30th were £9,307 4s. 4d. in 1889—the cash balance at the end of June, 1890, appears in the account of office cash in the ledger as £13,262—the balance appears as £13,260 8s. 8d. in the hands of the officers of the bank in June, 1890; the office cash-book shows only £6,917—£7,697 15s. 2d. is entered in the suspense account as money to be received from J. C. Dalcaine, on account of Smithers—there is no transaction as to that in the books—if it were acknowledged between Dalcaine and Smithers, it had no business in the suspense account; there was a debt of £9,000 due from Dalcaine to the bank in the regular course of business;

there is nothing in the suspense account or branch floating entries account to suggest any connection of that sum with office cash; with the exception of £1,000 on 7th October, no sum of money was paid in by Smithers to meet the overdrafts, except the sum necessary to balance at the end of September, 1890—£672 16s. 10d., paid by a cheque of Smithers on the London and Westminster Bank; so that the auditors would again find that the actual balance corresponded with the balance as entered in the ledger; from 30th September, 1890, to 14th July, 1891, these continued takings of cash took place, and then we get the £7,146 odd loan account, which also remains unpaid.

ANDREW GEDDES . I was cashier at the bank from 1884 to 1888, and am still a clerk there; amounts of cash were from time to time paid out to Smithers which were not posted to the journal the following morning, like other payments out of office cash—I do not know by whose orders they were so treated—I did not do the posting—a clerk did that from the vouchers, cheques, and bills—I have the office cash-book containing 29th October—£200 was paid out that day to McColl, and £287 to Walton on 31st—£555 5s. to Dominiquez on 30th—£100 to Famini on 1st November £100 to Witely on the 4th—£170 to Walton on 7th, and £100 to Eidd—£100 to Randall on 8th, and £100 on 13th, etc., total £2,500—they are the same persons as appear on the counterfoil of the cheque of 27th November.

Cross-examined. None of those counterfoils are in Smithers' writing; nor, as far as I know, had he anything to do with drawing them; after I was cashier, Fraser acted for a short time, and then Bell—Wright was cashier when I came, and was so from 188. to 1884; when I became cashier, I came to know of the existence of the pass-book, as it is called—I am not sure when it commenced—I dont remember seeing the earlier pass-books—they purport to show all payments made on Smithers' account, and his repayments were credited—there was no concealment of what was done—I never received any instructions from Smithers to omit any entries or to destroy the trace of any entries, or to do anything to conceal what was taking place—he was away in Buenos Ayres, on bank business, from August, 1889, till the following January or February, during which payments were made and received on his account as before, for which cheques were drawn by a clerk on instructions of the cashier, who would speak to the accountant about it—cheques to replenish the office-till, or to meet current liabilities, would be laid before the directors, and the system of marking the amounts required on the counterfoils was observed of late, and the cheques would be handed to the cashier—he might keep them in his drawer for a week if the money was not wanted—the rough cash-book was practically an account with Glyn's—it would not be proper to have an account of those payments out of cash—payments do, in fact, appear in the cash-book as "A. E. S."—the office cash-book is the regular book of the bank, and the rough cash-book the same—every penny paid to Smithers is accurately recorded in the office cash-book and the pass-book.

Re-examined. The counterfoil of this £2,500 cheque is initialed by Rogers and Smithers, and Smithers signed it—£2,500 is an exceptionally large amount for office cash; the usual amount is about £1,000.

JOHN REED . I was bill clerk in the English Bank of the River Plate, I prepared the cheque of the 27th November, 1890, for £2,500, and

I entered the amounts which now appear in the counterfoil—I cannot say from whose instructions; as a rule, I received my materials for entering the amounts either from Bell or Wright—I have no recollection of this particular case: I did not get the particulars from any book.

Cross-examined. I was not examined before the Magistrate—Smithers had nothing to do with the entries in the book, so far as I know.

DAVID LINDO HENEY . I am a clerk in the English Bank of the River Plate—I had charge of the securities and registered them—there was a securities register, in which all securities held by the bank against advances were entered—there was also a book called the safe custody register, in which the deeds at the bank for safe custody were entered—I never heard of the deeds of the freehold house at Brighton being deposited as security at the bank—they never passed through my hands.

Cross-examined. The safe custody register relates to clients who deposit their title-deeds and so on for safe custody with the bank—I heard the deeds for the Brighton property were found in a safe at the bank.

JULIAN OLIPHANT BYRNE . I am a senior clerk at the Official Receiver's office—in August last I took possession of the bank premises—I went to the strong-room and examined the securities there with the last witness—there is an inner compartment to the strong-room—there was a small safe in the outer compartment, which was opened by Wright in my presence—there were in it some books and papers, and amongst others a brown paper parcel—I could not be certain whether there was any name on it, but there was no label—it was put back again, and a month after I went again and examined the parcel, and opened it—it contained deeds and other papers relating to some property at Brighton—I gave instructions in August, when I took possession, that no documents were to be removed from the bank.

Cross-examined. There is a kind of inner chamber in the strong-room, called the treasury, where securities are kept that are deposited with the bank for safe custody, in different receptacles—there were two or three boxes of Smithers' at the bank—the deeds were not in either of those—there were books and papers there belonging to Wright, the accountant—he kept the key, which I had to get from him.

JOHN MENZIES WEIGHT . I am clerk at the English Bank of the River Plate—I was formerly accountant—this parcel of deeds relating to the house at Brighton was handed to me by Smithers—I said when before the Magistrate that it was about a year ago, roughly—I could not say exactly, but it would be about eighteen months ago—he gave them to me to take care of; I have no recollection of Smithers saying they were securities for money he had of the bank; I put them into the safe, where they were found—soon after the bank suspended, Smithers asked me to give him back the parcel that I had taken care of for him—I said I could not do it, as I had received instructions from Mr. Byrne, which he had received from Mr. Stewart, the Official Receiver, that I was to deliver nothing over to Mr. Smithers—my attention was called to the entry in the ledger debiting Smithers' loan account with £7,146 7s. 2d.—the entry came out of that pass-book, and was debited to the loan account by Smithers' instructions, four days, I think, before the bank suspended—I dictated the slip to Bell; I think it was dated tae 14th July—I had, in 1890, caused to be made these entries transferring £7,600 to the suspense account by

Smithers' instructions—I also transferred the balance of £3,600 to the branch floating entries account.

Cross-examined. Smithers had one box, I think, with his name upon it, which was kept in the outer safe—he had the key of it—if he had intended to treat these deeds as other documents belonging to him, there was nothing to prevent him putting them in and turning the key, but he told me to take care of them, as they were valuable deeds or papers—it might be further back than I thought it was when he brought me the parcel—I believe Messrs. Webb, Smithers' private solicitors, conducted the sale of his property, and accounted to the Official Receiver—I have no recollection of his saying he wanted the deeds for Messrs. Webb—I told him I could not hand them over, as I was told by Byrne not to do so—I was cashier in 1881 when the bank started—Smithers would come and tell me ho wanted some money, and I would pay it out of office cash—and so it grew from little to bigger things—there was never any attempt at concealment, nor was I in any way conscious that I was doing anything fraudulent or dishonest or a party to it—the auditors never asked for the office cash-books, they were available if they had—they were asked if they had everything they required, and always said, "Yea, we think so"—no books were kept concealed—there were considerable payments made during Smithers' absence abroad from August, 1889, to February, 1890—I cannot say how much without seeing the books—whatever has been paid has been entered in those books—I knew Dalcaine personally—I learnt from Smithers that he had made large payments for Dalcaine, and expected to receive large payments from him shortly, which were to be applied in discharge of money paid to him—about £8,000—£4,000 I believe came from that source (Buenos Ayres), and he said he was very much disappointed that more had not come forward—in the entry under the head of "Loan account"the balance of account in the cash-book £7,100 expresses the fact that Smithers is indebted to cash in £7,100—the entry, "To balance of your account in office cash, per pass-book, now debited to this account on your Mr. Smithers' instructions,"would not convey to anybody that the directors of the bank had authorised that to be treated as a loan to him—I was nearly nineteen years in the River Plate before I came to this bank—I have been in the employment of this bank from the beginning, and no imputation was made on me directly or indirectly—about January or February, 1890, two of the directors, Messrs. Moses and Cator, asked me to fetch up the office-book current at that time, and the one previous to it (produced); they show an accurate record of every penny paid to Smithers ("A. E. S. ")—Mr. Cator said, "Does Mr. Smithers keep a running account with the office cash?"—I answered, 'It cannot exactly be called a current or running account"—that although he took considerable sums from the office cash now and again, he had always repaid them up to that time by cheques either on the Westminster Bank or Brown, Janson; then Mr. Moses asked me if I could formulate some scheme by which this could be stopped or done in way with—I said, "Yes; by opening another account at Glyn, Mills, (Currie, and Co. 's bank, under the head of 'Accountants' drawing account,'"cheques against which would only be signed by the secretary and accountant; and this new account would be audited by the board weekly, and in the same manner that the clean cash-book was done weekly—the main cash-book—from that date to this I have heard no

more about it, though I know Mr. Moses had a talk with the secretary about it also—they did not give me any instructions not to make further advances, and the same system continued—Mr. Geddes made another suggestion, in the shape of a daily audit—from the beginning to the end of this matter, a«i far as Smithers was concerned, there was nothing that he told me to do, or not to do, that in any way suggested to me that he was trying to conceal something that he supposed to be fraudulent.

Re-examined. I signed the £2,500 cheque "pro secretary"; Smithers asked me to fill up the slip, and I did so—£1,000 was the usual amount for office cash—Reed would be told to draw the cheque, perhaps by myself, acting on Smithers' orders—certainly not Without—it must be signed by two directors—he must have told me what he wanted it for afterwards, or it would not have been paid into the London and Westminster Bank—the plan of specifying the amounts on the counterfoil is only about eighteen months or two years old—Smithers came down from the board-room one day and said, "The gentlemen upstairs are not pleased with the sums for office cash being so large; you had better tell those who draw the cheques to put the amounts on the counterfoils to show what the amounts are being drawn for"—that was before the bank failed, and after Smithers came home from America in 1890—when the auditors came in the beginning of October I put before them the books I thought they required; the cash-book, clean cash-book, all the vouchers belonging to the cash-book, journal, and ledger—they never asked for the counterfoils of the cheques—they could have seen them, but they would not have shown the payments to Smithers, nor would the dean cash-book—the journal might—the pass-books (produced) show them better, and the office cash-book would—they never asked for it—the private account-book of Smithers was kept in a drawer, of which I had one key and Bell the other—the particulars of the counterfoils must have been got by Reed or Bell from the office cash-book—I have since learnt that some of those amounts had been long ago paid.

By the COURT. I did not think it my duty to complain to the directors about the chief director.

DANIEL LOFTON BELL . I am a clerk in the English Bank of the River Plate—I was cashier there from November, 1888, till the bank suspended payment—this slip of instruction to carry the balance of £7,697 to Mr. Smithers' loan account is in. my handwriting; I wrote that by the direction of the accountant, Mr. Wright—this counterfoil of the cheque for £2,500, of 27th November, 1890, was at the time I was cashier; on the same date a cheque for £938 10s. 9d. was drawn for office cash—on the counterfoil there appears a list of payments which that cheque purports to be made to meet—I did not give instructions to Mr. Reed to put that list on the counterfoil; I did not see Mr. Smithers with regard to that matter—I saw Mr. Wright, the accountant.

Cross-examined. I acted as cashier for some time, I think at the end of November, 1888, or more particularly as acting-cashier—I paid some of the moneys at that period on Mr. Smithers' account out of office cash—I had no idea that I was doing anything dishonest or wrong in the matter; I was only obeying instructions—I did not conceal the matter—I entered the transactions in the office cash-book—I always understood that the moneys so advanced were each year made up by Mr. Smithers' payments; but I had no positive knowledge—I was cashier from

August, 1889, to February, 1890, when Mr. Smithers was abroad, except when I was occasionally absent from the office—while he was abroad I made payments on his account, under the accountant's, Mr. Wright's, instructions.

By the JURY. I was cognisant of the fact that these entries were omitted from the journal, and that the balance in the ledger did not agree with the office cash-book; it certainly struck me as peculiar, from the point of view of correct book-keeping.

GERALD VANDELINE I am a chartered accountant, of 12, Laurence Pountney Lane, Cannon Street, and one of the joint auditors of this bank—the audit of 30th September, 1890, was under my personal supervision—on no occasion had I before me the office cash-book, I did not know of its existence, I had not before me the books called "The private account-books,"I have never seen them except in Court here, I did not know of their existence—Mr. Wright produced the books at the audit—there was no entry in the books that were produced to me, showing that Mr. Smithers was making use of the office book of the bank.

Cross-examined. In the articles of association it is the duty of the bank to give the auditor a full list of the books of the bank—I did not get a list of the books—it was the duty of the company to do that, it is not the duty of the auditor to ask for it; I asked for what books I wanted, and got them—I got the general cash-book (it was handed to the witness); this is quite right, here are audit ticks upon it—this is the cash-book, they called it "The clean cash-book"—this is the official cash-book—I don't recognise the word clean or fair cash-book, that word was only used yesterday in my hearing for the first time; when I asked for the cashbook they gave it me; it gives me the idea of being the official cashbook of the bank, and I can prove it, because the postings into the ledger are made from this book—the inspection of the book does not show me that it is nothing but a copy of some other books—a comparison between the ledger and the office cash-book showed the difference between the cash in hand in the one book and the actual amount of cash in the other—this is my certificate I signed to that audit.

Re-examined. The cash-book, journal, and ledger were produced, and the cancelled cheques were produced as vouchers, but not the counterfoils—I had no reason to suppose that there were other books in existence—these books were admirably kept, and perfect in themselves—from none of them could I ascertain the deficiency in question.

By the JURY. I did not see any entries in this clean cash-book of payments made to Smithers; there might be payments made to Smithers, but if so they would be passed to his ordinary account in the ledger—none of those figures appear in the clean cash-book.

WILLIAM ROGERS . I have been a director of the English Bank of the River Plate since its formation—I occasionally signed cheques for office cash—I see that I have initialed the counterfoil of this cheque of 27th November, 1890—at the time I signed this cheque I believed that these amounts were required for the purpose of replenishing the till—I did not know that cheques had been previously drawn for the same purpose.

By the COURT. I did not know that any portion of this cheque was going to be paid into the private account of the prisoner.

Cross-examined. Mr. Smithers has always borne a high character for integrity.

Re-examined. I had entire confidence in him.

MOSES HENRY MOSES . I have been a director of this bank from its commencement—I was not aware at any time that Mr. Smithers was taking money out of the office cash—I took a part in the loan of 5th of December, 1890, of £12,700, made to Mr. Smithers—it was a liability which he said became due within one or two days, and he was quite unable to meet it, and the board was unanimously of opinion that it was necessary, in the interests of the bank, that the money should be advanced to Mr. Smithers, he giving such security as he could find—he found a life policy, or several life policies, a charge upon the shares he held in the bank, and a second mortgage on two houses—those securities were brought to us by Mr. Smithers and put by me in my own pocket and sealed by me with my own private seal, and then they were put in the bank treasury—the securities were not officially valued at the time—I was quite unable to form any estimate—they were entered in the security book as a packet of securities, not in detail—I am not sure how many shares Smithers held in the bank, X think between 260 and 300; they were £20 shares, £10 paid—the security on the shares was a blank transfer—I imagine the value of the shares at that time was as £ 17 for the £10 paid—I do not remember sending for Mr. Wright some time in 1890 and asking to see him with respect to the office cash—I remember Mr. Cator doing so—he spoke to me about it—I was in the board-room when he asked to see Mr. Wright—I can't say that I was in the room the whole time of the conversation—I was present part of the time and heard part of the conversation. (MR. JUSTICE CAVE interposed, and this was not pursued)—I did not on that day or at any other time examine this office cash-book—I have never heard of the existence of the private account-book.

Cross-examined. I had a high opinion of Mr. Smithers, in common with my co-directors—he has always borne a character for high integrity—as far as I and my co-directors are concerned we have been no parties to this prosecution—I believe it has been a matter resting with the Official Assignee—I have certainly had nothing to do with it—the revolution in Argentina took place previous to July, 1890, and in November that same year the well-known house of Barings stopped payment—that was a very great shock to public credit—many persons who had property which in ordinary times would be saleable, found themselves for the time being with property which could not command a market—it was universally felt—it was at that crisis that the last loan to Smithers was made—our shares stood at a large premium, the £10 paid shares were worth £ 17—Smithers' 280 shares would be worth £4,760—I am not aware that the policies have been valued at £2,500—I am not able to say what the value of the houses was.

By the COURT. Q. When the loan of £12,700 was made, do we understand you to say that for all you knew it was entirely covered by the securities?—A. No; on the contrary, we hardly thought that the securities would cover the loan—I could not form any idea of what they were; it depended on the value of the house property—we were afraid they would not cover the loan; we inquired of the prisoner if he had any other security—he said he had nothing better to offer—I had no idea that at that time he had withdrawn about £8,000 from the office cash.

By the JURY. There is no private audit by the directors in addition

to the public audit; it was the custom of the directors on duty once a week to examine the banker's pass-book with the cheque-book—we never looked to see that the lodger agreed with the cash-book—I have seen it lying on the desk, but never looked at it.

CHARLES ALEXANDER CATOR . I was one of the directors of this bank—I am in commercial life at 39, Lombard Street—I attended at the bank as a director from time to time—I never heard that Mr. Smithers was using the moneys of the bank till a fortnight after the suspension—on one occasion I became aware that a particular sum of money had been received by Mr. Smithers—I believe it was in January, 1888, I was a director in attendance, and chairman at the time; it was while Smithers was away; he came back about the middle of the month, but did not attend till the last board meeting of the month, the last Friday in January—I had a conversation with Mr. Moses about the cash; it was a subject that had frequently engaged the attention of the directors, and I am sure none of us liked the amount of cash in the till, because it was a certain amount of temptation in the way of the clerks, and I spoke to Mr. Moses about it, and we agreed to have Mr. Wright up to the boardroom, and I spoke to Mr. Wright—after that time I said there should be entered on the counterfoils of the cheques drawn for office cash, in many cases, the particulars of the sums drawn for, and from about that time that practice was followed—I heard a statement made by Wright of a conversation alleged to have taken place as to current account, and so on—that statement is distinctly not correct, in my opinion, to the best of my recollection of what took place—the £2,600 for office cash was a very exceptional amount—if a cheque came before me of an amount I thought unusual. I should ask the manager for an explanation; that would be the ordinary course I should pursue; if it had the amounts on the counterfoil I should accept it without any hesitation.

Cross-examined. This office cash-book was one of the books of the bank; I have seen it—before the return of Mr. Smithers I had this book up in the board-room, and examined it in the presence of Mr. Moses and Mr. Wright—I could not tell you the date—it would be some time in January; not the first of the month, but later, in the middle of the month—I can't say that I turned over the pages; when I say it was examined, it was not very carefully—I have not the slightest recollection of these two entries succeeding each other, of 15th January: "A. E. S., pass-book, £279 14s. 4d., and A. E. S., £47 9s. 7d. "; that is as far as I can go, upon a matter of memory, two years ago—I do not recollect asking Mr. Wright whether Mr. Smithers had a running account at the bank, and his suggesting how Mr. Smithers' cash transactions with the bank might be more easily checked by a separate account being paid to Glyn, Mills; that is distinctly untrue; that proposal came from Mr. Moses, not from Mr. Wright—I have not a doubt that Mr. Moses made that suggestion without the smallest reference to Mr. Smithers' account—we had an account at Glyn, Mills—one of us thought that this cash was a temptation to the clerks, and so thought the system ought to be altered, and that was the whole object of that interview; there was no thought of Mr. Smithers' or any particular account in our mind—I had the cash up before me on that occasion; there was about £6,000 or £7,000; I did not have the coin up, but I absolutely had the cash there, and as far as I recollect there was £6,000

or £7,000; we wanted that altered; that was the whole subject of our conversation—I had up this book; I did not have the ledger before me—if I had compared the office cash-book with the ledger, I should have seen the discrepancy that existed; they could not have agreed—this book contains the original record of each payment made as far as I recollect; I have hardly seen that book; the entries are made in abbreviation—"A. E. S.,"Mr. Smithers—I did not see the pass-book—these entries were made at the time Mr. Smithers was absent.

Re-examined. I had up the office each-book and examined it—I did not find that the amount there corresponded with the amount in the rough cash-book—my recollection of that book is that it was not balanced every day—I took Mr. Wright's account, and it was perfectly correct with his statement; it consisted entirely of entries, that there was nothing wrong in any shape or description—I had no idea at that time that the ledger account was being made up in a way which did not correspond with this office cash-book.

By the JURY. Mr. Wright was responsible for the proper bookkeeping—I do not know at all who gave instructions for the omission of these entries; Wright would be responsible for the proper dealing with all the entries in the office cash-book, and that would be put before the directors on the requisition of the accountant and manager, and we should look to them to see that it was right.

WILLIAM BLAIR ANDERSON . I am paying cashier of the London and Westminster Bank, Lothbury—Mr. Smithers kept his private banking account there—I produce a copy of his account—on 27th November, 1890, his credit-balance was £362 14s. 10d—on that same day £2,500 was paid in to his credit, and drawn out by a cheque to self—on 13th May, 1891, his credit-balance was £40 2s. 7d. prior to paying in £950; and on that same day £950 was paid out by a cheque to Mr. Hodson—on 16th July, 1891, his credit-balance was £209 4s. 7d.—by the 17th July it was reduced to £169 4s. 7d., which stood to his credit on that date.

Cross-examined. I do not know that he had an account with Brown, Janson, and Co.—his balance for the first half-year in 1890 was £6,055 10s. 5d.; for the latter half-year it was £23,430 6s. 1d.—in 1891, for the first half-year, it was £4,154 19s. 8d.; the account stopped on 15th October.

Re-examined. The £23,430 includes the £12,767, the loan of 5th December; on 5th December it was £2,500; on 12th December, £400; on 9th October, £1,000, and on 10th October, £200.

The prisoner's statement before the Magistrate was read as follows: "I was. one of the founders of the bank, and became managing director shortly afterwards. For convenience sake payments were made by Mr. Wright for me out of office cash. From time to time I made payments to Mr. Wright, balancing the accounts at the end of the year, and from the year 1881 to the year 1888 such payments were made for me, and were repaid partly during each year, and balanced at the end of the financial year. In 1888 I lodged with Mr. Wright the deeds of my freehold house and stabling at Brighton, which at that time were valued at £5,000, and I told Mr. Wright to take care of them, as they were valuable, and would be a protection to the bank for moneys I might be owing through his payments. In 1889 the payments were made as usual,

and in August, before I went to Buenos Ayres, I repaid the whole of the moneys then due, £9,000. During my absence, as usual, payments were made for me by Mr. Wright, and in July, 1890, I was expecting to be sent to me, through the foreign branch at Buenos Ayres, a sum of £7,000. Instead, however, of £-7,000 arriving, on account of the high premium payable on gold I only received £4,000; and that amount was paid to my account, and the balance expected from Buenos Ayres was placed in suspense, and debited to me in "Branches' floating entries account. "In 1890 the payments were continued as usual, and they now form subjects of the present charge against me. This sum would have been repaid by me but for the financial crisis in Argentina, by which I, equally with others interested in Argentine securities, suffered enormous losses. But for this crisis I was in a position to have repaid such advances, irrespective of the security of the freehold houses, the deeds of which I had placed with Mr. Wright as security for the bank. I emphatically deny that I allowed these payments to be made for me with any fraudulent intention. My present position arises from misfortunes over which I had no control. During my management the bank for years past made gross profits of upwards of £100,000 per annum, and was a flourishing institution, but was compelled to stop through non-receipt of the requisite remittances from the River Plate, owing to the crisis in Argentine finance, which latter likewise occasioned my own difficulties—Signed,

E. A. SMITHERS. " Several witnesses deposed to the prisoner's high character.

GUILTY.—Strongly recommended to mercy by the JURY on account of his high character and the laxity on the part of his directors, which enabled him to continue the practice of employing the moneys of the bank in such a manner for so many years. Four Years' Penal Servitude.

FOURTH COURT.—Tuesday, January 19th, 1892.

Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-208
VerdictGuilty > pleaded part guilty; Guilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude; Imprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

208. JOHN RALPH BLACKWELL (25) and FRANK ACLAND (25) , Forging and uttering an order for the payment of £435, with intent to defraud.

ACLAND PLEADED GUILTY to the uttering, and MR. ABINGER, for the prosecution, offered no evidence against him for the forgery. NOT GUILTY.

MR. GEOGHEGAN Defended Blackwell.

JOSEPH THOMPSON . I am a turf-accountant; on the 23rd, the hall-porter at the Victoria Club spoke to me, and I went into the hall and saw the prisoner Acland—he handed me a letter, with this cheque enclosed—I got into a cab and drove with him, and in consequence of what he said on the way I gave him into custody. (The letter stated: "Dear Sir,—Will you oblige me by cashing the enclosed cheque and handing proceeds to bearer—SHAFTESBUEY.")

ALFRED MA LONE Y . I am clerk at the National Bank, Charing Cross branch—we have no customer named Algernon Bathurst—this cheque was supplied to Mr. Reginald Brewer on April 7, 1889; his account was closed in September, 1890.

REGINALD BREWER . I am managing clerk to a turf commission agent—I had formerly an account at the Charing Cross branch of the National Bank; it was closed rather more than a year ago—this cheque came out

of my book—there was a receiving order against me, and the cheque-book was either sold in the drawers or in one of my pockets.

ASHLEY, EARL OF SHAFTESBURY . I am a member of the Bachelors' Club; this letter is not in my writing, neither is the endorsement to this cheque; I do not know the drawer—I know Mr. Thompson—I do not know Acland—this letter is on the club paper.

TROUD (Police Inspector). I was in the Old Bell when Blackwell came in—he came to me in the bar and said, "Mr. Stroud, there are rumours going about the West-end that I am wanted; what is the matter?"—I said, "Yes, there is something the matter; I want you for being concerned with Acland for getting a Large sum from Mr. Thompson, a bookmaker"—he said, "I had nothing to do with the job"—I took him to Bow Street, and heard Gregory read the statement to him—he said, "I am not concerned in it to the extent of that statement"; he made a further statement; I cautioned him, he made no reply.

Cross-examined. Gregory is one of my officers; he brought me a message from the prisoner, in consequence of which I went to the public-house; I think he intended to give himself up.

FRANK ACLAND (the Prisoner). I know the prisoner Blackwell as Jack Russell—I met him in Piccadilly Circus about a fortnight before I went to the Victoria Club; he said he should be wanting me, and he took me down and introduced me to Flash Fred, who forged the cheques—I went home with him that night—I subsequently met him at the Buttercup—I went to Belgrave Square to get Lord Shaftesbury's address—Fred told me to go there—Jack was there—a cheque was written out, and they were going to send it to Lord Shaftesbury's tailor—I went there, and found that his lordship was out of town, and went back and told them both; they were waiting for me; I told them that the family was out of town, and they agreed to let the matter drop—I next saw Blackwell ten days or a fortnight afterwards, with Fred, outside Piccadilly Restaurant; they said they wanted me to take a cheque in to-morrow—Blackwell was there, but Fred said it all—on the Monday I met Fred and Jack by appointment, at 23, Albert Street, and Blackwell gave me the blank cheque and a draft, and I copied it—Jack had then gone out to buy a clean shirt and collar, and he bought me this waistcoat and shirt at a shop in Brompton Road, and brought them in, and I dressed at Fred's, Jack being there—I do hot know who wrote this letter; it was not written in my presence—Jack and I came out of the house and hailed a cab, five minutes' walk off, in Sloane Street—Jack told the cabman where to go, and got out at Piccadilly Circus, and went to a restaurant—he came back and we went to Covent Garden—he said he would wait for me outside, and I was to bring the money to him; and if I missed him I was to meet him at the Buttercup—it was understood that I was to receive a second share, I suppose; it was not discussed at all, but there were three of us in it, and we were to have our shares.

Cross-examined. I gave information to the Police-officer; I was committed for trial—mine is the hand that wrote out the cheque—I did not get the note-paper—I have been in trouble once before for uttering a cheque—I did not write it; it was not a forgery, because there was

nobody of that name—I got four months—someone was mixed up with me in it; I do not suggest Blackwell—I have been in the Buttercup public-house twice—the house I went to with Blackwell was the St. James's tavern—this new waistcoat is the one Blackwell gave me—I was not with him when he bought it.

CHARLES BODE . On 23rd November I took a fare from Victoria Club, Wellington Street, and drove two men—I afterwards picked out one of them at Bow Street—Blackwell is the man.

Cross-examined. It was three weeks afterwards before I picked him out—the man I drove was young, with a slight moustache, a little above the medium height; two or three of the other men had a slight moustache—I did not see any with grey whiskers or beards—they were standing in a row—I only went in once—the inspector asked me to go in—he did not tell me he believed the guilty man was there—I did not come up three times; I turned back once—I identified him, but he was dressed differently—I walked up and down the line—the inspector said, "Go and put your hand on the man you know"—that was the only hesitation I had.

Re-examined. The cab was hailed at 12.45; it was stopped at Piccadilly Circus, and the prisoner got out, and came back in five or ten minutes and said, "Now to Victoria"—that was the Victoria Club, Wellington Street—we stopped at the corner of Southampton Street, and the prisoner got out and left the other man—that was opposite the Covent Garden Hotel.

GETTING (Police Sergeant). I was at the station when Bode walked along the line of eight or nine men—the inspector said, "Do you see anyone?"he said, "That is the man," and put his hand on Russell's shoulder—I read the statement to Russell.

Cross-examined. I wrote it down and Acland signed it; it was all written at the same time—I took two statements—they were not read over to Blackwell; I had not got it in my possession at the Police-court. (The statement was here put in and read.)—I was at the Police-court and heard Horace Myers called for the prosecution—the cabman may have been at the station more than five or six minutes before he was called into the room—we fetched some of the people in from the gallery of the Police court, and some from a public-house; none of them were policemen off duty—some of them had a slight moustache, and some a heavy one—I cannot say whether any of them were workpeople, they were all dressed respectably—this man was brought up from the cells and told to place himself where he liked—his height is about 5 feet 9 inches.

By the COURT. We looked out for men who resembled Blackwell.

Re-examined. Blackwell was not conspicuous by his height, and there was no one with a grey beard.

HORACE MYERS . I am a clothier—I sold the waistcoat which Acland is wearing, to two men—I had other customers in the shop, and was dressing the window, and did not criticise them.

Cross-examined. I said at Bow Street, "I did not sell the vest to the prisoner, I am certain of that; it was a delicate-looking man I sold it to"; that is true.


He then PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction of felony at Clerkenwell on December 19th, 1887.— Seven Years' Penal Servitude.

ACLAND then PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction of felony at this Court on

June 27th, 1887. Recommended to mercy by the Prosecution.— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-209
VerdictGuilty > with recommendation
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

209. MARIE TICKERIDGE and RICHARD BENNETT , Unlawfully endeavouring to conceal the birth of a child of Marie Tickeridge.

MR. BROMBY Prosecuted, and MR. LAWLESS Defended Tickeridge.

GUILTY. Strongly recommended to mercy by the JURY.— Three Months' Hard Labour each.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-210
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty; Not Guilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

210. FRANK JONES (20) and ROSE JONES (19) , Burglariously breaking and entering the dwelling-house of Charles Frederick Williams, with intent to steal, to which

FRANK JONES PLEADED GUILTY Three Months' Hard Labour. MR. BLACKWELL Prosecuted, and MR. F. GRIFFITHS Defended Hose Jones. CHARLES F. WILLIAMS. I keep a coffee-shop at 43, Chandos Street—about 1.30 a.m. on 24th December I was aroused by a constable, and went down and found two constables there and the two prisoners in the passage—the female prisoner had lived with me as a waitress for about two months, and had left about a month—while she was there the key of the shop was lost; this is it (produced)—when I went to bed the door was latched but not bolted.

Cross-examined. This was one of two keys; it is not the key now—when she came she told me where she had been living, and I knew that it was a very respectable place—she was a very good waitress—she stayed away all night and I told her if she did that again she would have to leave, but I did not give her notice; she told me her mother was very ill, and she would not do it again—I did not send her away for any bad conduct; she left some clothes with me—I always leave the door on the latch, as I have lodgers—I keep my money in my bedroom—a man called about 12.45 on that night and wanted a bed, but I was full—I left the door on the latch; it never fails to catch.

Re-examined. When the man came I did not go to the door; I looked out at the window—the female prisoner had taken her clothes away before the night of the burglary.

GEORGE MOEL (496 E). On 24th December, about 1.20 a.m., I was on duty in Chandos Street, and tried certain doors—I went to No. 43, pushed it open, and found the prisoners inside; I asked them what they were doing there; the female prisoner said, "It is all right, he has come to see me; don't make a noise"—he said, "lama burglar; take me to the station; I have done nothing"—I called a constable, and took them to the station—I found on Frank Jones this stick, a pair of pincers, a razor, a box of matches and two keys, one of which the prosecutor"identifies—on Rose I found this quantity of string.

Cross-examined. She had one end of the string, and he the other—I try all doors; I tried this door a quarter of an hour before, and it was shut. Police Sergeant 4. (Not examined in chief.)

Cross-examined. Rose Jones was charged with burglary before Christmas, and I went to Aldgate and found, from the wife of the superintendent, that the two prisoners had one room there, and lived there as man and wife; but there was no one there—Christmas intervened, and when I went again the place was shut up.

Evidence for the Defence.

REV. WILLIAM HARVEY SMITH . I live at Rose Cottage, Stamford Hill, and am President of the General Baptist Assembly—I have known Bose Jones since she was eleven years old, as a Sunday and Bible-class scholar, and for about three years as a communicant, and have never heard a word against her character—she left the neighbourhood about six weeks ago, and the understanding was that she had gone away to be married—I know that the banns were published, but further than that I cannot go—I have seen Frank Jones in my chapel, but know nothing of him.

Cross-examined. The banns were put up at DUD mow, in Essex, some time in September—I have not seen her since, and don't know whether, the ceremony was ever gone through.


11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-211
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

211. HENRY ALBERT RAVEN , Forging and uttering an order for the payment of £6, with intent to defraud.

MR. F. FULTON Prosecuted.

ARTHUR TALBOT SMITH . I am a member of the Bar, but not in practice—I live at Hampton Cottage, Sunbury—the prisoner came into my service as page boy in July—I request my servants to give their names and addresses, and the prisoner went out of the room and brought back this paper (produced) just written—he remained with me till October—about October 1st I was coming up to London, and did not require his services—I bank at the London and Westminster Bank—I kept my cheque-book in a drawer of a writing-table in the dining-room, which was almost always locked—the key was on my watch-chain, on my dressing-table—he had access to that room and to the keys in the morning—I draw cheques for wages every week, and he has got cheques cashed for me—they were often changed at Mr. Trotter's, the fishmonger—after the prisoner left my service I got my bank-book and found three forgeries—no part of these three cheques (produced) is written by me or by my orders—I examined my cheque-book, and found cheques 75, 76, 91, and 92 had been torn out—I do not think the signatures are good imitations of mine—here are three signatures of the prisoner, in this servants' wages-book, and I have no doubt that the signatures to these cheques are the prisoner's—this "5"in "September 5," and the "g"in "wages" and the "g"in "bridge,"in the address, are exactly the same; and the "H "in "House," and the "H"in "H. Raven,"his own signature.

Cross-examined by the prisoner. You used to come into my room and take my clothes' out and brush them—I never heard you take the keys.

ERNEST WILLIAM TROTTER . I am postmaster at Sunbury—I cashed these two cheques of 5th and 12th December, for some person whom I do not remember, and paid them into my bank—I was in the habit of cashing small cheques for wages for Mr. Smith—they were sometimes brought by the prisoner, sometimes by other servants and messengers.

WILLIAM DUNN . I am a clerk in the London and Westminster Bank, Westminster branch—Mr. Arthur Talbot Smith is a customer of ours—thee three cheques were paid by the bank and passed through the-Clearing-house,

and Mr. Smith was debited with them—they all three came through Messrs. Glyn.

HARRY MORGAN (Detective F). On 8th December, from information I received, I went to Lily Road, Fulham, and found the prisoner—I said, I am Inspector Morgan. You are charged with stealing three blank cheques, filling them in, and uttering them"—he said, "No"—I took him to the station, showed him the three cheques, and said, "Mr. Smith says they are in your writing"—he said, "No, sir."


11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-212
VerdictNot Guilty > no evidence

Related Material

212. HENRY ALBERT RAVEN was again charged upon two other indictments with forging and uttering cheques for £3 and £6, with intent to defraud.— No evidence was offered.


OLD COURT.—Thursday, January 21st, 1892.

Before Mr. Justice Cave.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-213
VerdictGuilty > manslaughter
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

213. WILLIAM GEMPESTEIN , for the wilful murder of Frederick Charles Swain.


JOHN TRIM (112 K) produced and proved a plan of the place in which this occurrence took place.

CHRISTOPHER TAYLOR . I am a fireman on board the steamship John Bright—I am now staying at 412, Penny Fields—on 8th December last our vessel was lying in the Inner Mill wall Dock—on that night I was in company with three firemen, named Frederick Charles Swain, John Cooper, and John Bahrs, who is also called Johnson—we were all employed on the John Bright—that same night there was lying in the dock a German vessel, called the Liebenstein—that night I and Swain, Cooper, and Bahrs went to the George public-house, and off and on we remained there till closing-time—we were in the public-bar—I heard some German singing going on in another part of the house—at closing time we left, and walked in the direction of the docks, down the Glengal Road; we walked on the right-hand side, two and two, I and Cooper first, Bahrs and Swain following two or three yards behind—as we were walking down, the prisoner struck Cooper; two other men were with the prisoner; I now know they were Krause and Striblow—they came together off the road to us—they were saying something in German which I could not understand—Cooper was knocked down—the Germans went away towards the dock, hardly at a walk—Cooper got up and we walked on together—when we got near the policeman's box and the dock gates we saw the Germans standing up there, waiting about; the three came up together, and they struck Cooper again; I don't know who struck him the second time; he got knocked down again, and when on the ground Krause kicked him—I went into the prisoner like to stop him, to push him away—I made a rush at him to charge him for knocking Cooper about—I got a few blows at a doorway, and he got the same from me—I saw something bright in his hand, and I felt a cut in my left hand; it was bleeding—I saw that after it was finished—Swain and Bahrs were coming up to us when they saw the men getting on to us, and the prisoner then left me and went off for them—he was the only

person there then—he was the only man I was striking—I don't remember where Krause and Striblow were; they had not gone away, they were all close by, but in what position I can't tell—the prisoner went up to Swain, and I heard Swain call out, "I am stabbed"—the prisoner then made a rush to pick up his cap; he stooped down to pick something up, and then ran away—at the time the prisoner went towards Swain, Bahrs was near him—I did not hear him call out; I did not see anything happen to him; he was still standing up, and Swain also—I did not see either of them fall—the prisoner ran over the bridge right past the policeman's box; they all ran together—the policeman at the dock gates pursued them, and within a short time he brought the prisoner back, and he was taken to the station—Swain was then lying on the ground; I could not say when he fell—he was not speaking or making any sign of being alive—Bahrs was in the police-box lying down; I did not see him fall—I remained on the same spot all the time—Bahrs was calling out as if he had been hurt—then I and Cooper, the prisoners, and some policemen all went to the station together—I think there were three policemen there then—the prisoners were charged at the station—I don't remember whether they made any answer—I afterwards saw the dead body of Swain in the mortuary.

Cross-examined. Our ship had come into dock about seven that night—this was our first night ashore—we had come from the Persian Gulf—we went into the George about half-past nine—some of us went out to get shaved, and then went back, and left about closing time—we were in the public bar—no word passed between the Germans and us there—we came out first, and the Germans followed; there were four English and three Germans—I did not see Striblow do anything—Krause kicked Cooper and then went away from us—I don't know where he went—when Cooper was knocked down I don't know whether he said anything; I caught hold of him to prevent him making a noise, to prevent him following the Germans and fighting with them—I saw two dock constables where the Germans were, Howard and Smith—I and Cooper waited till Swain and Bahrs came up—I don't remember one of us saying, "There are the three men; they have been getting on us, let us fight them"; I never said so—I did not hear the words, "There are those cursed Germans, let us have a row with them"—the Germans did not retreat across the bridge and we follow them—all I did from first to last was to give the prisoner some blows.

Re-examined. I did not see Striblow do anything; I saw nothing in his hand—when Krause went away I was closed with the prisoner; it was then I saw something bright in his hand, and after that I saw the cut.

JOHN COOPER . I am twenty-one years of age—I was a fireman on board the John Bright, lying in Millwall Dock—we went to the George, and left at closing-time, and came up the Glengal Road; Taylor was with me; Swain and Bahrs were just behind us—as we were walking down the road the prisoner came up and knocked me down; Krause and Striblow were with him—he did not say anything; he ran away, and the other two with him, up Glengal Road, towards the dock—I got up and went on in the same direction with Taylor—a few yards from the dock gates the Germans came back and met us, and the prisoner knocked me

down again—Krause and Striblow were with him; I was knocked down and Krause kicked me, and I saw nothing more.

Cross-examined. All through this affair Striblow did nothing that I saw—I felt injured the first time—I did not try to run after the men or to fight them—Taylor did not catch hold of my arm to prevent my doing so—he said, "Don't make a noise," and I did not—I did not hear any of my companions say, "There are the Germans, let us fight them"—I did not make a rush at the prisoner.

JOHN BAHRS . I live at 38, Penny Fields—I am not now an inmate of Poplar Hospital—I was a fireman on the John Bright—I am an Austrian by birth; I am known as Johnson on board the ship—on this night I remember leaving the George about closing-time—Cooper and Taylor talked down the Glengal Road in front of me and Swain; we were a few yards behind—as we went along the prisoner Krause and Striblow came behind us—I and Swain got on the side to let them pass, and Cooper was shoved down; I did not see who did it; they were walking arm-in-arm—Swain said, "You should not do that, we are walking along quietly here, and do not trouble anybody"—they made no answer—they walked on ahead of us, in the direction of the dock gates—after we had walked some yards farther I met a man named Ball, whom I knew, and I stopped and spoke to him, Swain stopped with me; Cooper and Taylor were walking slowly ahead of us—I remained talking to Ball about ten minutes or a quarter of an hour, and then I and Swain went on in the direction of the dock gates; the other two had got a good way ahead of us; when we got up-to the outer gates Cooper and Taylor were fighting with the prisoner Krause and Striblow; they were fighting with their hands, all five of them—I and Swain were walking up to them—the other two were walking on the other side of the road—the prisoner was standing between me and Swain—I heard Swain call out, "I am stabbed"—the prisoner said to me in German, "What is it that you want? there you are"—afterwards I felt that I was stabbed—I saw the blood running out of my left arm—one of them, Krause or Striblow, came up to me and tried to strike me, and I pushed him back in the mud; that was before I felt myself stabbed—at that time one was on the other side of the road, and the other was about in the middle; neither of them was near enough to have stabbed me—they came up to me and tried to strike me, and I pushed them back, not both, one of them: I could not say which—I did not call out; I went over to Swain and asked him if he was stabbed—after I was stabbed the prisoner ran away—he raised his hand to his mates and ran right after the police-box, in the direction of the bridge; I did not see him after that—Krause and Striblow ran in the same direction—Swain was then lying on the ground; I did not see., him fall; he could not speak, he was groaning—I became unconscious, and don't know what happened till I found myself in the hospital.

Cross-examined. As we went along one of the Germans gave Cooper a shove sideways—I did not see whether they struck him a blow or not—the Germans were walking arm-in-arm—I don't know the width of the pavement there; I did not notice that there was a pavement—after Cooper was knocked down the Germans still went on arm-in-arm.

GEORGE BALL . I am a ship's fireman, living at 116, Brunswick Street, Poplar—on the early morning of 9th December I was in the Glengal Road, and saw three men loitering about on the George side of the bridge

—I went on and met four men, one of whom, Bahrs, I knew—I talked to him for about ten minutes; another young man stopped with us, and the other two men went on ahead—the two men I was talking to seemed to be sober—I did not notice anything after I left Bahrs.

GEORGE HOWARD (Millwall Docks Constable 31). At half-past twelve on the early morning of 9th December I was at the dock gates, and I heard some quarrelling going on between some German and English sailors near the bottom of the Glengal Road, near the George public-house—after the quarrel three of the Germans came up the road and passed by the gate going towards the bridge; in a few minutes they returned and met the Englishmen at the gate—the four Englishmen came up to the gate nearly together, there may have been a few yards dividing them—when the Germans and Englishmen met they renewed the quarrel again, with words and blows, and it did not last a minute before the man called out he was stabbed—I did not see any blows dealt; not thinking anything was going to occur I was not looking; I had two gates to attend to, and I cannot tell what happened; my attention was attracted by hearing the cry, "I am stabbed!"—I went towards him, and he was turning towards me, and as soon as I saw the blood on his neck I ran to the man nearest to him (the prisoner) and followed him over the bridge to the gate, and caught him there and brought him back; Swain was lying on the ground apparently dead; I believe I said, "See what you have done," and he said, "Not me"—Bahrs was lying on the ground when I returned; he was bleeding from his arm, which ho was holding—I took the prisoner by the arm, and went to Cubitt Town Police-station—another constable took Krause—Striblow had not been brought back then—at the station all three men were charged together; no interpreter was there at the time—I do not think the prisoner made any answer—I left him there in custody; I was not at the station afterwards when the interpreter was there.

Cross-examined. I said before the Magistrate that there was a quarrel, and "Shortly afterwards they came back, and met the Englishmen again, and recommenced quarrelling, and then got to blows;" and I may have said, "And the prisoners moved back about ten yards, the Englishmen driving them back towards the dock bridge"—I don't remember saving that, but I may have done so—they were all mixed up together—the three men were standing in the dock when I gave my evidence.

Re-examined. I was looking after my two gates, and the cry, "I am stabbed!"first called my attention.

JOHN SMITH (Millwall Dock Police 20). I was in the dock in Glengal Road with Howard on this evening—when I was in my box, I saw the prisoner, with Krause and Striblow, come up the road, from the direction of the George;. they stopped about a minute opposite the box, and then passed on towards the dock bridge—directly after I saw them returning from the direction of the dock bridge, towards me, and in the direction of the George—they stopped about twenty yards from my box in the middle of the road—at that time I saw four men, who seemed to be together, coming from the direction of the George; they stopped at the gate, and about the time they stopped one of the men, seeing the men standing in the road, said, "Those three Germans have been getting on to us, and we will fight them"; and the four men passed on towards

the three—almost as soon as all seven men met in the road one man called out, "I am stabbed!"—Howard and I rushed towards them, but before we reached them a second man called out, "I am stabbed!"—then the three Germans ran away over the dock bridge—I accompanied Howard to the bridge; he blew his whistle for the gate-keeper on the other side of the bridge to stop the men at the gate—I returned to the gate, and saw Swaine lying on the footpath outside the box apparently dead, and Bahrs lying on the bottom of the box groaning—I did not see anything in any of the men's hands, from where I stood I could not see a blow struck, and I could not see sufficiently to identify one man from another—Howard brought back the prisoner in custody; he was wearing a cap, I believe, and a leather jacket like be has got now.

Cross-examined. When the Englishman said, "These Germans have been getting on us; we mean fighting them,"I was about twenty yards from the Germans, who were then standing still; the Englishmen went towards them.

LEWIS SAMUEL WILLIAM INNOCENT . I am landlord of the George—there were only three German sailors in my house—they were all sober when they left; the house was clear at twenty minutes past twelve.

WILLIAM CULLING (Inspector K). I followed the prisoner into the Isle of Dogs Police-station—I charged him; no interpreter was present, and the prisoner said nothing in answer to the charge—Constable Wynne brought two caps to the station, and at the time he did so the prisoner had a cap in his hand—when Wynne held the caps up the prisoner said, pointing to one of them, "Mein cap, mein cap"—it was given to him—I have searched at the scene of this affray in order to discover a knife, we have not found anything—a diver has been employed in the dock, but has not found anything.

JAMES HAWKINS (Inspector K). At half-past ten a.m., on 9th December, I charged the prisoner—Mr. Rosenberg, the interpreter, was there.

EDWARD ROSENBERG . I am an interpreter—about half-past ten a.m., on 9th December, I was at the station when Hawkins charged the prisoner, and I interpreted the charge to him, and he seemed to understand me—I cannot tell exactly what the nature of the charge was, but whatever Hawkins told me I interpreted correctly—the prisoner made statements which I correctly interpreted to the inspector, who took them down in writing.

Cross-examined. The first time the prisoners all spoke together, and made statements which I was unable to give to the inspector—there were three men behind a long table—the inspector said something to me in English, which I repeated in German to the three men—they were then very anxious to make statements, but I prevented them, because the" inspector told me that any statements they desired to make they could make before the Magistrate, and he told me to caution them—I did not exactly stop them, I only told them what the inspector said—the inspector said they would have an opportunity of making statements before the Magistrate, and I interpreted that—before that the prisoner was desirous of making a statement.

Re-examined. After I told them something about the Magistrate they all made a statement which I interpreted, and the inspector took down in writing.

JAMES HAWKINS (Re-examined). On this morning I told the three men

they were charged with being concerned together in feloniously killing William Swaine by stabbing him in the neck in Glengall Road, and they were further charged with feloniously cutting and wounding John Bahrs by stabbing him in the arm with a knife; the prisoner was also charged with cutting and wounding Taylor, and all the men were charged with assaulting Cooper by knocking him down and kicking him at the same time and place—those charges having been interpreted they all seemed anxious to address me, and started off together to do so—I told them they could make any statement they wished before the Magistrate; from their demeanour I had an idea they thought I was trying the case, and I told them I was simply charging them—the prisoner said, "We walked; some five or six persons accosted us, and knocked us about, and said, 'You b——y Dutchmen!' we crossed the road to where the policeman was standing, and one of our assailants pulled off his coat, challenged us to fight him, and struck me a blow on the chest; we ran away, me and my mates, a policeman blowing his whistle, and he got hold of us."

JAMES CRISP (293 K). In the early morning of 9th December I was at the corner of Glengall Road—I heard a whistle blown from the dock gates; went up Glengall Road, and found the prisoner in custody—I afterwards took Krause to the station—I searched the prisoner at the station, and only found a handkerchief on him.

Cross-examined. I arrested Krause twenty yards from the constable's box, on the opposite side of it, and on the right-hand side of the road, the box being on the left.

WILLIAM PALMER (341 K). I was on point duty in Glengall Road on this early morning, and soon after a quarter to one, from information which reached me, I went to the dock gates, where I found the deceased man Swaine, and took him to the mortuary—Mr. Leslie soon afterwards saw him there.

WILLIAM MURRAY. LESLIE . I am a registered medical practitioner, of 531, Manchester Road, Poplar, and divisional surgeon of police—on the morning of 9th December I was called to the dock gates, and there saw a dead man lying on his back on the pavement—he was taken to the mortuary, where on the next day I made a post-mortem examination of him—I found on him two wounds, one on the back of his left hand, uneven, jagged, and somewhat triangular, cutting through two tendons, and the other, on the left side of the neck, a gaping wound extending through the skin, nerves, veins, and chief artery, between that point and the lower border of the first rib—it was two inches or more in depth, but it was difficult to know its exact end, on account of its passing into the pleural cavity—it passed through the sub-clavian artery, which was completely severed, and through part of the first rib, splintering the bone—it was a wound that would have required considerable force to inflict—it was the fatal wound—death was due to syncope from loss of blood, occasioned by the wound in the neck—both wounds might possibly have been caused by the same implement, but I could not swear to it—the wounds must have been occasioned by a broad-bladed instrument, because the transverse length of the wound was considerably over an inch, in fact I should say at the top it was one-and-a-quarter inch; it was impossible to say whether the implement was pointed or not, because the end of the wound was in the pleural cavity—I could not be certain whether the weapon had more than one edge—it was a wound that

could have been inflicted by a chisel or by a knife; but it must have been broad-bladed and used with considerable force.

JOHN COOPER (Re-examined). I was at the Police-station when the prisoner was brought in—he had Swaine's cap in his hand; this is it; Swaine was wearing it on that night when we came down Glengall Road before we met the prisoner, and after we met him first; Swaine was still wearing it till we got to the dock-gates—I did not see Swaine lose it nor the prisoner pick it up.

Cross-examined. I don't know whether there was a general scrimmage and they were feeling for their caps in the darkness; I was lying in the middle of the road.

JOHN TRIM (Re-examined). There is pavement on both sides of the road going down to the dock-bridge—on the right-hand side it is about five feet nine inches or six feet wide.

The following Witnesses were called for the Defence.

LUDWIG KRAUSE (Interpreted). I am assistant-engineer on board the Liebenstein—I was eighteen years old yesterday—on the evening of 8th December I left the Liebenstein about seven o'clock—I met Striblow at the dock-gates, and went with him to the George public-house, and at eleven o'clock I went to the George again—I heard a number of Germans singing in there, and I went into the compartment and joined in with them; one of them was the prisoner and the others my shipmates—Killgrass and Sewer were not there then, but they had gone on shore that evening—I remained till closing-time, and then I, the prisoner, and Striblow left to go on board our ship, and walked arm-in-arm on the right-hand side of the path going towards the dock-gates—we passed two Englishmen without any interference, and then we came up to a second pair of Englishmen—I left the prisoner's arm, and went a little bit in the road; the prisoner, in passing the two Englishmen, shoved one of them aside; then I came on the pathway again, and the three of us went towards the dock-gates—we were on the right-hand side of the road; I saw the constable's box on the left-hand side—when we got to the bridge Striblow said, in the prisoner's hearing, "Sewer and Killgrass are still on shore; we will wait and join them, so that we can go on board together"—we all turned round, with our faces towards the George, and I saw the four Englishmen coming up the road—I said, "We bad better go on the other side of the road, so we might not meet together with the Englishmen"—we all three then crossed to the constable's box on the left-hand side of the road—the four Englishmen followed us; when we saw that we stopped—Cooper approached us and put himself into a fighting attitude; he pulled his coat back, and then tried to attack me—I saw that he had closed with' Gempestein—I stood there; I was attacked by somebody who struck me; I lost my cap—I was then in the middle of the road—I shoved away the man who was attacking me; I did not say anything to him—I saw the prisoner was fighting—Striblow ran away—I do not know if he ran away before I was attacked and the prisoner was fighting—the prisoner ran away—he told me he was twenty years old.

Cross-examined. I had no weapon on me—the prisoner is carpenter on the Liebenstein—I have seen him in possession of a chisel on board ship—when the Englishmen came up to us at the outer gate of the. docks,

they were two and two—we stood about a quarter of a second by the constable's box—I did not see the prisoner outside the gates knock Cooper down; I only saw him strike him with his fist; I did not see Cooper fall down—I did not do anything to Cooper at that time; I never saw him lie on the ground—Cooper tried to attack me; I shoved him away from me, that was all—I did not hear anyone call out "I am stabbed!"—I could not understand—I heard someone speaking, but I could not understand what—I did not hear anyone say in Gorman, "Was ist est? Das du wilst? Da hast du."

GOTHELF STRIBLOW . I am a German, and one of the crew of the Liebenstein—on. this evening I was with Krause and the prisoner at the George at closing-time—two other' of our shipmates were on shore—I, Krause, and the prisoner left the George and went up Glengall Road towards the dock, walking on the right-hand side of the way—we pasted two Englishmen, and then came up to two other Englishmen—Krause went into the middle of the road, and I went between the two Englishmen, and the prisoner pushed one of them; I did not see if ho fell—Krause came on to the path again, and we three walked on to the dock bridge, when I suggested we should wait for Killgrass and Sewer—as we waited, I saw the Englishmen coming up on the right-hand side—Krause said, "Let us go on the other side of the street, for that we don't come again to the English fellows"—we crossed over to the left-hand side whore the constable's box was—the Englishmen came up, and one said, "Come, they are the three Germans; let us fight with them"; and at the same moment I saw that the prisoner and Cooper were fighting—I said to the prisoner, "Come, Gempestein, let us go on board; I don't like this"—he said in German, "Master, you can't expect that I shall be beaten by this man"—I saw the other two Englishmen, Swaine and Bahrs, come up; one fellow gave me a smack in my left eye, and I ran away, and an English fellow pushed me, and I fell down—the man that struck me in the eye struck me on the knee with his foot; I cannot say who it was—I ran across the road, and when I was on the other side I heard someone holloa out, I am stabbed!"—I am married.

FREDERICK VOGT . I am captain of the Liebenstein—the prisoner has been one of my crew since I joined the ship on 6th October—no has borne the character of a peaceable and quiet man since then.

Mr. JUSTICE CAVE considered that there was not evidence to support the charge of murder.

GUILTY of manslaughter Eighteen Years' Penal Servitude.

There was another indictment against the prisoner for wounding Bahrs.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-214
VerdictNot Guilty > no evidence

Related Material

214. LUDWIG KRAUSE , Unlawfully assaulting John Cooper.

Mr. MATHEWS, for the prosecution, offered no evidence.


OLD COURT.—Monday, January 18th; and

NEW COURT.—Tuesday 19th, Wednesday 20th, and Thursday 21st, January, 1892.

Before Mr. Common Serjeant.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-215
VerdictSpecial Verdict > unknown

Related Material

215. CHARLES WILBRAHAM PERRYMAN was indicted for maliciously and unlawfully writing and publishing a scandalous, malicious, and defamatory libel of and concerning Anthony Pulbrook. To this a justification was pleaded.

MESSRS. GRAIN and ARTHUR GILL Prosecuted; MR. COCK, Q. C., with MR. MALONY, Defended.

Before plea, MR. COCK applied to quash the indictment on the ground that it woe bad, at the word "falsely"woe omitted, for which omission there was no precedent. In support of this he referred to several authorities, among others to Archbold, p. 973, Styles' Reports, p. 663; Craft v. Bryett, Saunders' Reports, p. 310, and Crown Circuit Companion, p. 293.

MR. GRAIN contended that these old authorities were superseded, that the "falsely"was mere surplusage, and woe implied in the word "maliciously,"but if the Court thought fit, it could amend the indictment by inserting the word. MR. GILL referred to 14 & 15 Vic. c. 100, Sec. 26, which stated that no indictment could be insufficient for want of the averment of any matter that was unnecessary to prove. MR. COCK, in reply, contended that this indictment was not framed upon the Statute, but on the Common Law; and although it was not necessary on the part of the prosecution to prove "falsity,"it was necessary to allege it in the indictment. The COMMON SERJEANT doubted the power of the Court to amend, but as the question of truth or falsehood was here raised by the plea of justification, there was a distinct issue before the Jury, lie did not think it absolutely necessary that "falsely"should appear in the indictment, and therefore was not bound to quash it.

MR. GILL put in an order of a Judge in Chambers authorising the prosecution, also an extract from the Register of Newspaper Proprietors, describing the defendant as the proprietor of the "Financial Observer and Mining Herald. "

EDWARD SUMNER ROBERTS . I am a commercial clerk—I got these two papers (produced) at the office where they are published, 96, Queen Street, Cheapside, on 11th September, 1891; they are dated August 22nd and September 11th—I read certain passages in those papers—at page 427 in the paper published on 22nd August there is an allusion to "The attorney, Anthony Pulbrook," and lower down there is a Terse referring to "an attorney named Pulbrook"—reading that, I say it refers to Mr. Pulbrook as a solicitor.

Cross-examined. I am a commercial clerk—I would rather not say in whoso employment; I object to do so—I have come here this morning on the express understanding that I am not to produce their names; not to say anything that does no? refer to this case—my present employers do not wish their names made a subject of ribaldry—I will not tell you their name—I was in the employment of Mr. Pulbrook from about May, 1891, to something like the end of September—I gave evidence before the Alderman—I was with Mr. Pulbrook as his book-keeper, shorthand correspondent, and clerk; also secretary of one of his Companies, the North Mexican Milling and Mining Company—if he conducts his business economically it proves that he is an honest man, and not like your client—it was a Company which he financed—I think he financed very considerably; he is here—I was in Court during the time he gave evidence before the Magistrate—I heard it. (Upon the witness being asked t» state what he heard the prosecutor say before the Magistrate, MR. GRAIN objected, as the best evidence would be that of the deposition, but on MR. COOK pressing the point, as to credit, the COMMON SERJEANT would not exclude it. A number of questions founded upon the depositions were put to the witness seriatim,

to most of which he replied that he had no recollection, that he did not hear, and that a good deal was in the form of observations by counsel.)—I have no idea whether Mr. Pulbrook had anything to do with the Meat Consumers' Company; I never heard of it before—I believe I have heard something of the Provident Supply, but I am not sure—I believe he was a promoter of the United Service Stores, a very successful thing, I believe—I never heard that it was wound up—I never heard of the Anglo-French Provision Company or the Investment Registration Stock Exchange—I know the North Mexican Milling and Mining Company; I am not sure about the North Mexican Silver Mining Company: I think these two Companies were developed—Mr. Pulbrook was a director; he put the principal amount of money into it—I can't say whether any of the Companies ever paid a dividend—I know nothing about other Companies except the one I was concerned with as secretary; the directors of that Company were Lord Teynham, Mr. Tallack, an East India merchant of Great St. Helens, and Mr. Phillips—that Company is still going on and is likely to do so—I never looked at the agreement under which the Company was constituted; I suppose it is at the office—I think I have heard of the Mont de Piété of England—I never heard of it in connection with Mr. Pulbrook—I think I have heard of the North Mexican Foundry—I can't say whether that was one of Mr. Pulbrook's Companies—I don't know whether he is a director of the New Munro Gold Mines—I have not heard of the British Columbia Trust and Agency; I never was in the office of that Company—I know the Honduras Gold Company—I don't know whether that was one of Mr. Pulbrook's Companies—I have heard the Cotton Powder Company mentioned in the office, that was not one of his Companies that I know of—there was an Omnibus Company; I was in the office when that was registered; I don't know much about it—very likely Mr. Pulbrook was concerned in bringing out that Company, but that was before I was in the office.

HENRY SMITH . I am summoning officer at the Mansion House—I was present when the summons in the name of Perryman was called—that is Mr. Pulbrook.

The following Witnesses were called for the Defence.

CHARLES PHILLIPS . I am a clerk of the Incorporated Law Society—I produce a letter from Mr. Perryman of September 21st, 1891, the first letter—that was placed before the Council, and as the prosecution was then pending against Perryman at the instance of Mr. Pulbrook, it was decided to let the consideration of the matter stand over till that prosecution was disposed of—subsequently, on 31st December, a letter was received signed,

C. W. PERRYMAN; I have not that letter—the letters are formal, and relate to a complaint lodged under the Solicitors' Act, 1888—one point the Law Society took was that the complaint was not in proper form not being verified by affidavit—I produce a copy of the affidavit; used on the application before the Court; the original is filed in Court—it is made by Watson Smith and John Worsley Forbes—that matter was disposed of by the Court on 9th June-that has nothing to do with this matter—I can prove the writing of the letter,.

DAVID HILBERT . I am one of the firm of Odell and Co., sheriff's officers, of 36, Coleman Street—a fi, fa. in the action of the Big Golden Quarry Mining and Water Power Company, Limited, against Perryman,

was lodged with us on 6th August, 1891—I have the warrant—it is a direction to levy execution for £73 6s. 2d., and £1 1s. 8d. costs—the date of the judgment is 8th August, 1888—the verbal instructions from Mr. Pulbrook were not to execute the warrant, as he was getting some further information—the warrant was only required for 96, Queen Street, on that day—on Friday, 7th, the warrant was to be held over till 10.30 a.m.—my partner, Mr. Odell, was not in town on Thursday, but on Friday, in consequence of a conversation with him, I wrote to Mr. Pulbrook. (This was to the effect that Mr. Pulbrook, not having kept the appointment, between half-past ten and eleven, if he did not wish the warrant executed he must send in due course)—we received an answer from Mr. Pulbrook countermanding the warrant the same day—on Saturday, 8th August, Mr. Pulbrook called about twelve o'clock—we then received orders to wait till he came a second time, when he would accompany me to the defendant's office—he said he wished another warrant to be issued for the printing-office at 12, St. Thomas-the-Apostle; that was the office of the Financial Observer and Mining Herald—I had that warrant—the judgment is of the same date—I received the usual fee of half-a crown on it—he said he did not want it executed till a quarter past two at 96, Queen Street, as Mr. Perryman was expected to go out of town by two o'clock—he gave no instructions as to the time the warrant was to be executed at the printing-office, simply stating that he wished the paper stopped, if possible, because, if I remember, he said it contained a libel he did not want to appear—soon afterwards Mr. Joy came—Mr. Pulbrook wanted him to be my man in possession at 96, Queen Street—about two p.m. Mr. Pulbrook came to the office and said he was ready, and wished Joy to come with us—I told him I would not adopt Joy as my man in possession; I preferred to have my own man there—he said he would indemnify me—I said I should not take that, I should put my own man there—he said there were certain papers he wanted to find, and that Joy knew where they were, as Joy had received some information from a clerk of Mr. Perryman—my instructions were to seize the papers in the safe—I told Pulbrook I had only power to seize bonds or money, or securities for money, and only those goods that we could soil—he said he wanted two transfers—I told him he had no power to seize them—he said I was to do anything to get at the contents of the safe—I have given no proof of my evidence for Perryman—I went to Perryman's office—I saw a clerk of Mr. Perryman, who informed me Mr. Perryman had gone out, but would be back in about five minutes—I reached the office about 2.20—Pulbrook and Joy accompanied me—I told Joy I could give him no direction under my warrant, that if he came he came at his own risk—Perryman came in and spoke to me—Pulbrook was not present—I then went to 12, St. Thomas-the-Apostle, to execute the"second warrant—I found the premises closed—I had left a man in at Queen Street—I reached the printing-office about three o'clock—I went back to my office—I found this pencil note from Mr. Pulbrook (read) "Perryman: The things wanted are two transfers of the Caledonian Deferred Converted Stock to Owen, and an indiarubber stamp 'Certificate lodged for the Caledonian Railway Securities. '(Signed) A. Pulbrook. "And at the bottom: "For the Caledonian Railway Secretary"—on the Monday Mr. Pulbrook called at my office; he saw Mr. Odell—I heard Mr. Odell tell Mr. Pulbrook that was not the proper course to

secure the documents; the object of a fi. fa. or execution was to recover the debt; the proper way was to lodge an information at the Mansion House, and obtain a search warrant—names wore mentioned; Mr. Austin was mentioned—he was not a party to the fi. fa. or judgment—he had nothing to do with the Big Golden Quarry action—a second name was mentioned—one name was a witness, or had something to do with criminal proceedings against Ferryman—some correspondence passed between our firm and Ferryman—on 10th August we received this letter from Mr. Ferryman. (Acknowledging letter of 8th, and enclosing copy of letter from Mr. Ferryman, and urging the witnesses firm to proceed with the fi. fa. Another letter read, 15th August, Pulbrook to Odell and Co., complaining that the debt had not been received; no man was in possession, and that Odells would be held liable for any loss—we had withdrawn from possession on an understanding from Messrs. Vernon and Son, which satisfied us. (Read, letter 17th August, Odell and Co. to Pulbrooh, stating arrangements were made whereby the plaintiff company would not be prejudiced, and that there was no ground of complaint. Also, reply of same day, stating that jndgment against Perry man teas still in full force, and there was no ground for withdrawing. Also, 19th August, Odell and Co. to Pulbrooh, in reply to letter of 17th, stating they were satisfied with the undertaking, and declining to search for a paper they had no power to seize).

Cross-examined by MR. GBAIN. Our duty when in possession would be to prevent anyone taking away a security; but private books or papers we have no power to seize—if a safe was condemned we should take it away, provided we could not get the key—it would be legal then to force it open, and our duty to see what was in it—if we had gone in for £50, and found £100 in bank-notes, we should be paid of!, with our fees—we did seize the safe—the debtor would not have any right to take anything away without the consent of the man in possession; but the man cannot be in more than one room at a time—if, as in this case, we are satisfied with the guarantee, the man in possession goes out—then the debtor could take what he pleased—we should seize a cheque made payable to and endorsed by the debtor; or if not endorsed, I might add, with a good signature—I would not seize a transfer; it has no value—probably should take it, or a certificate for what it was worth—I should leave a stamp or manifold writer—they would be condemned—I should ask the debtor to open a safe, or a drawer that was locked, or any receptacle that might contain property that ought to be condemned and seized—Mr. Odell took the guarantee of Vernon and Sons—I have never been in possession where no one was there to represent the debtor—I take it the debtor's solicitor would look after the premises being secured.

Re-examined. A transfer of North-Western stock to Brown I should seize, subject to the claim of Mr. Brown—I should seize a third person's property—if in a bank I did not find sufficient money I should seize the securities belonging to other people, subject to their claim.

EDGAR THOMAS ODELL . I am a member of the firm of Odell and Co., Sheriffs Officers of the City of London—I have given no proof; I have been subpœnaed by the defendant—on 0th August a writ of fieri facias was lodged in the suit of the Big Golden Quarry Mining and Water Power Company against Perryman—I knew where Perryman carried on business as a newspaper proprietor—I had known him for some time—in ordinary course we should execute the writ the same day, or perhaps the

same hour—it was delivered to me during business hours on the 6th—I found it on 7th August, and the instructions, which seemed odd—I wrote a memorandum to Mr. Pulbrook, as he did not come at 10.30 on 7th, and kept the appointment mentioned in the instructions, and a countermand was endorsed—I went out of town again at 6.56 p.m.—on Monday, 10th, Mr. Pulbrook came to see me—I had had my ordinary letter on Sunday morning, telling me what had occurred—these instructions are rather unusual; our duty is to break open anything to find any cash or securities, or anything of value that we can seize; that is, after a reasonable time—in thirty-seven years I have only had to break open an iron safe once—that was not on the Saturday afternoon, when the gentleman had left—the date of the judgment struck me as peculiar, and) then the instructions, coupled with the fact that the warrant emanated from Mr. Pulbrook, put me on my guard, and the Company being the plaintiffs Company in liquidation—Pulbrook said the object was not to got the money; he did not care anything about that—I asked him. what be wanted—he said he wanted an India rubber stamp, which, as a fact, we considered as valueless, and a transfer of Caledonian stock, which he alleged had been taken away and produced at the Mansion House, and which was the reason the Alderman dismissed the summons against Perryman—I daresay Pulbrook was with me twenty minutes—he said, 11 Will you open the safe?"—I told him "No"—Mr. Perryman would not give us the key—there was a summons to set aside the judgment—I said, "It occurs to me this is not the proper process for you to get possession of the information you require; you ought to swear an information, and five Mr. Perryman into custody, and let the detective search the office"—he said, "I have told them so"—I said, "You mean down. the street?"—I was then in Coleman Street, in my office; he said, "Yes," and a name was mentioned—other persons were interested in attacking Perryman; they had no connection with this Company—one of them had already attempted to attack Perryman—I took an undertaking to pay me debts and costs, with which I was perfectly satisfied—a correspondence followed.

Croat-examined. I did not see Perryman, I was not on the premises; my partner was—I did not see Perryman till long after—I never asked anyone to open the safe—I differ a little from what my partner said in his evidence; if I had levied that execution, and had found the safe open, I should have looked for money, bills, and bonds and securities for money; if I had seen a transfer I should have taken no notice of that; I do not want inter pleaders—I told Pulbrook Perryman had refused to open the safe, from information I had first from the letter from my partner—the interview with Pulbrook on the Monday made me anxious to take the undertaking and get out of it.

Re-examined. The refusal to open the safe was on the Saturday—I believe on the Saturday, when Ferryman returned from lunch, he was asked whether he would open the safe, and refused—I had also been told of it—Joy was running in and out of the office the whole day; we wore never free from him bringing messages.

SAMUEL HAYMAN . I am from the office of the Registrar of Joint Stock Companies—I produce the file of the following Companies: The London Meat Consumers Company, Limited, registered by Mr. Pulbrook, of 31, Threadneedle Street. 16th December, 1865, dissolved in 1888—a list of

directors is optional, unless there are shares—annual returns are not necessary when the Company is without share capital—there is no list of shareholders; the Provident Supply, filed 17th November, 1874, name changed to Regent United Service Stores, Limited, wound-up 18th January, 1878; the Anglo-French Co-operative Stores, 21st May, 1878, dissolved 5th November, 1886, and an Order to wind-up 15th October, 1879; 24th, the Investment Registry Company, 24th January, 1880; the Vendors' Limited, 15th April, 1883; the Isle of Wight Sanatorium Limited, 16th January, 1884; Mont de Piété of England, 114, Victoria Street; North Mexican Foundry, 8th April, 1886; the New Munro Gold Mines, 7th May, 1887; the Mont de Piété of London and Great Britain, 6th June, 1887; the British Columbia Mortgage and Trust Company, 27th April, 1888; the Mexican Mortgage Trust and Agency, 7th May, 1888; the Mexican Mines Development Company, 9th August, 1888; the North Mexican Milling and Mining Company, 1889; the Mexican Mines Development Company, 11th September, 1888; the Honduras Gold Placers Mining Company, 5th September, 1888; the Cotton Powder Company, 4th November, 1888; the Omnibus Proprietors Company, 2nd June, 1891; the Honduras Gold Placers Company, 5th October, 1889; the North Mexican Silver Mines Company, 1884; the Big Golden Quarry, &c, Company, 11th May, 1887, wound up on 6th March, 1889. (These documents, filed on the dates referred to, were described to consist of prospectuses and memoranda of association of the various Companies, whose registered offices were at 20, Great St. Helens, 28, Great St. Helens, and 31, Threadneedle Street, "in England,"&c.; also agreements with directors, vendors and others, for the payment of large sums for land, services, &c, the share capital of these Companies ranging from £50,000 to one million; also some returns to the Board of Trade, the signatures to the memoranda of association being Mr. Pulbrook, his clerks, Mr. Cox head, a joiner, and others in humble life, which Companies, after shares had been subscribed for by the public, had ceased to exist.)

Cross-examined. I have not examined all these files that I have produced, it not being part of my duty, which was simply to produce the papers—I have had experience of these articles of association for twenty-five years—I have heard a great many portions of them read by Mr. Cock to-day, and I have previously heard portions of similar things read in other prosecutions—I have known of clauses being inserted in the articles of association providing for the voidance of office when a director becomes a lunatic or bankrupt—it is a usual clause—it is the common form to insert the words "United Kingdom"in the Memorandum of Association, and the part of the United Kingdom in which the office of the Company is proposed to be situated—it determines the office at which the Company should be registered—there is nothing unusual about that—it is necessary for a Company which has been registered under a name, and wishes to change that name, that the new name should be registered, and the consent of the Board of Trade obtained—as regards the file of proceedings produced, where there has been a change of name that was with the sanction of the Board of Trade; it could not be done without—there is nothing unusual in that—beyond the papers which appear upon the respective files, I know nothing about the matter—I merely produce them—with regard to the United New Gold Mining Company (document produced), that was registered by Messrs. Abrahams,

Sons & Co., of 8, Old Jewry, a very large firm of solicitors, and very well known—I have not looked at the documents, and know nothing about the present position of the company—there are a great number of shareholders there (looking at the document)—I do not see any mention of Mr. Pulbrook there.

Re-examined. I never, in my experience of twenty-five years, heard such a list of Companies, either in quality or quantity, connected with one man—I have known, of course, of firms of solicitors who have registered large numbers of Companies—Companies' solicitors—we should decline to register if the clause containing the part of England where the office was to be was not in the Memorandum—the Company might change its name by special resolution, and whatever the object was of that change of name, if it was communicated to the Registrar with the proper certificate of the Board of Trade which is obtained by the Company, it is registered as a matter of course.

In reply MR. GRAIN called

ANTHONY PULBROOK . I am a solicitor, carrying on practice at 20, St. Helen's Place, in the City, and am the prosecutor in this case—I was consulted last year by a person of the name of Owen, and the result of his consulting me was that certain proceedings were taken against the defendant, Mr. Perryman—prior to those proceedings I had never seen my name mentioned in the Financial Observer, either alone or in conjunction with any other person frequently named in that paper—the proceedings taken against Mr. Perryman came to an end in his favour, on either the 28th or 29th of April—in those proceedings I was acting as the solicitor to the complaining party, Mr. Owen—although so acting, I was called as a witness for the complainant, and cross-examined—about a week or a fortnight after the proceedings terminated I saw my name in the Financial Observer—I saw an issue of the paper of 22nd August, which is part of the alleged libel—I read the portion in the article headed "Bellaires"of 5th November—between the end of the proceedings at the Mansion House and the issue of the paper of 22nd August I had never spoken to the defendant—I had seen him the day or the second day after the proceedings, and spoke to him in reference to what had taken place before the Lord Mayor—I told him I had called for the transfer, which he represented before the Lord Mayor would be handed over to my client, Mr. Owen, and I traduced to him the authority from Mr. Owen to receive the same—he said it was at his solicitor's, and appointed the next day to deliver it over; and I attended the appointment, which was at Mr. Perryman's office, but he was not in attendance to keep his promise, nor anybody representing him—the transfer that he had promised to hand over was a transfer of £500 converted Caledonian Consolidated Stock into the name of Mr. Owen, who had been my client in those proceedings, and complainant—I have never seen the defendant upon that subject since, but I communicated with him—these are the documents (produced) that he promised to hand over—up to the present moment I have never received those documents which he promised to hand over—these are the documents alluded to in the conversations and correspondence between myself and Messrs. Odell at a later date—I was admitted a solicitor thirty years ago, and commenced at once upon my admission to practise on my own account—I had offices originally in Clifford's Inn, and after that I

moved to Newton Abbot for a short time, and then came to the City again, and have been continuously in practice, taking out my certificate year by year—I first became professionally connected as a solicitor with Companies when I removed from Newton Abbot to the City the second time, which was about 1862, I think—I then acquired some business for a limited Company—it was about 1877 or 1878 that I first assisted in the promotion of any Company irrespective of being the solicitor—up to that time I had never had any connection with the promotion or subsequent carrying on of any Company other than acting as their legal adviser and solicitor—between 1862 and 1863 I had invested moneys in Companies, particularly mining Companies, and at that time I was a very large loser—the result was that I got into considerable pecuniary difficulties—I have heard extracts from the documents contained in this file (produced) read—with reference to the London Meat Consumers Company, no complaint has ever been made to me personally by any shareholder or subscriber, or anybody, in respect to it—no legal proceedings of any kind of an adverse character have been taken against me or any persons who were at any time directors of the Company—I was not a promoter of the Company, which was as long ago as 1865—I had nothing whatever to do with it beyond being solicitor, and preparing those documents—I did not get my bill of costs—I had to pay £29 15s. in stamps, and I got £30—as to the Provident Supply Association, I simply acted as joint solicitor, and prepared and registered the documents, and I invested money in the snares of the Company—there was another solicitor jointly with me—I took about 25 shares in it and paid for them—there was a very large number of shareholders in the Company, of all classes of persons—the name of the Company was changed to The Regent United Service Stores—they have premises in Regent Street—they are not in the same building as the Junior Army and Navy Stores—I had nothing to do with the Company under the changed name, beyond being its solicitor, and I think the other solicitor did most of the work, as I had to go abroad—on the change of name the directors had acquired the business of another Company, the Public Supply Association, and they took over the liabilities with that—I had nothing whatever to do with that—the Regent United Service Stores was wound up—my costs were taxed by law at £300 odd, and all I was able to recover was £127—I assisted and advised in the promotion of the Anglo-French Co-operative Society; I lost £800 by that—I was a shareholder and a debenture holder in that Company; I paid the full value for the debentures—I invested about £800 in that Company, but how much of that was secured on the debentures and how much purely lent I cannot say—I got a small dividend, but a considerable portion of what I paid was lost—the Investment Registry and Stock Exchange Company was registered on the 24th January, 1880, and has been in existence from that time to the present day—it has been paying a large dividend for years—Messrs. Freshfield acted as solicitors for the Company; Mr. Tyrrel Lewis, solicitor to the Army and Navy Stores, now acts—I originated the idea of the Company, and found the preliminary money for advertising, printing, &c.; I have seen the printed balance-sheets and accounts, and am still a shareholder—for the last three years I have received a dividend of 12 per cent., 13 per cent., and 13 l-3rd per cent.; the shares were divided into preference and ordinary—I am both a preference and ordinary shareholder;

the dividend before alluded to was on the preference—I have received dividends of about 8s. upon 10s. shares upon the ordinary for years—I have received in dividends in one year 10s. on every share in respect of which I paid 10s.—as regards the Vendors' (Limited), no capital has been subscribed; it was never put out to the public to induce them to subscribe at any time; I have never had any complaint as to that from any person—the objects of the Company—appear upon the memorandum of association—I was instrumental in promoting the Isle of Wight Sanatorium—Mr. Ramskill, of Union Court, Old Broad Street, was the solicitor of the Company he is a relative of Dr. Jabez Spence Ramskill—a number of persons were communicated with, and joined with me in the promotion—this (produced) is one of the prospectuses of the Company—there were directors in the Company, and the Company commenced operations—about that time I had occasion to leave England to go to Mexico in reference to the Mexican mines—I was absent several months—when I returned I looked into the affairs of the Company, and one director was removed and another one appointed in his place—I was interested in the Company in the form of snares—notwithstanding the removal of the director, the Company could not be revived, and it ended in litigation, which came before the late Vice-Chancellor Bacon—it was a longish inquiry before the Examiner, and then it went upon the deposition before the Vice-Chancellor—I was in Court and heard the judgment of the Vice-Chancellor—I subsequently read his judgment in the Times newspaper, and I am prepared to show it if necessary—I never made any money out of the Isle of Wight Sanatorium—I was not a director of the Mont de Piété of England, and had no connection with that other than as solicitor—a great number of persons were communicated with at the time the Company started with reference to its objects—this document (produced) is an intended prospectus, I suppose—I have seen it—it was handed to me by the projector, Mr. Lewis Morden—it satisfied me that the Company was bona fide, and I consented to act as solicitor and register the Company—I am paid nothing with reference to that beyond my professional charges—with reference to the New Munro Gold Mining Company I was simply instructed, as solicitor, to prepare articles of association and contracts, for a fee of fifty guineas—that was all I had to do with it from beginning to end—the Mont de Piété of London and Great Britain was only registered to prevent another Company having the same name as the original Mont de Piété; nothing was ever done—I had nothing whatever to do with it beyond acting as solicitor—with regard to the British Columbia and Mortgage Agency, it has never gone beyond registration; no prospectus has been issued, and no application at all has been made to the public to subscribe; and it follows no money has been subscribed—that is the whole record of that Company—I registered it, and that was all I had to do with it—I have never been paid for it—with regard to the Al Biscuits Company, I had nothing to do with that beyond preparing articles of association, carrying out the purchase of the works, and preparing deeds in relation thereto—their manager, or managing director, was late manager of Messrs Peek, Frean and Co.—that Company is still a going Company and at work—the works are at Battersea—I do not know whether it is paying a dividend—I am not a shareholder in it—I registered the

Mexican Mortgage Trust Agency; but beyond that I had nothing to do with it—I received my instructions from Colonel McMurdock, who was the promoter of that—I registered the Honduras Gold Placers Mining Company; beyond that, I had nothing to do with the Company—with regard to the Cotton Powder Company, I only acted as. solicitor in that—their office is in Queen Victoria Street, and their works are at Faversham and Mailing, in Kent—cotton-powder is a very well-known explosive—the works are still going on and paying dividends—they have been working from the day of its formation to the present time—with reference to the North Mexican Silver Mining Company, I went out to Mexico just after the Isle of "Wight Sanatorium had started—I went for the purpose of inspecting certain mines which had been brought to my knowledge—I landed at New York, and travelled thence to the various mining centres in the States, and thence to Mexico, acquiring general information in order to apply it to the particular location that wanted to inspect—I engaged mining engineers at San Francisco—I arrived at Popocatapetl—I had with me Ottoker Hoffman, an expert; he was well known in the States—I inspected the mines with him—I was about a fortnight at the mines, and then returned to England—the engineer would not give his report without making certain experiments at San Francisco—when in England I communicated with several persons with reference to the Company—some report then arrived from Mr. Hoffman; that would be after he made his inspection—I have those reports—the Company had been registered previously—previously to the arrival of the reports we had applied to the public, but the money was not to be spent until after the written reports came—when they came the money was raised by way of debenture, the prospectus being issued to the public in respect of those debentures—this (produced) is one of the prospectuses then issued; I read it carefully—Mr. Hanbury Tracy, Mr. F. W. Lowther, of the Carlton Club, and Mr. Palmer were trustees—Mr. Palmer subsequently became a director as well—he is a member of the firm of Palmer and Co., hide merchants, Bermondsey; he is still alive—I invested a few hundred pounds in the Company—I am still possessed of shares in the successor of this Company, practically in this one-his is wound up now, and shares are exchanged for shares in the other—I transmitted between £70,000 and £100,000 to Mexico for the purposes of working—the Company was practically re-constructed—that is a going Company now—I have photographs of the underground workings—I went there before we commenced operations, and again three or four years afterwards—between the first and the second time the machinery was sent in and the men got to work; and ore was being raised, and the mill was being erected—I went down a third time about a year and a half ago—between all those dates remittances of money had been made for erecting the shafts and raising the ore—when I was there a year and half ago they were at work—these photographs (produced) were taken at the mine, some by me and some in my presence at my first, second, and third visit—this is No. 2, which I took on my second visit; they are of different portions of the mine; and this is an enlarged photograph of the ore works; it does not show any particle of the internal working of the mine—this one is the mill; I took that on my second visit—this (another) represents the internal works two or three months ago, since I was there—I can say that they are true as I saw them a year and a

half ago, with some slight additions since—the mine was working at a good profit last year—the Company receive weekly reports from the different departments, all signed by the manager, which I have here—the North Mexican Milling and Mining Company are working the mine—the North Mexican Silver Mining Company have also worked it—the change of name was made legally—the two Companies' names both refer to the same territory, that which is represented by the photographs—I hold 10,000 £1 shares in the present Company; I have put £1,250 in within the last fifteen months—that was when the alteration took place in reference to the half-crown that was to be paid—I held the shares in the North Mexican Silver Mining Company; the name was altered; there was a reconstruction of the company, and it became the North Mexican Milling and Mining Company; every share to be taken as 17s. 6d. paid up, and 2s. 6d. to be paid in cash; and I took these and paid the half crown amounting to £1,250—on 28th and 29th April, 1891, Ferryman's proceedings came to an end—I was acting as solicitor to the complaining party, Owen—I was a witness for him—I saw Perryman between 29th April and 22nd August: namely, the second or third day after the result of the proceedings at the Mansion House—I said to him, "I have called for the transfer,"which he had represented to the Lord Mayor would be handed over—he said it was at his solicitors, and would be handed over—I attended the appointment at his office; he was not there—I have communicated with him since, but have never received the transfer which he promised—I had offices originally at Newton Abbot, and since then in the City—about 1862 I became connected with companies, and I acquired some business as solicitor for limited companies—about 1877 and 1878 I first took part in the promotion of a company—I had before then invested moneys in companies; mostly mining companies—I was a large loser—I had acted as legal adviser to companies before 1877—I got into considerable pecuniary difficulties—there was an action of the Big Gold Quarry v. Perryman on 23rd January, 1888—a writ was issued against Perryman—application was made for leave to issue substituted service; no appearance was entered, and on 8th August, 1888, I signed judgment—I did nothing until 6th August, 1891, for reasons which I am prepared to give—in substance I accept what Odell and other witnesses have stated—on 29th April I made an appointment to see Perryman next day, and he promised then to hand over one of the documents mentioned—this is the document to which I refer in my correspondence with Mr. Odell, the sheriff's officer—before I put in force the judgment which had been obtained on behalf of my clients, I had communicated with the company—I had before that received special instructions from the liquidator to the company—on 6th August, 1891,1 communicated with the sheriff—I don't know if I communicated with the liquidator after that date, but I communicated with the gentleman the liquidator referred to, and who was chairman of the company, that is working the company now; he would be the representative of the plaintiffs in the action—I communicated with him within a day or so of the 6th August; he lives close by me—after that he knew what was going on—at that time, in my legal capacity, I was acting as representative of the plaintiffs in the action—I was Mr. Owen's legal representative in the Mansion House proceedings; he is here to-day; I am still acting on his behalf.

Cross-examined. I gave evidence before Alderman Knight on 26th

November, last year; it was read over to and signed by me—you asked me if I bad been concerned in the formation of very few Companies, not twenty, and I said yes—the expression concerned I took to mean had I promoted twenty; I never dreamt you referred to Companies where I had acted as solicitor—I have been a good deal experienced in Company matters—I understand wrecker to mean a man who, without due cause, destroys a company; who for his own purposes presents a winding-up petition, or appears on proceedings for his own interests, and not in the Company's interests—I do not recollect that I have been so described by Vice-Chancellor Malins or by the Court of Appeal—I believe Vice-Chancellor Malins did say so in re The Regent United Service Stores. (MR. COCK read part of the judgment in this case, as reported in the Law Reports, Chancery Division, 8 vol.) I forget if I appealed; it is fourteen or fifteen years ago, in 1878—the appeal was dismissed, and I was personally ordered to pay the costs, on the ground that I had not proved my technical authority—there were dissensions in the board. (MR. COCK read part of Lord Justice Baggallay's judgment in the case.)—I believe I have paid the costs; I have no doubt about it—I advised the promoters of the London Meat Consumers, the Provident Supply, the Regent United Stores, and the Anglo-French Co-operative Stores Companies—my business had paid remarkably well—on July 25th, 1879, an execution for £203 was put in against me at the suit of Mary Kemp, and there was a return of nulla bona—on May 13th, 1878, an execution was put in at the suit of Hooper and Batty, and there was a return of nulla bona—on August 9, 1878, there was an execution against me for £31 Os. 9d. at the suit of Water low, return, nulla bona—in November, 1878, an execution for £30 11s., at the suit of Warburg, was put in against me, return, nulla bona—other executions were issued against me on November 1st, 1879, at the suit of Pearce and Company, for £169 10s. lid., nulla bona; on 2nd September, 1880, at the suit of Sawnay, for £26 16s. 8d., nulla bona; on 3rd September, 1880, £114, at the suit of Fox and Bousfield, nulla bona; June 27th, 1882, £43 13s. 4d. at the suit of Brook, nulla bona—on October 11th, 1881,1 was committed at the suit of Hunt, for £105, and taken to Holloway—on April 15,1882, I was committed to Holloway—after four more committals it did not become desirable for me to find a company in which my name need not appeal?—on 15th April, 1883, I promoted the Vendors, Limited, of which I was managing director; I was the sole director—the sole capital consisted of the guarantee of the signatories to the articles of association, of £1 each—I have only been at Holloway once, I cannot tell how many times I have been committed there—the signatories to the articles of association of the Vendors, Limited, were the only persons who had any part in it; they were Aspland, my clerk, myself; Ellwood, a clerk to the Ladies' Dress Association, never one of my companies; he was in my employment; Osborne (I forget who he was)—the company came to nothing; it did no business; the company was kept alive, so that it could be started at any moment—we never incurred any debts—Short lands, in the Isle of Wight, was simply in trust to the company—it was not a bogus company; it was started for this reason: in 1885 I had written a work and suggested the best mode of limited liability was a company limited by guarantee, best for creditors and anybody—I cannot say who Osborne was—George William Tulloch was a clerk in the Ladies' Dress Association; he was

described as an accountant because he was one; the Vendors, Limited, was not started till 1883, and the Ladies' Dress Association was registered in 1877—John Williams, described as a warehouseman, was a clerk in the Ladies' Dress Association—in forming a company you have to get seven people to subscribe the memorandum, and you get anybody, because proper people won't sign because their names are exhibited in the newspapers—A. S. Ough was a clerk somewhere—he is described as an accountant—there were no directors beside myself—we became trustees for other people—the Vendors, Limited, were trustees rather than myself, because as a solicitor I did not wish my name to be continually appearing—the public were not asked to. believe anything about the Vendors, Limited—I was the company, I objected to be trustee—Mr. Bellairs has been my client for some time—he is a stockbroker—I don't know that he is a promoter—I know his paper, the Weekly Bulletin—I read, "The Eminent on Reconstruction"; I suppose Bellairs wrote that. (MR. COCK read the paragraph)—I was solicitor to the Nizam's Concession Gold Mining Company—Bellairs does not mention my name, I think; I have no doubt who P—1—b—k means; he ridicules me more than anything; he wrote some very funny tales about me—the names you have given were the only members of the Vendors Company. (MR. COCK read a notice to the Registrar of Joint Stock Companies, dated 20th March, 1884, to the effect that the number of member of the Vendors, Limited, had increased from 20 to 100)—that was merely done to enable the company to obtain members—there never were twenty members of that company—until I gave that notice I could not accept a member—£4,000,000 has never been obtained nor asked for; the nominal capital of companies I have registered would no doubt amount to that—other companies that you have not mentioned, besides the Ladies' Dress Association and the Investment Registry and Stock Exchange, hare paid dividend beyond a year—the Cotton Powder Company has paid dividend, but it was only started a year ago; it was a reconstruction of a company that has paid for years—I believe the Mont de Piété has paid dividends; I don't know if it has done so from money obtained in the business; they have raised their capital by debentures—nearly all the companies were simply registered, and no business was done—I have no books of the Vendors, Limited, here; I don't know if there are any—I am sole manager—there are no books, because it has done no business; it is in operation—I want 100 more members—my connection with the Investment Registry ceased, except as a shareholder, within two or three months after it was started—I obtained the subscriptions of capital for it—I found the capital with which to advertise, half of it out of my own. money—that was formed on 24th January, 1880—very possibly I had had an execution for £169 against me on November 1st, 1879, and there was a return of nulla bona—I paid my debts—I did not get one penny out of the formation of that Investment Registry; I took my 200 founder's shares, and paid for them; they were £1 each, reduced to 10s.—the money I paid for them was used in the advertisement—I will tell you where I got the money from: I put a client into the Wheal Phoenix Mine, and he bought those shares at £7; and when he got all his money back I was to have half a share in his interest in the company; he received £21 a year dividend, and I had my half share; then tin fell in price, because of the discovery of Tasmanian tin, and

profits ceased, and I had to pay calls; tin rose in value, the mine improved, and in 1879 I was enabled to sell my share for £1,000, and out of that I found the money—I did not introduce Fitzgerald; I met him in the street; he was starving, and he asked me to do anything for him, and I employed him to send out the envelopes with prospectuses—my connection with the Investment Registry did not cease just after its formation, but my work ceased when I had done my work—the manager and secretary recommended by me were appointed—the business was to prepare and keep a register of securities not dealt with on the Stock Exchange, and find buyers and sellers for them, and to establish a "Westend Stock Exchange; it was not a bucket-shop, which is a place where a stranger can go and put down £10 and open £1,000 worth of stock; that cannot be done at the West-end Stock Exchange; they only buy and sell stock on the Stock Exchange; they work through members of the Stock Exchange—I promoted the Ladies' Dress Association. (MR. GRAIN submitted that the Ladies' Dress Association, not being included in the plea of justification, could not be cross-examined to, but that only those companies specifically named in the plea could be gone into. MR. COCK having replied, the COMMON SERJEANT consulted MR. JUSTICE CAVE, and ruled that MR. COCK could cross-examine as to companies other than those named in the plea of justification, as it went to the witness's credit, but that the witness's answers must be taken, and evidence could not be called to contradict him.)—I received £3,000, not for promotion, and founder's shares—I was not appointed manager, nor director—I was a director subsequently; Mr. Lake was secretary—a meeting was not called by order of the board on 25th October, 1883, to consider my conduct—I cannot recollect the date when when Mr. Lake issued a circular to the shareholders of the Ladies' Dress Association. (MR. COCK read a circular expressing a hope that proxies would not be entrusted to Mr. Pulbrook, and stating that certain allegations made against him had not been refuted; that the directors had investigated charges against him, and had come to the conclusion that he (Pulbrook) had grossly abused his position; that he had drawn money from the Secretary on I O Us and cheques)—I have never seen or heard of such a circular before I heard of it in court—I ceased to be a director about six months after that, because I refused to attend the meetings—fresh directors were appointed, and I refused to sit with them—in July of the previous year the company had not gone on to my satisfaction—I was the means of calling a meeting of shareholders, and obtained a very large majority to remove the directors—we passed first a resolution expressive of want of confidence in the board; a poll was taken, and there were proxies representing two to one against the directors—I then passed a resolution requesting the directors to resign; they refused to do so—I told them at the general meeting, "Now, I will pass a resolution removing you. You know perfectly well that that resolution requires a three-fourths majority, and I have only two to one; but it will go forth to the world that you, as directors, are sitting on the board and that the shareholders have passed a resolution of want of confidence in you"—then they resigned—I and Major Cotton were appointed directors—the directors had appointed a committee to investigate as against me; the chairman of the committee was the late Boswall Preston, one of the largest shareholders in the company—I explained matters to him, and from that time he supported me throughout; he

said: "These people say you have power to appoint a director, and that you will exercise that power in an improper way; will you agree to appoint me a director, as I am the largest shareholder in the company?"I said "Certainly"—Mr. Surrente, who had got up the committee to appoint me, asked Major Cotton to be one of the committee—I said I did not care, so long as he was an independent shareholder: "Appoint whom you like"—at that time the returns of the company were going down at the rate of £2,000 a month—I set aside every other business and worked the company, with the result that in three months the returns were increasing at the rate of £1,500 a month; I then found gross irregularities had taken place in the management of the company, and that Surrente had been embezzling money, and I told the directors that we must make an example of the man; he was prosecuted and committed for trial—at the annual meeting at which the accounts were brought forward, Major Cotton said he had not seen the accounts—afterwards, when I was abroad, two additional directors were appointed, who were nominated by Major Cotton—the chairman and myself contended that those appointments were illegal, and we refused to attend any other meeting; and I have written to those directors from time to time that they are not legal directors, and would be responsible for all the fees they had taken—the end of it was I refused to be a director—the gentlemen against whom I have made these charges have been directors of the company ever since, for nine years—Mr. Aspland became my clerk at 5s. a week, and when he left I was paying him £3—Mr. Coxhead is a working carpenter; he acted for me in holding these shares—Miss Pulbrook, my daughter, is 28—she acted for me with regard to these shares; all the shares have been fully paid up—Miss Howe did not act for me, but for herself—the North Mexican Silver Mining Company was started to purchase certain mines from Mr. Bell, an American, and all the share capital was handed to him—then further money was raised by debentures, £100,000—no dividend was paid on the shares of that company, because by the constitution of the company, by the issue of the debentures, every amount of money subscribed by the company was to be paid back on the debentures before the vendor could receive a shilling on his shares—£4,000 interest was paid on the debentures; that was money deposited for that purpose, not from any earnings of the company—the debenture-holders took possession and managed the. company, and sold it to me on an engagement by me to raise £25,000, and give everyone the right to retain his interest in the company—I did not sell the company to the Vendors, Limited—this was ail by contract—then the Mexican Mines Development Company was started—I and my two clerks were the directors—I, as trustee for the debenture-holders, sold it to the Development Company—the Vendors, Limited, never sold it—then the Worth Mexican Milling and Mining Company was started; that has not paid any dividend—an execution against that company for £160 was put in at my office, and there was a return of nulla bona—the money was paid—these photographs were put up in my office to give the shareholders an idea of what the property consisted—I never wanted to make a market for shares; I was content to have it stand on its own merits—the Milling and Mining Company has a banking account at the London and South-Western Bank—I have not the book

here—there is a minute-book; that is not here—the directors are Lord Teynham, Francis Tulloch, Mr. Hoffman, and myself—Mr. Hoffman investigated independently, and agreed to accept management and share of profits, it was so good—Mr. Tulloch has never made one penny-piece out of my companies; he would not take anything unless the company succeeds—he depends on the results of the shares—I daresay I could get the banking account—the minute-book is in the City; it would not show what business was done—I have not brought the minute-book of one of these companies, or any books—I do not think I am improperly called a company solicitor, but I am not to be slated—I agree that "if there were no unscrupulous solicitors there would be no bogus companies"—I do not agree in this," that for facility of walking round the Companies Act commend us to Mr. Pulbrook"—two persons have been described as City thieves in a particular article—I know their names, but till September 5th I never knew that. I was included—I know that Mr. Perryman called me "the eminent ass"—it is perfectly clear, by his putting two hyphens that he includes me as a City thief—Mr. Owen lives somewhere in Hertfordshire—while Mr. Sanbridge was his solicitor, Mr. Bellairs introduced him to me—I never knew that Bellairs had had a dispute with Mr. Perryman; he never mentioned his name—Mr. Owen took criminal proceedings against Mr. Perryman at the Mansion House—I was put into the box, and cross-examined, I believe, as to whether Mr. Bellairs introduced Owen to me—a transfer was produced and handed to the Lord Mayor—it was suggested to the Lord Mayor that this was a prosecution got up by Bellairs and not substantially by Owen; and the Lord Mayor, on seeing the documents, said, "Here I have a transfer into Mr. Owen's name before the summons was issued on the 21st," and consequently he dismissed the summons—when the transfer has been lodged at the company's office and the corticated is issued by the company of the lodgment of that transfer, any person, other than the person in whose name it has been registered, can deal with it—the certificate is simply a certified transfer announcing that the transferor of the property has lodged the title-deed at the office, and when he does so it will be in his name, but it is perfectly competent on taking that transfer back to the company's office to have that certificate cancelled—it could be done without Owen's authority—I wrote to Perryman saying I had authority from Owen for Perryman to deliver to me the transfer of the Caledonian Deferred stock; I attended in consequence of that on April 28th and saw Perryman—(MR. COCK read a letter of April 30th from the witness to Perryman, saying that he had called yesterday with Owen's authority to receive the Caledonian Stock, and that he had to request him to deliver it to Owen or himself (Pulbrook) in the course of the day; a letter of the same date from Perryman to the witness, saying that the statements in the letter were untrue, that Pulbrook had never been informed that the transfer was at Perryman's solicitors, nor was any appointment made to deliver it that day; and a letter from Perryman to Owen, of May 23rd, declining to have any communication with Mr. Pulbrook)—at the time I went to the office, before I put in the execution, I did not know that the position Perryman had taken was that he would not hand over the transfer to Owen till he had paid the costs which Perryman had been put to by the prosecution, or that Owen could bring an action against him for the transfer, and he would counter-claim for malicious prosecution—I saw a letter from Perryman

declining to hand over the transfer unless he were paid £100—(MR. COCK read a letter of May 11th, from Owen to Perryman, expressing surprise that he had not delivered the stock to Pulbrook; a Utter from Ferryman declining to have any communication with Pulbrook; a letter from Owen acknowledging receipt of certificate of shares in the Kensington Stores, and saying that he had no occasion to have an interview with Perryman; that all he required was for him to hand over hit property to himself or Pulbrook; a letter from Perryman to Owen expressing his willingness to make a settlement to him on Owen's paying Ferryman's costs, which he put at £100, in defending himself against the charge made against him; a letter from Owen, saying that neither his stock nor money had been returned to him; a letter from Perryman to Owen, saying that he could defend himself against any further steps Owen wished to take to recover any further moneys he said Perryman held, but that he was willing to settle with Owen if Owen would pay the damages he had been put to; and a letter from Perryman on 30th, July to Owen, saying that he was ready to come to a settlement with him if he would pay the costs incurred in the prosecution)—as far as I was concerned this transfer was the property of Owen, ray client—I had seen a letter from Perryman, contending that it was not—I never gave instructions to take it in execution at the suit of the Big Gold Quarry Company—what I explained to the sheriff was, "I have an execution against Mr. Perryman; I have only just heard that he has goods which can be seized; I am told no printer will print his paper"—nominally Perryman has been carrying on business in the City for eighteen months or two years—I saw in the newspapers that he had a dispute with Mr. Foster, who had prosecuted him, and that his principal witness was Plumbley; I knew that the prosecution had come to an end; I believe the summons was withdrawn—Joy, who had been in Perryman's employment, and Plumbley were at Mr. Foster's office when we had a meeting on 5th or 6th of August—I knew Plumbley had been a witness against Perryman; it was suggested that Joy should give some information about Perryman; he volunteered to do so—I said with respect to the information something like "Oh! I have thought of a better plan than that, as by going in through the sheriff there will be no tainted evidence,"after I had consulted with Mr. Graham and Mr. Foster—Mr. Graham and Mr. Plumbley had no interest in the Big Gold Quarry judgment—Mr. Ley ton was the liquidator of the Big Gold Quarry Company—I had seen Ley ton before,1 made that observation—there were two meetings the same day; I had not seen him before the first meeting, but I had before the second—Bellairs was interested in the company—I registered it; Mr. Ogle was the person prominently interested, I think—at that time I cannot say if I had any authority from the liquidator of the company to take any proceedings, but I made the application for it immediately—afterwards I arranged "for Joy to go into the office with the sheriff's officer, to point out the particular safe where the securities were, and that that safe might be broken open by the sheriff"—those were your words, not mine—you asked me certain questions without reference to names and periods, and they are all mixed up together.

Me examined. Mr. Owen was my client; he is here to-day, prepared to be a witness—he gave me instructions to take criminal proceedings against the prisoner in reference to the alleged misappropriation of some Caledonian stocks, or money that had been sent for that purpose—

I applied for process at the Mansion House, and my client swore an information—process was granted, and a summons in due course was issued on 26th March, 1891, calling on Perryman to appear at the Mansion House—he appeared, and was represented by Mr. Cock—I was a witness—a document was handed by Mr. Cock, and passed up to the Lord Mayor; I did not see it then, and I had never seen it till it was put into my hands to-day, except that I just saw it passed; my memory is that it was on blue paper. (The document was read. It was a transfer to Owen of stock in the Caledonian Railway Company, stamped 19th March, 1891, and having a certificate at the side. MR. GRAIN proposed to put in two letters, the first being dated 28th March, in relation to the charge at the Mansion House. MR. COCK having objected that they were not relevant to the issue, and that the matter did not arise out of his cross-examination, the COMMON SERJEANT ruled that they were not admissible)—these two documents were handed to me in the course of the inquiry with reference to Mr. Owen—I am still authorised to act on his behalf—on the depositions taken from me when Mr. Cock examined me is a phrase that I thought a document was there which had been forged; I gave that answer upon information which Joy had given to me—it was after he gave me certain information that I gave the instructions to Messrs Odell and Co.—I had not at that time looked into the section dealing with search warrants—directly after the proceedings at the Mansion House a writ was issued by Perryman against Owen for malicious prosecution—no statement of claim has been delivered; nothing has been done in prosecution of the action beyond issuing the writ; it can be dismissed at any time for want of prosecution—up to the present time Owen has not received a shilling of consolidated stock or anything—in reference to all the companies no complaint had been made against me with the exception of one which was dealt with by Vice-Chancellor Bacon, the Isle of Wight Sanatorium. (Mr. GRAIN proceeded to ask the Witness what Vice-Chancellor Bacon had said. Mr. COCK objected. The COMMON SERJEANT ruled that the evidence was inadmissible.)—thirteen years ago I was solicitor to the Prudential Supply Association, which became the Regent United Service Stores; they took over the business of the Public Supply Association in Regent Street—I went abroad, and while I was abroad the solicitor for the Public Supply Association was appointed solicitor, and acted, and when I came back proceedings were taken, and I was appointed by the directors to act, and a technical objection was taken that I had come forward of my own motion and appeared for the company; but I had always been the recognised solicitor for the company, and Vice-Chancellor Malins told me in chambers privately that he had been wholly mistaken in the case—when he found my bill of costs taxed at £300, which was allowed, he admitted his mistake—the Omnibus Proprietors' Company is a good company, and is going to pay a dividend, the chairman told me; it only started last May—the West-end Stock Exchange is a good company, and has been paying dividends up to this time of 15 per cent.—the Mexican Milling Company is a good company, and likely to yield very large profits to the proprietors—the shares are not quoted on the Stock Exchange—we have refused to have anything to do with it.

PHILIP WILLIAM TUBBS . I am an omnibus proprietor, and am managing director of the Omnibus Proprietors' Company, Limited, which is registered under the Joint Stock Companies' Act—I was an owner of

omnibuses before the company was formed by omnibus proprietors—I consulted Mr. Pulbrook as to the formation of the company as a solicitor—the company never went to the public at all—the money was subscribed by ourselves; it was something like £17,000 which was paid for the purchase of the stock—various proprietors subscribed who are now members of the company, which started on July 1st, and we have just paid an interim dividend of 8 per cent., but we could pay a peat deal more; if we put our stock into the market we could get a good deal more than we paid for it—Mr. Pulbrook merely acted as solicitor, and was simply paid as such, nothing else.

Cross-examined. There are twenty shareholders at £1 each—the company was started in July, and the dividend was declared and paid before these proceedings commenced—it was declared ten days or a fortnight ago—we know nothing of any proceedings in October.

Re-examined. The declaration of the dividend had nothing to do with it; it was a flourishing, going company—the dividend was paid out of money honestly earned.

JOSEPH PINNOCK OWEN . I am a builder and decorator, of Wheathampstead—I had a few copies of the Financial Observer sent me last autumn—I then wrote to the prisoner, and ultimately sent him a cheque—I received no documents of title with reference to any stock, only the bought note—on Monday, March 16th, I communicated with Mr. Pulbrook, and gave him certain instructions. (MR. COCK objecting to this evidence being given, the COMMON SERJEANT ruled that it was not admissible—that the facts leading up to and included in the prosecution at the Mansion Mouse could not be gone into.)—I was present at the Mansion House when Mr. Perryman answered to a summons in my case—from the time I sent a cheque to the prisoner I have never received anything for it, bar the West Indian. Gold Mining Company.

LAMPTON BEVAN . I am secretary of the Cotton Powder Company, Limited, which manufactures Tonite—the predecessor of that company, carrying on the same business, had been in existence twenty years, with the same works at Faversham—during the twenty years dividends have been paid—in 1890 I applied to Mr. Pulbrook, and instructed him to carry out some alterations in the company's legal constitution; and in pursuance of that a company called the Cotton Powder Company was registered—Mr. Pulbrook prepared the memorandum and articles of association—he was paid nothing for doing that, beyond the ordinary professional charges—the shareholders in the first company exchanged their shares for shares in the new company—I have the transfers—it was a company limited in the ordinary way—I have the balance-sheet for. 1890; 14 per cent, was paid on the first preference, 10 per cent, on the second preference, and 5 per cent, on the ordinary shares—it is not a bogus company.

Cross-examined. This company was registered at the end of 1890—we have had a dividend for one year—Mr. Pulbrook registered the articles of association, and had no other connection with it.

HORACE ANDREWS . I am a member of the bar in America—I held the power of attorney of Mr. Bell, who was the owner of the North Mexican Milling and Mining Company's territory, and I came into connection with Mr. Pulbrook in reference to the sale of that territory to the North Mexican Silver Mining Company—it was arranged that

persons in England subscribing should have the whole of their subscriptions returned before any profits were returned to the vendor—this is a prospectus of the North Mexican Silver Mining Company. (MR. COCK objected to the prospectus being used in evidence; the COMMON SERJEANT ruled that it could not be produced.)—the territory alluded to in the North Mexican Silver Mining Company is the same territory now being worked by the North Mexican Milling and Mining Company—I have been in Mexico, but never. very near this property—I have 100 shares in the Milling and Mining Company—I made inquiries about the company last September or October when I was in Mexico—this original agreement of the North Mexican Silver Mining Company is signed by me.

Cross-examined. I first came to England in 1882, a year and a half before the Silver Mining Company was floated—I came over on other business—I have been going backwards and forwards for the last ten years—I have introduced other property on to the English market, that has not been turned into companies that I know of—this was turned into a company—Mr. Bell was over here at the time this company was promoted—the money that was raised from the public was raised on debentures—all the shares went to the vendor—there was nothing to prevent the vendor unloading his shares, except that a certain portion he had to set aside for the subscribers to the debentures, that is for the debenture money—independently of the debenture shares, he or his co-promoters had 120,000 £1 shares in his hands ready to be put on the market; but a certain portion of the shares he was under obligation to give to certain parties—Mr. Bell was formerly a judge of the Supreme Court of Texas; at this time he had retired from the bench on account of paralysis of his hand; he is now in Texas—on 30th January, 1884, when this company was registered, he was not doing any business—he did not come with me when I came first—he was here when the company was started—he and I came over for the purpose of turning this company in America into a Joint Stock Company—I assisted him in doing it—that company liquidated—I don't know that on the debentures about £120 was raised from the public besides the shares—I had nothing more to do with it after the liquidation—I held shares in the old company—I never received any dividend on them—I was a shareholder at the time the company was wound up; I had parted with some of my shares; I got nothing for those I held, nor did anybody to my knowledge—I had, I think, three debentures; I gave them to my sons; they received some interest out of the £4,000 originally deposited I think, nothing except that—so far as I know no person who invested money in that company has ever received a farthing except what came out of the £4,000 deposited under the articles of association, and so far as I know not a farthing has been got out of any one of the companies into which this has been developed and changed—I only know from what I have heard to whom the £ 100,000 raised on debentures was transferred on liquidation—I think the liquidator was Everingham Smith, in the City—when the company was started its office was in Mr. Pulbrook's office.

Re-examined. Mr. Han bury Tracy, M. P., Mr. Lowther, and Mr. Oastler, of Oastler and Palmer, were trustees for the debenture-holders of the North Mexican Mining Company.

The JURY found that the publications were libels; that the libel of August 22nd was true and that of September 5th untrue, and that neither was published

for the public benefit. The COMMON SERJEANT said that this amounted to a verdict for the Crown on the plea of Not Guilty, and a verdict for the Crown on the plea of justification.—Judgment respited.

FOURTH COURT.—Wednesday, 20th, January, 1892.

Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-216
VerdictGuilty > lesser offence
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

216. JAMES DERBY (42) , Feloniously wounding William Shippey, with intent to do him grievous bodily harm.

MR. ST. AUBYN Prosecuted,

WILLIAM SHIPPEY . I am a general dealer, of 6, Hampden Street, St. Pancras, and have a pony and trap—I have known the prisoner two years and eight months—I have never done him any injury; I have lent him money—on 7th December, between three and four p.m., he said, "Halloa, Ship, how are you getting on?"—I said "All right, how are you getting on?"—he said, "Come and have a look at my pony—"—his stable is next door—I went and looked at the pony, and he picked up a four-pronged pitchfork and stabbed me with it, saying—"Take that, you b"—it went through my nostril; I bled and fell down, and when I came to I ran to the top of the road—I was taken to the station, and the doctor attended me—I have never injured the prisoner, or caused dissension between him and his wife.

Cross-examined by the Prisoner. You did not let me have half of your stable—you did not lend me your pony and barrow all through the winter—I did not pull you down with a broom, nor did you say if I hit you with the broom you would hit me with the pitchfork.

JOHN THOMPSON . I am a surgeon, of 70, Oakley Street—I attended Shippey; he had two punctured wounds, one half an inch below the lower eyelid, and one right through the cartilage of his nose, but not very deep on account of the bone—I dressed the wounds; one of them might have been very serious—I sent him home to bed.

FREDERICK COLLINS . I stopped the prisoner, and Shippey charged him with stabbing him with a pitchfork—he said, "Yes, I did do it; and I wish I was b——well out of it; he has tried to ruin me and my wife"—this is the pitchfork.

Crofts-examined. You did not say that you could not avoid doing it, you were taking your own part.

The prisoner, in his defence, stated that Shippey attached him, and he only acted in self-defence to prevent his being brained.

GUILTY of unlawfully wounding. Recommended to mercy by the JURY on account of the provocation. Six Months' Hard Labour.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-217
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

217. EDWIN SMITH , Forging and uttering a request for £200, with intent to defraud.



JANE GOURLAY . I am married, and live at 105, Harpinger Road South Lambeth—in September last I lived at 220, South Lambeth Road—I received this letter (produced), afterwards from five to seven letters came, addressed W. S. Ashburnham; the defendant called for them—no one of that name lived in the house.

JOHN HOLLAND CROFT . I live at 2, Oakhill Avenue—I desired to

let No. 1, and on September 22nd the prisoner and Le Grand, who has been convicted here (Nee page 77), came, and I agreed to let it at £6—the prisoner drew up this agreement in my presence—they each paid half the rent; Le Grand came into occupation on the 23rd with his wife and family—he was arrested a few days afterwards, and his wife and children remained till I took possession—the prisoner never returned.

JAMES WEBSTER . I am a turf commission agent, of the Pas de Calais—on September 4th, 1891, I received this letter enclosing this cheque it is endorsed by a clerk in my service; I paid it in to my account, and received other letters and telegrams, in consequence of which I made certain bets on horse races—on September 11th I received this letter, and sent a letter to the address given in these other letters, enclosing this cheque for £150, which is debited to my account at the bank—it represents the balance due to the persons sending the letter after the transactions I had for him.

FREDERICK GEORGE NETHERCLIFT . I live at 10, Bedford Row, and have been an expert in handwriting for forty-eight years I have compared this agreement, signed Edward Smith, proved to be the prisoner's writing, with this letter of September 3rd; they are written by the same person, and so is Mr. Webster's letter; so are these forged cheques for £200 and £150.

Cross-examined. I have been engaged in cases in which photographs have been furnished to the jury, so that while I was being examined the jury could view them, and see to what I was alluding—this cheque is dated September 3rd, and in the agreement there is "September 22nd"—I do not say that the "p' s"resemble each other, but look at the figure 9 in 1891—there is not a resemblance in the "e"—there is nothing uncommon in the "t,"only that the dash is made away from the down stroke—the "s' s" are very much alike—there is no resemblance in the "h"in "two hundred" and the "h"in "furnished house"; but I can find a resemblance in other documents—numbers of people do not make the "T"like this in "Two hundred" and "To Mr. J. Croft".—it is not like a lady makes it—ladies do this kind of thing more than men; I am alluding to anonymous letters—women write anonymous letters more than men, and in country villages from 150 to 200 per-cent.—the "8"in the cheque, is written in a free commercial hand—I do not call the prisoner's a commercial hand; the cheque is filled in more carefully—I do not call the writing of the cheque a disguised writing—I was examined on Le Grand's trial—of all the documents I have examined I do not suggest that any of them are disguised, but some are written more carefully than others—I said on Le Grand's trial that I saw a most striking similarity in the letter "T"—the writing is the same character, only written more carefully—I was shown a pocket-book; that did not enable me to come to any conclusion as to the writing of the cheque; it came with the other documents—the only thing I recognised in it was the little "d,"it has a very small turn round—I do not say it is not often made like that.

Re-examined. I have got my memorandum—the capital "C"in "Croft,"the "S"in "St. James's Square," and the "S"in September, and the final "s,"in which there is just a dash down, and the "M"in "Mr." and in Morgan are all found in the cheque—the original document and the letter to Mrs. Fraser. (The witness pointed out several other

similarities between the original document and the letter to Mrs. Fraser, also between the letter of September 4th and the writing of the cheque. The agreement was read, also the prisoner's letters of 3rd, 4th, and 11th September', 1891.)

WILLIAM ASHBURNHAM . I reside at 30, Dover Street, Piccadilly—I have an account at the St. James's Square branch of the London and Westminster Bank—I sometimes draw cheques similar to those produced; they are obtainable at my club, I only use them there—the cheque for £200, or the two cheques for £150 each, or the blank forms, or the letters produced, are none of them signed by me or by my authority—I think I first became aware of the £200 cheque on 28th September; I saw it at the bank—I had no knowledge of the £150 cheque, dated in September, until after they were cashed.

Cross-examined. I have never seen the prisoner before, to the best of my belief—it is known at the club that I use those blank forms; I only use them there.

WILLIAM PETER DENNING . I am one of the cashiers at the St. James's Square branch of the London and Westminster Bank—I paid a cheque for £150 across the counter in three £50 notes, as directed on back of cheque—Nos. 35658, 59 and 60, 6th January, 1891—I believed the signature was W. Ashburnham's at the time—the cheque for £200 came to the bank in the ordinary course of things for the purpose of crediting Mr. Ashburnham's account with it, which we did.

Cross-examined. I cannot identify the prisoner.

CHARLES JOHN WILLIAMS . I am a Note Inspector of the Bank of England—I produce notes 35658, 35660, which have bf en returned to the Bank and cancelled—the date is 16th January, 1891, and they are endorsed "J. Devereux."

WILLIAM JAMES (Detective Sergeant D). On 26th September I arrested Le Grand at Maiden Station—the prisoner was with him—he ran away—I had no knowledge of these forgeries then, and no authority to arrest him—I took Le Grand to the Police-station, and then searched The Oaklands, Acacia Grove—in a bedroom on the ground floor I saw some clothes, documents, and a portmanteau belonging to Le Grand—I found some documents in a drawer containing clothes—there was an envelope addressed, "The Hon. W. Ashburnham,"containing three documents (produced)—one was an unused cheque for £200, dated 25th September—in another envelope I found a blank book of forms and some loose forms in the same room—I got a warrant for the prisoner's arrest somewhere in November, and arrested him a little before 10 p.m. on 12th December in Landor Road, Clapham—Holder was with me—I said, I must arrest you on a charge of forgery"—he said, M Very well; I shall not attempt to run away"—nothing was found on the prisoner relating to this charge—his address was searched.

Cross-examined. I was not examined before the Magistrate, but Mr. Moore was; the portmanteau was found in the same room—they wore undoubtedly all Le Grand's things; I got a warrant for the prisoner the same day as Le Grand was committed for trial—Inspector White received some letters—we did not make inquiries about anybody in consequence of them—I don't know what he did with them—I knew an expert was engaged in the case—in one letter two men were mentioned; we made inquiries about them before the prisoner's arrest, but

could not find them—one of them I don't think is living; the other I know is; the letters came by post—I saw them before the prisoner's arrest—the post-mark is "London M—the prisoner did not tell me he had given information to the police—perhaps he did—Holder, Hitching, and Gow were the names in the letters—I found Hitching had been changing a lot of bank-notes, which were undoubtedly the proceeds of these cheques; the prisoner gave certain information about Hitching; some of the notes were cashed in the neighbourhood of Chiswick—the prisoner lived at Kilburn, and was arrested at Clapham; I have only seen the three notes in Mr. Williams's possession that he produced; I do not know if they were paid in at Bedford Park; I have traced about twenty notes, besides the ones Mr. Williams produced; some of them to Hitching; the prisoner has not given any useful information; Le Grand gave no information; the prisoner went quietly to the station—I had no struggle with Le Grand.

Re-examined. I was at another Police-court when this case was tried before the Magistrate; I had no information about the prisoner's whereabouts up to the time I arrested him.

HENRY MOORE (Police Inspector). I saw the prisoner on 18th December, at Rochester Row Police-court; he said, "My name is Edwin Smith; I gave it as Everard Smith," and when charged he said, "Do I understand I am only charged for the £150 cheque?"—I said, "That is all at present"—he said, "That's all right."

JAMES HOLDER (Detective Officer). I was with Sergeant James when the prisoner was arrested—we conducted him to his apartments—James said we were arresting him for forging a cheque for £200—he said, "Very well; I will not attempt to run away"—at the station Inspector Moore read the charge; all that the prisoner said was said before us both.

Cross-examined. We searched the house—he made a statement while he was in my charge, which I took down in writing; I have got it here, signed by him—I did not tell him he had assisted the police—I saw some letters to White purporting to be from the prisoner—I read some of them—I worked with Sergeant James in this matter—we inquired about some people, but not in consequence of those letters.

F. G. NETITERCLIFT (He-examined). The endorsement on the three £50 notes is the same writing as that in the agreement; they are written by the same person.

Cross-examined. It was not a woman's writing—I recognise the writing—I compared them with all the documents.

Witnesses for the Defence.

FREDERICK FOX . I am employed at Olympia—I have known the prisoner about eighteen months; I also know Honbold, alias Morley, and Gow; they are two distinct people—in August I had a conversation in the Roebuck, at Chiswick, with Honbold—some time after that I met a friend named Andrews, and we went in the Roebuck and had some refreshment, and I saw Honbold and Gow in the private bar—they had some forms similar to these in front of me that they were writing on—there was a book on the counter that looked like a large note-book with "Ashburnham"in gilt on it—Honbold was showing some forms to Gow which were written on—I saw a cheque purporting to be signed by "Ashburnham"—I have seen Ashburnham writing before in this publichouse, on the same sort of paper as this; I took the documents to be

receipts—there was a conversation between them when Honbold was showing them to Gow—I could not pick out the cheque I saw—(a cheque was handed to the witness)—the writing was similar to this in every respect—Honbold put them into his pocket when he saw I was looking—I had a further conversation with him, and afterwards with the prisoner—Andrews is here—I have not been intimate with the prisoner—I saw Gow about the 16th September.

FREDERICK LUMLEY . I live at 131, Selway Road, Shepherd's Bush—I have met Gow at Chiswick—I went to several places with the prisoner; one place was Short's, in St. Paul's Churchyard; he spent a lot of money, which was in Bank of England notes—I don't know the amounts—he changed six or seven at various places in London.

ALFRED AHRENFELD . I am a lithographic writer, and have been an expert in handwriting for about twenty years at 44, Fleet Street—I have seen the admitted writing of the prisoner in the agreement to take this house—I do not think the writing in the agreement is the same as that in the other documents.

Cross-examined. I first saw these documents last Saturday morning—the "91"in the agreement and the "91"in the cheque for £200 are very similar—I cannot point out any difference between the two "9's"—they are not the same; the "9"in the admitted writing has a flat top, the other has a round top—the "C" in "Croft" and the "0"in "Co"are not the same; the "C"in "Croft"is circular, the "C"in "Co. "is flat; no one could say they were the same—the "S"in "square" and the "S" in "September"are totally different—the final "a"in "James"' and the "s"in "months"are similar in formation—one is larger than the other, and the "s"in "months "has a circular top—I of ten see that kind of "s"—I gave evidence in this court as an expert about 1885 or 1886—the "M"in "Mr." and the "M"in "Maiden"do not resemble each other at all—the letters signed "W. Ashburnham,"to Mrs. Fraser and Mr. Webster slightly resemble the admitted writing—the general character of the writings do not agree; there is no resemblance—I do not dispute that the "y"in "Surrey" and the "y" in "pay,"in the letter to Mrs. Fraser, are similar—there is no peculiarity in them—I gave evidence in this building four or five years ago—the charge was sending threatening letters and extorting money—I gave evidence for the prisoner; he was acquitted on one charge and convicted on another—I have given evidence in other courts, but only once before here.

Re-examined. I have often given evidence in courts of justice—the "9 "in the unuttered cheque of 1891 and the "9 "in the cheque for £200 are totally distinct.

WILLIAM JAMES (Police Sergeant, Re-examined). I have been to the Bank of England for the proceeds of two different cheques—the Bank in each case gave me three £50 notes.


The prisoner then PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction of attempting to obtain £150 on a forged cheque in 1889.— Ten Years' Penal Servitude.

OLD COURT.—Friday, January 22nd, 1892.

Before Mr. Justice Case.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-218
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

218. ANNIE HOWARD (19) was indicted for wilful and corrupt perjury, alleged to have been committed upon a charge of rape made by her before F. Mead, Esq., at the Thames Police-court.

MESSRS. FORREST FULTON and BIRON Prosecuted, and MR. A. GILL Defended.

The details of this case are unfit for publication.


NEW COURT.—Friday, January 22nd, 1892.

Before Mr. Common Serjeant.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-219
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

219. JAMES RICHARD THOMAS (29) , Unlawfully omitting certain material particulars from a cash-book of his employer, with intent to defraud.

MESSRS. C. MATTHEWS and BODKIN Prosecuted, and MR. GLENN Defended. GEORGE LOUIS COLLINS. I was a draper's manager, at 225, Amhurst Road, Hackney, but have left—I have known the defendant about two years—about eighteen months ago or more I met him in the City, and told him I was thinking of starting in the coal trade; he said he was the manager of a coal company, and could supply me with coal—I arranged to have a commission on the coal that was sold, which could hardly be called a partnership—I took an office at Neville Road, Stoke Newington, in the name of "G. L. Collins and Co., Coal Merchants and Contractors"—some advertisements of this kind were prepared. (A card model of a coal cart.)—I continued in possession of the premises five week she got some orders, and so did I—I sent them to the Seaborne Coal Company, who executed the orders, as I had no carmen or vans—I have nothing to do with ordering the coal to be loaded, that was done by the company—it never came to profit; I was to be paid by commission on the coal sold by both of us—we were each to have a commission—the orders which I procured were executed, and the carmen of the Seaborne Company received the money—I handed the prisoner the money I received—about ten tons of coal were supplied to my order—after four or five weeks I suggested to Thomas that it would not pay me, and I had better have done with it—I had paid the rent of the office, 6s. a week, and got no return—I went to the landlord; Thomas became the tenant, and I left—this letter of 23rd July, 1890, to me, was written by the prisoner. (This stated that the witness's interest in the business would cease from that day.)—I assented to that—I also ordered coal from the Seaborne Company for my private purposes, and in September, 1891, lowed them £15 2s. 3d.; I received the account on 2nd October, 1891, and paid Thomas that day £9 2s. by this cheque (produced), £6 in gold, and threepence—the cheque is stamped by the London and Westminster Bank, and endorsed "R. Thomas"—I did not know that Thomas had an account at that bank—I received this receipt (produced)—I did not owe the Seaborne Company £33 16s. 4d. in October, 1890, or any money whatever; I entirely cleared my indebtedness by the payment of the £15.

Cross-examined. I canvassed for orders, and sent them up addressed sometimes to Thomas and sometimes to the Seaborne Coal Company; they were executed by the Seaborne Coal Company on their own consignment notes, and I was to have a commission—the people did not all pay the carman when they got the coal; some did.

Re-examined. I sent the company about a dozen orders during the five weeks I was in the business.

GEORGE HARRIS . I am a greengrocer, of 11 1/2, Greycoat Place, Westminster—I have given the defendant orders for coal; I paid him £2 4s. on 11th May, 1891, for coal supplied to me from the wharf, and got these receipts in return—this receipt is signed J. R. Thomas—on 9th June I paid him personally £1 2s. for a further quantity of coal, and he signed this receipt.

Cross-examined. I was in the habit of going there to pay the money, hut on these occasions he came to me—he did not come to me for orders—the money was taken through to an office at the back; the safe is at the back.

JOHN BALKER DAWSON . I am a licensed victualler, of 58, Grosvenor Road, nearly opposite the wharf—I got coal there occasionally, and gave the order to Mr. Thomas—on May 22nd and 23rd I received coal from the wharf, and paid Mr. Thomas 11s. 6d. and £2 17s. for it in cash—he signed these two receipts (produced)—I think I sent it over to the office—I paid one amount over my own counter.

JOSEPH GARD . I am a coal dealer, of 11, Horseferry Road—I have been in the habit of receiving coal at Parliament Wharf—I ordered it of the defendant or his clerk—on June 8 I owed the Seaborne Company three sums of £1 11s. 6d., each, and paid Mr. Thomas in cash, and got these receipts in return.

LAURENCE MCKIE . I am a coal dealer, of 1, Douglas Street, Westminster—I have ordered coal at Parliament Wharf of Mr. Thomas and his clerk—I received two tons of coal, value £2 17s., on 22nd June—I or my son or daughter paid it, and got this receipt—on July 1st I paid £4 15s. for a further lot of coal; this is the receipt.

RICHARD EDWARD LANTON : I am assistant cashier to Messrs. Watney, of the Stag Brewery—they paid £2 4s. for coal in August last—this is the receipt (produced).

FREDERICK JOSEPH HANCOCK . I am an undertaker, of 10, Neville Street, Stoke Newington—I let off part of my shop to Mr. Collins at 6s. a week as a coal agent—he continued my tenant four or five weeks—the name of Collins was put up—I saw the prisoner there once or twice, and he became my tenant after Collins left, but Collins's name was kept up—in November, 1891,1 got back the keys of the premises—the prisoner paid me about £5 rent in the twenty weeks—there was no written agreement; nobody represented Thomas at the office that I know of—we took charge of the letters—the office was locked up all day long, and the blind down in Mr. Collins's time.

SIDNEY HILL . I am a clerk at the Vauxhall branch of the London and South Western Bank—I produce a copy of the prisoner's banking"account, which I have examined with the original entries in the bank books—I also produce an affidavit of Mr. Henry Christie, the manager, which verifies the copy, and a certificate from Somerset House certifying that we have furnished a list and summary under the Companies Act—on October 3rd, 1891, £15 2s. is credited to the account—I made the entry in the waste-book; it is not here—I did not receive the £15 2s.—I made the entry from the credit slip, which is written by the customer—the credit slips are kept—I have never seen this cheque of 2nd October for £9 2s. before, to my knowledge—it has the stamp of the London, and

South Western Bank on it—it seems to have been paid into the prisoner's account—the endorsement is his writing. (The Witness was sent to fetch the waste-boo I and paying-in slip.)

GEORGE RICHARD BULLEX . I am general manager to Mr. John Edey, coal merchant, 16, East cheap, who has wharves in many parts of London; he has the Parliament Wharf, Grosvenor Road, Pimlico, which is carried on under the style of the Seaborne Coal Company—in June, 1890, when he acquired that wharf, the prisoner was manager of it, at £2 a week; after which the prisoner continued as manager, at the same salary, to 17th November, 1891—his duty was to keep the books of the wharf, a cash-book and ledger—he had also to collect moneys and give receipts for money collected, and forward such money to the head office in Eastcheap weekly, from June to the end of 1890—at the beginning of 1891 the prisoner was told to keep weekly sheets in addition to cash-book and ledger; he was provided with them—he had to enter on them such coal as had been sold on credit and for cash during the week, and such cash payments as had been made by the persons to whom originally coal had been sold on credit—he had to return it with an account of the outgoings for the week attached to it—he would deduct the outgoings from the receipts, strike the balance, and return the balance so struck to his employer—I had no notion that, in the name of Collins, the prisoner was occupying premises where a coal agency had been established, at 10, Neville Road, Stoke Newington, during this time—I knew he had a private banking account, because during 1888 I gave a reference for it to be opened, but I had forgotten the fact—I have no knowledge of the amounts the prisoner was paying into his private banking account from January to November, 1891—he had no authority to endorse cheques—his duty with regard to cheques drawn to the order of the Seaborne Coal Company was to forward the cheques themselves; he was not authorised to deal with them in any way, or to sign in the name of the firm for them—I am general manager to Mr. Edey at East cheap—Parliament Wharf was under my jurisdiction; I had to visit it and see how things were going on there, and in that way I came into personal relationship with the prisoner from time to time, and to me these accounts and things came forward—Mr. Edey is largely employed elsewhere than in London; he has over 1,000 clerks in his employment—the prisoner had no authority to have cheques made out in his own name for coal supplied by the Seaborne Coal Company—a cheque drawn to the prisoner he should have sent on to the head office, with the cash balance at the weekly intervals—in the meantime there was a safe in the office where he could put valuables and cheques till the end of the week, when he would bring them himself, or sometimes they would be collected from him—from the beginning of 1891 he sent forward regularly, from week to week, the weekly cash-sheets—on the cash-sheet of 16th May, 1891, there is no entry of £2 4s. received from Mr. Harris on 11th May—I find payments of 10s. 6d. from Marsh, and £1 1s. from Lawlor—I find no entry of Harris's £2 4s. in the cash-book or in the ledger; nor any entry in the cash-sheet of 23rd May of 11s. 6d. or £2 17s. received from Mr. Dawson on 23rd May—sums appear as small as 11s. from Jones, 10s. 6d. from Rowlands, and 5s. 3d.—there is no entry in the cash-sheet or ledger of the 11s. 6d. or £2 17s.—in the cash-sheet of 13th June there is no entry of two sums of £1 11s. 6d. each, paid by Mr. Gerard—there

are entries of sums as small as 4s. 9d. from Sidler, and 10s. from Rutherford; and there are only two sums on the sheet which exceed in amount £1 11s. 6d.—I do not find on this cash-sheet, either, £1 2s. paid by Mr. Harris—I find no entry in the cash-book or ledger of the two sums of £1118. 6d. or of the £1 2s.—there is no entry in the cash-sheet of 27th June of £2 17s. from Mr. M'Kay on 22nd June; all the sums in the sheet, except one, are small amounts, such as Chamberlain 10s. 6d., Francis 10s., Rowland Collins 5s.; the highest is £1 1s. 6d.—there is no entry in the cash-book or ledger of the £2 17s.—there is no entry of £4 15s. from M'Kay on 1st July in the cash-sheet of 4th July, nor in the cash-book or ledger—there, is an entry on June 12th of £2 18s. 6d., and on June 7th of £2 17s.; there is no subsequent entry of £4, or any sum near it—there is no entry of £2 4s. on 17th August from Mrs. Watney, in the cash-sheet of 22nd August; nor in the cashbook or ledger—I find smaller sums in that cash-sheet—there is no entry of £15 2s. 3d. on 3rd October from Mr. Collins, in the cash-sheet, cash-book, or ledger—the largest sum in that cash-sheet is £15 from Chambers, and there is a separate receipt for that; I have seen both Chambers' and Collins' receipts—I had no notion that on 3rd October £15 2s. had been paid by the prisoner into his own private account—Collins' ledger account, after 2nd October, showed that he was indebted to the Seaborne Coal Company £81 9s. 4d.—when that entry was first discovered that was believed to be a genuine debt, and we applied to Collins for payment of it, and we had from him this receipt of 2nd October, showing that on that day lie had paid for everything that had been supplied to him by the company—there is no record in the journal or any book of £15 2s. 3d.—the receipt did not turn up till after the prisoner was arrested—on account of entries in the journal we applied to customers for payment of their accounts before 2nd October; they objected that they had already paid, and produced receipts, and that caused the first investigation into the matter—I and Mr. Edey were present on 17th November, when the prisoner came to 16, East cheap, to make explanation and give account (Mr. Edey has an attack of influenza, and is unable to get out)—Mr. Hall, the solicitor, asked the prisoner what explanation he could give as to these deficiencies, and he said he could give no explanation—he was given into custody—the cash-sheets are all in the prisoner's writing—these nine receipts and the letter to Collins, of 23rd July, 1890, are in his, writing-subsequent to his arrest I went with Mr. Edey to Parliament Wharf, and found a book of paying-in slips, which caused us to make inquiry at the London and South-Western Bank.

By the JURY. I have not the delivery notes showing where the £81 worth of coal went to.

Cross-examined. There is an order-book in which all orders, as given, were entered by the prisoner, or whoever was in the office to receive the order—the accounts appear in the ledger, but not the receipt in these cases; thus, Harris's order for coal, amounting to £2 17s. 2d., appears in the ledger—in every case it would appear in the books in the prisoner's writing that the man had had the coal and owed the money; and the entry of the money having been paid does not appear—that applies to all except Collins—we found out that these amounts had not been paid, by writing round to people whose names appeared in the book as

debtors—it is customary to write from time to time to persons whose names appear in the books; I don't think it is customary to send a circular asking if they owe the money; I have not done that—I and Mr. Edey had access to the books at all times when we asked for them—this wharf originally belonged to the Metropolitan Coal Association; I was manager under them of another wharf—in November, 1889, the prisoner was employed at this wharf, I think—it belonged to the Metropolitan Coal Association, and the Seaborne Coal Company had its name up there—I had the superintendence of the horses at the prisoner's branch then; I don't know that there was any friction between us—after Mr. Edey purchased the business my name was struck off the bills, at his request—the time Mr. Neville and Mr. Sheriff were general managers of the Seaborne Company was so short that I can scarcely remember what was done then—Mr. Edey took over the business in June, 1890; the prisoner had been there from November, 1889; but for nine months of that time the business was in the liquidator's hands—I don't remember any misunderstanding about Scrivener—the Block Fuel Company rented part of the wharf; they paid £100 a year rent, and were to have storage room, and the prisoner was paid 10s. a week extra for keeping their books—he had to keep the other company's books as well, and to attend to the office work of the Block Fuel business, they had a man to do the outside business—I do not think that the prisoner had a good deal to do there—he had to go out and collect accounts—he went and canvassed for orders when he collected the accounts; he was not forced to canvass, but it was part of his duty—he had to overlook all the men; he did not superintend the weighing—he did not make out all the accounts; the head clerk in the office did that; it was part of the office work—during a short period of the time he had to hire barges—the early part of the time that Edey had the Seaborne business the prisoner had to see to it and superintended the unloading of vessels—two trolleys were sent out to sell coal in the streets by retail, and they were under the prisoner's superintendence—he complained once or twice that he was overworked, and wanted more assistance; he only had a lad in the office to help him—I am not aware that at one time he had to pay for extra work himself—I swear I did not know that he was dabbling in coal himself—he gave me no explanation as to Collins and Co., or as to the £81—he did not give me the names of persons who owed money to Collins and Co.—he did not tell me that the accounts headed Collins and Co. were for coals sold on commission to different people; he told me just previous to his arrest that there were two others in the account, Carr and Holt—the prisoner was not constantly seeing Edey—sometimes he received several letters a week from him—the prisoner came to the City once a week, but he did not always see Edey—he might have come more than once a week sometimes—he has discussed business with Mr. Edey on about two occasions—I have not heard from Mr. Edey, and do not know if he told him about the customers that owed money to Collins and Co.—I asked Mr. Edey if he took down from the prisoner the names and addresses of all the persons who owed Collins and Co. money; he said no—I don't know if there are letters from the prisoner to Mr. Edey asking for assistance—the solicitor has letters which I have looked through, I have not read them all—he told he wanted more assistance there, and he complained to Mr. Edey—at the end of the financial year, in June, 1891,

there was a general settlement of accounts, and Mr. Edey complained to the prisoner of numerous mistakes in the books; the prisoner said something to the effect that he was overworked, and the books were not as regularly kept as they ought to have been—Mr. Edey was an accountant; his clerks investigated the books—I introduced the prisoner to this bank to open an account there—I did not do it because money payments had to be made on account primarily of the Block Fuel Company, and afterwards of the Coal Association that had to be made by cheque—he did not tell me that persons who supplied goods to the Block Fuel Company wanted to be paid by cheque, and would not take cash, and that he wanted an account for that purpose—he said it was for a private account—M'Sibbing deals in coal—he supplied two or three lots to the wharf during 1890, when the company was short of coal—it was not supplied to the prisoner personally that I am aware of—he paid for them out of the company's money—I do not know that they were paid for by a cheque on this account—when the prisoner was away only a lad would be at the office, and payments would be made to him by persons who came in to pay accounts—I do not know that two wooden bowls were kept there, one for the Block Fuel and the other for the Coal Company; I did not say at the Mansion House that I knew it, but that it was contrary to my instructions—I don't think I ever saw the wooden bowls; my memory is a blank about it—a rough cash-book was kept by the lad, who entered moneys he received, and they would be posted up from that—an omission in the rough cash-book would not find its way into the other books, unless it was thought of—the rough cash-book was kept contrary to my instructions—we had no bowl for money at our own wharf, and only the boy kept a rough cash-book—a lad named Howard, who had been at the wharf, left about March, 1891—I do not remember a number of accounts being afterwards found which Howard had not entered up—I know of no complaints being made by the secretary of the Block Fuel Company shortly before June, 1891; it was done directly between the Block Fuel Company and the prisoner—I believe the prisoner mentioned it to Mr. Edey in my presence—he did not say to the effect that he had no time to keep the books properly, that the Block Fuel orders could not be executed because he had no time to attend to them, and he must give up the Block Fuel business unless he had further help—Mr. Edey had no interest in the Block Fuel Company except that they paid him £100 a-year for the use of the wharf—I believe Mr. Edey then came to see if he could use the whole wharf if the Block Fuel people went—I believe it was suggested that the prisoner must give up the Block Fuel business if he could not have more assistance—I believe Herman was sent from another wharf for two or three days—in January, 1891, a return was asked for but never received—Mr. Edey sent the prisoner £5 5s; I did not see the accompanying letter—the business had increased during the winter months; it was a new business, and would naturally increase.

Re-examined. It was after an investigation that the weekly sheets were instituted—it was the prisoner's duty every week to bring his cash and his sheets—he would generally see me because Mr. Edey was not there—the Block Fuel Company went into liquidation, and gave up possession of the place about April, 1891—his complaint of too much to do was listened to, and remedied by the lad Howard being taken away

and one of his own relatives (Mr. Wearn), 18 or 19 years old, being given to him—he did not complain any further—the rough cash-book was not authorised; it was not with the set of books in the business; it related to payments received by the lad in the office—there might hare been an entry or two of money received by the prisoner, but nothing of any account; it was kept by the lad—I have seen Mr. Holt—the payments to Mr. M'Sibbing for one, two, or three lots of coal would come to something under £100; it was in 1890.

THOMAS WILLIAM HALL . I am solicitor to Mr. Edey, who is unable to be here to-day through influenza and bronchitis; I have a certificate to that effect—he was here five or six days ago—on 16th November, when the prisoner was present, Mr. Edey said to me, "I should like you just to speak to Mr. Thomas"—I said, "What explanation have You to give of this case? let us take the first one," and I took them one after the other—the prisoner turned to the accounts and the books and said, "I can give no explanation; I don't think the customers can have the receipts"—I said it would be necessary to give him into custody, and he was so given—he said to Mr. Edey, Is there no other Way out of this?"—Mr. Edey replied "No. "

Cross-examined. The prisoner did not ask to be allowed to examine the books and materials at the wharf, nor say he could not explain without doing so—the prisoner and Mr. Bullen were left alone; with that exception I was present at the whole interview—when I got there I found him in the waiting-room; I cannot say if he had been with Mr. Edey before—he opened the ledger and cash-book at various dates.

SYDNEY HILL (Re-examined). I have now got the waste-book containing entries in my handwriting with reference to the items of the cash payment of £15 on 3rd October.

THOMAS FULLER . I was cashier on 3rd October, 1891, at the London and South Western Bank, Vauxhall—this paying-in slip was brought to me on that day; it is in favour of James R. Thomas; acting on it, £15 2s. was placed to the credit of the prisoner's account—it was paid by cheque for £9 2s. and cash £6.

SYDNEY HILL (Re-examined). The credit entry of £15 2s. was carried to the prisoner's credit on 3rd October, by £6 money and a cheque for £9 2s. on the London and Provincial Bank, Kingsland, drawn by Collins—in the ordinary course the customer would make up this slip.

WILLIAM HENRY WEARN . I am the prisoner's cousin, and was employed under him at this wharf—this slip of 3rd October, 1891,1 wrote under his instructions.

Cross-examined. I am twenty-one—I went to the office about the middle of July—the prisoner complained that he had more work than he could get through in the course of the day—I had to stay late with him after office hours from time to time to complete the work—I do not remember a bundle of delivery tickets, for coal drawn from other wharves, that had been left by Howard being discovered—I had to make entries from a bundle of delivery tickets; I was there late that night and early next morning with the prisoner; the books were a lot behind when I went there, and I had to enter them up—the system was to keep a rough cash-book, whoever was in the office, and the prisoner made up his book from the rough cash-book—money taken was put into wooden bowls—the office could only be entered by travellers and others

employed by the firm—there is a swing door into the office where the safe is; if anybody came in, we should ask them what they wanted—people can walk through to the wharf and then into the office where safe and bowls are kept—I went to Mr. Holt once to ask if he had collected some money from customers of Collins and Co., and if he would call and see the prisoner; I did not bring back any money.

Re-examined. I went to Holt, on the prisoner's instructions, to ask him to come and see the prisoner in relation to coals said to have been supplied to Collins and Co., the money for which was outstanding—Holt afterwards came, but did not see the prisoner—it was the duty of whoever received any sum to enter it in the rough cash-book, and put the money in the bowl, which would be placed in the safe at night—ordinary care was taken with regard to the money, and in entries made in the book—usually the person who received the money entered it, or it was handed over to the prisoner if he were there—if I was there, I used to enter it; if the prisoner were there, he would enter it, or hand it to me to enter—there should have been the entry of every sum in the book—the bundle"of delivery notes was when I first went there in July—the Block Fuel Company had then for some time ceased to exist.

ROBERT WALKER . I was formerly clerk to the Block Fuel Syndicate, Limited—this wharf was one of their branches—they went into liquidation on March 25, 1891; they carried on business at the wharf up to 3rd or 10th April last year.

Cross-examined. The prisoner settled up the accounts by about 25th April by paying about 5s., and any accounts outstanding then were collected from the City office; the accounts were supposed to be settled each week. He-examined. April 25th was the last day he was concerned in this matter.

JOHN DAVEY . I am a yard foreman at Parliament Wharf—the prisoner was there as manager—I don't remember his private address; he told me to send the coals up there to his house, and said "Call at my house for the delivery tickets"—his house was up north, the other side of Holloway—I did not go there—he very often told me to send coals there—sometimes he would bring delivery tickets to send with them in the name of Mr. Collins—if he did not bring the tickets I used to have a slip of paper, which he left on the clerk's desk, to take with them; some of the slips were in his writing, and some in the clerk's, I believe—the delivery tickets were not the printed tickets of the Seaborne Coal Company—I suppose it went on for nearly twelve months—the house was somewhere in Dalston—I said I thought it was not quite right without tickets; he said, "It will be all right; send them up with my orders."

By the JURY. The prisoner was in the habit of sending away coals with slips of paper made out in his writing, and not with printed official forms of the Seaborne Company.

Cross-examined. A great many times we did not have the slips back signed; it was only when we took them to Collins that we used to have them back—the slips were to send up to his house—I don't know where the coals went to—I cannot give the name of anybody to whom they were sent in this way except Collins—the carman would not bring the slips back—the coals were taken up to his house, and he would give them

orders where to take them to—the slips were nothing more than his name and address, and only his name on some—the carman did not provide himself with an ordinary form before he started.

EDWARD WINDER (85 City). On 17th November the prisoner was given into my custody by Mr. Bullen, to whom he said, "Is there no other course but this?"—Mr. Bullen said, "I can see no other course"—in answer to the charge at the station he said, "I have nothing more to say than I have already stated to Mr. Bullen. "

The prisoner in his statement before the Magistrate said that if, in answer to hit request at various times, matters had been properly looked into, no facts to support the charge could have been discovered.

Evidence for the Defence,

JOHN MCKIBBIN . I am a coal porter, of Arthur Road, Brixton—between September, 1890, and February, 1891,1 sent coal to the defendant and he paid me with these cheques (produced)—I think he was in an average way of business, he and a clerk and a manager were in the yard—I think latterly the staff was insufficient to cope with the business, when the younger one went in I think he was short-handed—this coal would represent about £190, about 350 tons—it was delivered to a barge at the wharf.

JOHN FISHAN . I am assistant officer of the high bailiff of the Shoreditch County Court—there is a judgment against the defendant obtained in October for £3 16s. 6d., it is still unsatisfied—I received a judgment on February 25th, 1891, at the suit of the London and Westminster Loan Company; the high bailiff returned it to the Court; I do not know whether it has been satisfied, it has not been paid to us—he has not gone to gaol for it.

Cross-examined. I did not know that he had a private banking account into which he was paying money, or that he paid in £15 2s. on October 3rd—I could not meet with him.

The prisoner received a good character.

GUILTY .— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.

OLD COURT. Saturday, January 23rd, 1892.

Before Mr. Common Serjeant.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-220
VerdictGuilty > lesser offence

Related Material

220. HENRY CORY (17) , Unlawfully attempting to carnally know Edith Menlove, aged ten years. Second Count, for an indecent assault.

MR. HUTTON Prosecuted, and MR. SANDS Defended.

The prisoner received a good character.

GUILTY on the Second Count. Six Months' without Hard Labour; being paralysed.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-221
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

221. WALTER HENRY COUTTS (19) , Stealing a cap, gown, hood, and bag, the goods of Henry Moore Bleeby.

MR. BAYLISS Prosecuted.

HENRY MOORE BLEEBY . I am a "lieutenant"in the Salvation "Army"; I am a B.A.(Lond.)—I was slightly acquainted with the prisoner at the beginning of December—on 29th December he stated that he was from South Africa, and was a Bachelor of Cape Town University, and a nephew of Baroness Burdett-Coutts and Sir Gordon Spriggs, and asked me if I would lend him my robes to be photographed

in, as they were somewhat similar to his—I lent him my cape, gown, hood, and a bag to take them in—he said he was to be married on 8th January, and return to South Africa on 9th—he should have returned my things on 31st December—I found he was not related to the Baroness, and was not what he had stated; and I went to his lodgings on the 30th and found the things there—I asked him what he meant by the deception he had carried on; he said there were my things, that I could take them—they are worth about £5—the prisoner has nothing to do with the Salvation "Army"; he is a grocer's assistant I found.

WILLIAM BUTTERFIELD . I am a wine porter, of 4, Trafalgar Road, Haggerstone—about 12.50 on 30th December I was in Fleet Street, standing out of the rain, when the prisoner, who had two parcels, said, "It was not like this in Australia"—I had never seen him before—I asked him what part of Australia he came from; he said "Sydney"—a few seconds afterwards he asked me whether I could show him a pawnshop—I told him there was one in Fleet Street, on the right-hand side, and I went with him there; it was full of people, and he did not go in then we went on to Fore Street, I carrying the parcel of books and the prisoner the other parcel; he asked me to go, and said he would pay me—he said the parcel he was carrying was a clerical robe and hat; that he had only been over here three weeks, and that he was going to pawn them; he wanted £3 on them, as he owed his landlord £2 15s. for board and lodgings—he took the parcel of books from me and took that and the other parcel into the pawnshop—I did not go in—he came out in about ten minutes with both parcels, and said the pawnbroker said they were no good to him—he asked me if I knew a bookseller's; he would try to sell the books—we went to two bookseller's, but did no business—then he mentioned the name of the Rev. Mr. McKay, and said he knew him—the two booksellers and myself advised him to go to Mr. McKay and get assistance from him if his story was true—he thought Mr. McKay was going to advance money on the robe—then he tried another pawnbroker's in the Kingsland Road; he came out and said, "They only offered me £1 for the robe, I wanted £2"—then we went to Mr. McKay's—I did not go with him into either of the two pawnbroker's.

Cross-examined by the Prisoner. You said you would pay me—I did not say I would take you to a bookseller's.

Re-examined. I was with him from 12.45 till he was taken into custody, through Mr. McKay, about five o'clock—he did not pay me.

GEORGE PETER MCKAY . I am a Baptist minister, of the Manse, Watford Road—I first saw the prisoner on 30th December, when he came to my house and said he was lodging at the house of one of the members of the church of which I am pastor, and he was in temporary difficulties, because he had come from South Africa, his people being very wealthy people there, and he having passed his B. A. degree, they were anxious he should have a holiday; that at Southampton he had lost his bag, with £40, and the people with whom he had been lodging for ten days or a fortnight naturally wanted the money; that he had been to his father's bankers in the City, and they had cabled to Cape Town, but while he was waiting he was in financial difficulties, and he desired me to give him a letter to the people with whom he was lodging requesting them to keep him for a week or so until his money did come—I said, "I cannot do so unless I know more about you"—he said he had with him

his cap and gown belonging to the B. A. degree, and those he offered to leave with me as security, if I was in any way security for him, or he would leave them with the people with whom he was staying—I said I should go to the house with him—he said he was willing; and I went to the house with him—on the way I made various inquiries of him as to his people; he said his father was very wealthy, and had been three times Mayor of Cape Town, and asked me if I knew Sir Gordon Spriggs, and other people—I went into the prisoner's room at his lodgings—he asked me to wait a moment, and he came back in one or two minutes saying it was all right; that while he had been out a letter had come from his father's bankers to the effect that they had had a reply, and that he might go tomorrow and obtain the money—I said, "Perhaps you will kindly show me the letter?"—he said he would, and left the room, and in a few minutes returned with a pencil note, which he carefully doubled over, showing me only a portion, and I found that was a request for him to call at an address in Ludgate Hill—I said this was no letter such as he had given me to understand he had received—I began to turn it over, and he said he could not show me that, and made a snatch at it, and it was torn—I afterwards looked at the part I had in my hand, and found it was a request for him to call, lest a charge of obtaining money by false pretences should be preferred against him—he had told me he had a number of books which he was willing to leave with me, as well as the cap and gown—when I had seen the books, I communicated with the police—he gave me to understand that the cap and gown were his own property, and he wished to leave them with me as security.

WILLIAM WRIGHT (Detective N). Clover brought the prisoner to the station—when the charge of stealing this cap and gown was read to him, he said, "I did not steal the books nor the gown"—Clover is ill.

The prisoner in his defence said that he did not intend to steal the things but meant to redeem them when his people sent his money.

GUILTY .— Eight Months' Hard Labour. There was another indictment against the prisoner for stealing the books.

OLD COURT.—Monday, January 25th, 1892.

Before Mr. Common Serjeant.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-222
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

222. ANNA MARGARETTA FLUGEL, alias REESE , Unlawfully obtaining by false pretences two dresses and other goods from Peter Robinson, and other goods from Thomas Wallis and Co. by false pretences. Other Counts, For conspiracy with other persons.



FRANK CROCOMBE . I am assistant to Messrs. Wallis and Co., of Holborn Circus—on 21st November, between eleven and twelve midday, the prisoner came into my department and wanted to be shown some dresses; she said she was commissioned by Mr. Mikschik to purchase a dress for his wife; she presented this card, "Mr. J. E. Mikschik, engineer and artist, 41, Finsbury Pavement, London, E. C. "; she said the things were to be sent to 28, Glaslyn Road, Crouch End; I wrote the address on this piece of paper; she selected a dress, and also a black Jersey bodice—I

made out this invoice for £3 12s.—she said the goods would be paid for on delivery—I put them into a box and sent it down to the parcel office—about twenty minutes afterwards Miss Barnard, an assistant in another department, handed me this paper, "Mr. Mikschik, 28, Glaslyn Road, mantle, £5 19s. 6d. "; I took the prisoner to Miss Barnard—I did not rive credit: the goods were sold for ready money, to be paid for on delivery;. this cheque for £17 2s. 11d. was brought back by the porter who took the goods; it went to our bankers in due course, and came back endorse "Account closed."

ADELA MARCHANT . I am an assistant to Messrs. Wallis—on 21st November the prisoner was brought to my department by Mass Barnard; she said she wanted a hat; she selected one, and said it was for a gentleman for his wife; the price was £1 3s. 9d.—she said she wanted ft tent with some other goods that she had bought at our establishment; he showed me a card, with an address upon it; I wrote the address in her presence, "Mr. Mikschik, 28, Glaslyn Road, Crouch End—I made out an invoice; this is it—she said the goods were to be paid for on delivery; she said she wanted a coat for a little child, and I took her to another department.

CLARA MARY LETHEREN . I am an assistant to Messrs. Wallis & Co—on 21st November the prisoner was brought to me by Miss Marchant; she purchased various goods and all sorts of underlinen for a lady, and a costume for a child—she gave the address on a card, when I wrote on a piece of paper (as before), the articles came to £6 7s. 8 1/2 d.; she said the goods were to be paid for on delivery—I gave the goods and the bill to Mr. Crocombe.

Cross-examined. I parted with the goods because I thought they were to be paid for on delivery—I was told a gentleman would pay for them, by a cheque—we invariably send goods to be paid for on delivery.

CECIL AUST . I am a porter to Wallis & Co.—on Saturday, 21st November, I received a parcel addressed to Mr. Mikschik, 28, Glaslyn Road, Crouch End; also an envelope enclosing the bills—I went with them to that address; I knocked at the door; it was opened by a man he told me to take the parcel into the house—I went into a room and saw a woman and a little child—the man and woman spoke to each other—the man gave me this cheque for £17 odd, and I left the goods—the prisoner is not the woman I saw—on the Monday I handed the cheque to the cashier—the man went out of the room and I brought back the cheque—the figure 7 was a little wet.

Cross-examined. I did not see the prisoner there—when the man opened the door I said, "Is this Mr. Mikschik?"he said, "Yes—he did not say, "I am Mr. Mikschik"—I said I had some clothes from Wallis's, and he said, "Come in, please. "

HILDA GAUSTER . I am an assistant at Peter Robinson's—on November, about two o'clock, the prisoner was brought into my department by another assistant—the prisoner spoke to me German—I am of German nationality—she said, "I am commissioned by a gentleman friend to buy a costume for his wife as a birthday present, and she selected one at seven guineas—when she first came in she asked me if I recollected serving her about twelve months ago—I said, No, as I see so many people in the course of the day"—she then said she wanted better dress, and she selected one at thirteen guineas—the body ol the

first dress was not made up, and she said she would buy a jersey to wear whilst the body was made—I then took her into the mantle department—on the way there she said the gentleman could well afford to make a handsome present, because the lady was bringing him a fortune, 25,000 something, either pounds or marks—she selected a mantle at four guineas, and then a fur mackintosh at 31s. 6d., a hat for three guineas, an umbrella for £ 8s. 6d., and sundry other articles, making £41 10s. 8d.—I made out these two bills—these (produced) are the umbrella, the dress, the mantle, and petticoat I sold her—all the other articles I have since seen at the pawnbroker's—she gave me a card, and I copied the address on this other card, "Mr. J. E. Mikschik, Engineer and Artist, 41, Finsbury Pavement, E. C."—she also showed me a private card, with "28, Glaslyn Road, Crouch End,"on it, and I copied it in pencil—she said the goods were to be paid for on delivery—I believed her statement.

Cross-examined. I understood that she was buying these goods for Mr. Mikschik for his wife; that she was their agent—it was the promise for payment on delivery that induced me to part with them.

JOHN AUSTIN . I am a salesman in the employ of Peter Robinson—on 21st November I received a box addressed to Mr. Mikschik, 28, Glaslyn Road, which I took with some bills to that address—the prisoner opened the door; I told her I had brought goods from Peter Robinson's—she said, "Bring them inside"—I took them into a room, where was another woman and a child—the prisoner said the other lady could not speak English—I opened the box; it contained dresses and various articles of apparel; the prisoner examined them, and the other lady tried them on in my presence—the prisoner said they were all correct—I gave these two bills to the prisoner, one for £32 and the other for £9 odd—she left the room, leaving them on the table—she came back and gave me this cheque—it appeared to have been just written; it is for £41 10s. 8d.—I took with me this delivery note, which was signed "A. Mikschik"—I took the cheque and handed it to our cashier—on the following Wednesday he gave it back to me, and I went back to 28, Glaslyn Road—the prisoner was not there; only a broker's man in possession—I met Sergeant Brock-well there.

Cross-examined. I am sure it was the prisoner who opened the door to me she left the bills on the table when she went out of the room, and returned with the cheque.

WHITEMAN COOPER . I am assistant-manager of the London Trading Bank Limited, 12, Coleman Street—on 12th October, 1891, J. E. Mikschik, of 41, Finsbury Pavement, opened an account with a credit of £22 17s. 2d.; I saw him sign the signature-book—I have a certified copy of his account—he paid in, on 27th October, £20, on 28th October 7s., on 2nd November £2, 5th November £5, in all £50 4s. 2d.—he drew out the whole of that between 24th October and 17th November, by a bout twenty-one separate cheques, leaving the account on 17th November 4s. 9d. to the good; the bank charged that as commission on the account, and closed the account by this registered letter on 17th November after that cheques were dishonoured—these cheques from Wallis and Peter Robinson, signed by our customer Mikschik, were presented; there was nothing to meet it, and I caused it to be marked "Account closed"—both cheques are after due notice of the closing of the account—when Mikschik opened the account he gave a reference to one of our customers

known to us a dozen years, who brought and introduced him as a respect able man known to himself—Mikschik had two cheque-books during the time he had an account; he did not return the unused cheques after the closing of the account; we have never received them—I know the prisoner; she opened an account in the name of Annie Reese, on 1st August, 1890; it was closed in January, 1891—one cheque was presented after it was closed—I never saw her from that time to this—the cheques (produced) are all signed by her, and these are some of the counterfoils of cheques issued to her.

Cross-examined. Our customer who introduced Mikschik was Begelmeyer—Ellis and Co., in the Wool Exchange, introduced the prisoner.

MARIA LOVELL . I am the wife of Charles Henry Lovell, a packer, living at 3, Temple Street, Dalston—about one o'clock on 28th October, 1891, the prisoner came alone, and took a bed-room and fitting-room at 7s. a-week; and she came the same night with a man, and slept there; they occupied the two rooms—she never told me her name, but I heard it mentioned by some one at the door as Reese—they went out about ten a.m., and came back about five and took tea, and stayed in—the prisoner said they had a mantle-maker's business in the City—on every Wednesday their rent was due—on Saturday, 14th, I asked the prisoner to pay the rent due, and on the Sunday she said she would see what she could do for me before mid-day Tuesday, and she told me she had bought four machines and a table and some irons, and was going to set up in business for herself in the City—on the following Wednesday, 18th, she paid me 10s.—on 21st November the prisoner came home about six o'clock, bringing Julia Kumer with her—the prisoner said she was one of her hands she had brought from the City—Kumer had a parcel—the prisoner said she had been working very hard all the week making a dress and mantle, and when she sent them home by a little boy who was not to leave them without being paid, they could not pay him, and so he brought them back, and there they were—she asked me who she could get to pledge them—I had been asking her for more rent—I said, "I will"—she was carrying this umbrella—she opened the parcel and took out this dress and mantle, and told me to pledge them—she also took out this petticoat, which afterwards I saw hanging up behind the parlour door—I pledged the things about six o'clock at Mr. Ridgway's, close by, where I had been before and was known—they knew my proper name, but I pledged always in the name of Smith—they lent me on them £1, less two-pence—I gave the 19s. 10d. and the ticket to the prisoner—she had stated no price, but told me to get as much as I could—I don't know how far it is by road from 28, Glaslyn Road to our house; it took us three-quarters of an hour to go by rail—on the Sunday, the day after the pawning, the prisoner told me if I liked to come to 28, Glaslyn Road, Crouch End, there were some odds and ends, if I would like them and would fetch them, and I went on Monday morning with Mrs. Ryder—I saw the prisoner on the step of 28, Glaslyn Road—she beckoned me in and told me there were a few odds and ends for me—there was a bassinette done up, and she said I must get on home, as she had to get into the City—Kumer was acting as servant there, as far as I saw—in the kitchen were table, chairs, and things—I went into no other room, but the' doors of other rooms were open, and, as I passed by, they looked nicely furnished

—I took away the odds and ends—about four the same afternoon the prisoner came to my house with a young woman, who spoke in a foreign language, which I did not understand—after a short time the prisoner came and asked mo to take a note to Baudach's barber's shop in the Ball's Pond Road—some one else took it, and afterwards Reese, the man. living with the prisoner, came and spoke to the prisoner and the foreign woman—they remained some time together in a room—this blotting-pad I have seen in use by the man Reese in my rooms which they hired; I saw the police seize it, and they have had it since—the prisoner came back in the evening alone, and later Reese came—on 20th, I think, the police came and asked me some questions, and I gave them information—I last saw the prisoner, before I saw her at the Policecourt, on Wednesday, the next day, when she left my house—the policeman said to her, in my presence, that he had arrested Reese—during the time the prisoner was at my lodgings I saw her making a plain bodice, which I once afterwards saw her wearing; beyond that I have not seen her do anything.

Cross-examined. She is foreign; I always understood her; she does not speak English as well as I do—I might be mistaken in what she said about 4he pledging; I understood generally that she wanted me to pledge them—she said, Take them and get as much as you can on them"—I asked them to make them as much as they could—I am in the habit of dealing at the pawnshop, and my credit is good there—£1 was the utmost I could get.

SARAH HANNAH RYDER . I am the wife of Joseph Ryder, of 26, Valentine Road, South Street, Hackney—on Monday, 23rd November, I went to see Mrs. Lovell, and I saw the prisoner also, who said that a friend of hers was going to move; and she said to Mrs. Lovell, "Would you like to go there; there will be a few things you can have"—I went with Mrs. Lovell next morning to 28, Glaslyn Road—I saw the prisoner there—Mrs. Lovell took away some things—on Sunday evening, 22nd, Mrs. Lovell showed me this umbrella; the prisoner was not there then, but afterwards Mrs. Lovell said to her, "I have shown my friend your umbrella"—and the prisoner said, "It does not much matter."

KATE FLORENCE BARNARD . I am an assistant in Messrs. Wallis and Company's mantle department—on 21st November one of our assistants brought the prisoner to me—she wished for a mantle for another lady she selected one—I made out this invoice for £1 5s. 6d.—she said the mantle was to be sent to 28, Glaslyn Road; I got the name from another department—she said the size did not matter, it was for a married lady—she wished to see a hat, and I took her to another department—I gave the mantle to one of the assistants to be put with other goods.

Cross-examined. She told me the goods were not for herself, she was commissioned to buy them for another lady—I delivered them to Mr. Crocombe to be sent to where other goods had been ordered.

SARAH GLOVER . I am the wife of William Glover, we lodge at Mrs. Lovell's, 3, Temple Street—on 23rd November the prisoner, whom I knew as Mrs. Reese, asked me to go to Crouch End with her—a woman she called Mrs. Mikschik was with her, and the man Reese—we went to the bottom of Temple Street together, and then I went alone to Crouch End with a note, which Mrs. Mikschik asked me, in the prisoner's presence, to take; the prisoner gave me sixpence for my fare—

the servant, Miss Kumer, was in the house there alone—all the things in it were packed up; Miss Kumer came back with me to Temple Street.

JULIA KUMER (Interpreted). I am now a general servant in Mrs. Baudach's service, at 80, Ball's Fond Road she is a midwife, and her husband a barber—on 22nd November I went into her service—before that I had been in Mrs. Mikschik's service, at 28, Glaslyn Road, Crouch End—the prisoner, whom I knew as Mrs. Reese, came to the house on the Friday previous to my leaving the service, with a man whose name I do not know—Mr. and Mrs. Mikschik were in the house, and the prisoner and the man stayed in the room, where they were for some time—next day, Saturday, the prisoner came to Glaslyn Road, and was with Mrs. Mikschik that afternoon—a man came and went into the room they were in—the prisoner said, "That is my brother"—later that evening she told me to carry a parcel for her to Dalston; I did so; I saw Mrs. Lovell—the prisoner took it from me and undid it; it contained a dress—on Sunday, the prisoner told me I could not stay in Mrs. Mikschik's service any longer—Mr. and Mrs. Mikschik lived at 28, Glaslyn Road; I was never in the prisoner's service—I have never been to a shop in the City kept by the prisoner—I think this is the house key of 28, Glaslyn Road—I think this is a photograph of the prisoner's brother.

Cross-examined. I only saw the prisoner at the Mikschiks' on the Friday, Saturday, Sunday, and Monday—I had not seen her before that—I was in Mrs. Mikschik's Service for six weeks—the prisoner told me that all these transactions she did for Mrs. Mikschik; I did not hear her say that they were well off—two gentlemen, whose names I do not know, first came to ask me to give evidence—they asked me several questions; they did not threaten me in any way.

Re-examined. Mr. Tauber lived at 26, Glaslyn Road.

FRANK GYNGELL . I am manager to Mr. Fish, a pawnbroker, of 179, Kingsland Road—on 25th November the prisoner pawned this umbrella with me—this is the duplicate. (In the name of Mrs. Reese, 3, Temple Street.)

Cross-examined. I lent her 4s. on it; it is not gold-mounted, as described; it is a metal mount, plated with gold—I believe I could sell it for 15s. 6d., but they always deteriorate by lying by.

ERNEST HARVEY . I am manager to Walter Ridgway, pawnbroker, of 21, Dalston Lane—this dress and mantle (produced) were pawned with me on November 21st for £1, in the name of A. Smith, 3, Temple Street, but her name is Mrs. Lovell.

Cross-examined. They are worth £3 or £4, but I would not lend more than £2 10s. on them, because they would deteriorate—she asked me for the most I could lend, and if she had pressed for more I would have lent 30s. more—I have heard that they were sold by Peter Robinson for £17 4s.

MARY GROOMBRIDOE . I am the wife of a constable, and have searched females at Highgate Police-station—I searched the prisoner there, and found a large number of documents, which I handed to Sergeant Brockner.

MARIA SCHENY . I am the wife of George Scheny—on December 7th

I searched the prisoner at Northfield Hall, Highgate, where the Sessions are held—she was wearing this petticoat.

HERMAN BTTERMAN (Detective Sergeant). On 24th November I arrested Carlos Otto Holfield—this (produced) is his photograph—he has several aliases—he has gone by the name of Reese—he had five months' hard labour last year in Germany—he was taken there on an extradition warrant—I found this latch-key on him and two return halves of railway tickets from Broad Street to Crouch End, and from Broad Street to Dalston—the latch-key belongs to 28, Glaslyn Road, but the lock has been removed—I also found on him a pawn-ticket for a dress and mantle—he made a statement to me, in consequence of which I went to 3, Temple Street, Dalston, on 24th December, and saw the prisoner—I told her in English to turn out her box; there was some dirty linen in it, so I did not do it myself—she did so—I told her I had arrested the man she was living with—she handed me, among other things, a number of cheques and counterfoils, and these eight cards, "Mr. T. E. Mikschik, Finsbury Pavement"—Bedal Alogaher, alias Holfield, is the man who has gone to Germany—there is a firm of Mikschik and Powder, architects and builders.

Re-examined. I know Holfield, but not under the name of Ventura.

THOMAS BROCKWELL (Detective Sergeant). On November 25th, by direction of the Commissioners of Police, I went to 28, Glaslyn Road, Crouch End, and found a broker's man in possession, on behalf of the landlord—I looked over the house, and found a small quantity of furniture left—on 30th November I received this joint warrant against the prisoner and Mikschik—I could not find them—a warrant for a woman named Mikschik was obtained on 18th December—her description was circulated, with the usual information which goes to the City Police—on 3rd December, about eight o'clock, I stopped the prisoner in Bishopsgate Street, from the description I had received—I said, "Is your name Mrs. Reese?"—she said, "Yes"—I said, "I am a police officer; you are wanted on a charge of obtaining a quantity of goods, by false pretences, from Messrs. Wallis and Co, Holborn Circus, on 21st November; there is also another charge against you of obtaining a quantity of goods from Peter Robinson and Co., of Oxford Street, on the same day"—she said, "I did get the things for Mr. Mikschik"—I took her by train, and pulled some photographs out of my pocket, which I had got in the course of my inquiry—she was sitting by my side, and when she saw this one she said, "This is Holfield'S wife"—Holfield is the man who was living with her at 3, Temple Street; she is a woman of the town—it is a photograph of a woman and child—I found it at 11, Alfred Place, Tottenham Court Road—the prisoner gave her name at the station, Anna Margaretta Flugel, and said she had no fixed home—I knew that she and Reese, alias Holfield, had been living at 3, Temple Street, Dalston; I went there on December 9th, and found this blotting-pad, which has been identified as used by Reese; I spoke to the landlady, and took it away with me—a number of documents were found on the prisoner, in German, relating to her identity and nationality—I directed Mrs. Groom-bridge to search her, who gave me this pawnticket for an umbrella.

Cross-examined. I found a passport on the prisoner, which gave me full information as to her name, and I said, "Is your name Mrs. Reese?"

—she said, "Yes"—the passport gives her name Anna Margaretta Flugel, née Reese—she produced the pawn ticket herself.

GUILTY .— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour.

OLD COURT.—Tuesday, January 26th, 1892.

Before Mr. Common Serjeant.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-223
VerdictGuilty > unknown; Guilty > lesser offence
SentenceMiscellaneous > sureties; Imprisonment > hard labour; Imprisonment > hard labour; Imprisonment > hard labour; Imprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

223. JOHN BUTLER, DAVID APPLEBY, MICHAEL HAYES, JOHN MCCARTHY , and ARTHUR HAMPSHIRE were indicted for a riot, and assaulting William George Sells, Frederick Chadwick, and others.



JOHN WINGFIELD . I live at Forest Hill Terrace, and am foreman at Carron Wharf—a strike commenced at the wharf on September 14th, in consequence of the determination to employ permanent hands; it continued to the end of November—during that time the work was done by free labourers not attached to the Union—the wharf was picketed—Hampshire was employed there, and went out when the strike commenced.

Cross-examined. I have known Hampshire five or six years—he occasionally sampled tea, but he was looked upon as a labourer.

JOHN PROAL . I am a clerk in the employ of the London and Edinburgh Shipping Company, employed at the Hermitage Steam Wharf—there was a strike there at the same time as at the Carron Wharf; the same reason applies to both'—the wharf was picketed, and the work was done by free labourers, with the assistance of the clerks and engineers—Butler was employed as a stevedore; the strike did not affect them, but when the men went out on strike Butler went out with them.

Cross-examined. I have known Butler seventeen or eighteen years—he has borne a good character as far as I know—I believe picketing is a perfectly legitimate occupation.

JOHN REGAN (Thames Polios Inspector). I have been on duty while the strike has been going on, and have seen Butler acting as a picket—complaints were made of his using bad language to the tree labourers at the wharf, and I spoke to him more than once, and advised him to tell his companions whatever they did not to take the law into their own hands—he knew the case I was engaged in—I have known him fourteen or sixteen years—on one occasion he had a subscription list—I know Hampshire as being on strike, but not McCarthy—I have accompanied the free labourers from Wapping Railway Station to their work—they would pass the Union Hall to get to Wapping Station, and in passing it I heard, McCarthy and Hampshire calling them blacklegs, cows' sons, and wh—'s sons.

Cross-examined. I have known Butler fourteen years as a hard-working, honest man—he once complained to me of the free labourers using bad language to him, and I told him I would try and stop it—I have known Hampshire about two years; he is an honest, hard-working man—he was employed as a tea sampler—I have known McCarthy from a child; he is an honest, hard-working man, in constant employment—he was not on strike; he was working at St. John's Wharf.

WILLIAM GEORGE SELLS . I live in Newcastle Street, Greenwich—I went into employment at Hermitage Wharf as a free labourer when the

strike began, and worked there from September to November—I am not working there now—on 1st November I came up from New Cross to Cannon Street Station, and got into the wharf about 11.55—when I was close to the bridge leading to the wharf I met two men, who asked me where I was going; I said, "To work"—one clutched the handkerchief I had my food in, and got away, and as I crossed the road to get away Butler struck me with his fist on the right side of my cheek—he was not one of the two men—the blow drove me into the road, and I fell, and a few came round me, and somebody put a sharp instrument into my back, and I was laid up for three days, but I did not attend a doctor—when Butler struck me he called me a black wh—s bastard—I have known Butler by sight seven or eight weeks—I saw him standing at the beer shop opposite the wharf gate—I have heard him threaten people, and say lie would wait on them—I remained on the ground, face downwards, till some man picked me up, and then went into Hermitage Wharf.

Cross-examined. I saw the two men quite distinctly; I cannot say their names—I did not describe them to the police—I saw a policeman in the lane, 400 or 500 yards away—I was on the ground five or six minutes—there were 150 or 160 women, children, and men there—I started from Cannon Street Station to walk alone, and I was alone when the two men came up—my bundle could be seen in my hand.

JACK CHADWICK . I live in Dunswood Street, Euston Road—I am not connected with the Union—I was employed at Hermitage Wharf—I go by train to Bishopsgate Station, and walk to the wharf—on the night of 1st November I started with my son, and on arriving at Bishopsgate proceeded to walk to the wharf, and when we got to the bottom of Nightingale Lane eight or nine men came towards us; and there were a lot behind them—it was then about 11.30, we had to get to work about twelve—as we reached the men I heard a whizzing noise, and said to my son, "look out, Fred!"he bobbed his head, but caught the blow by the side of his head; I made a grasp at the article, and to the best of my opinion it was a strap with a piece of lead or a knot at the end—Butler is the man who used it, but I did not know his name; I had seen him once, a day or two before, when he said he should like to thrash me—I saw a big lump on my son's head, over his right ear, and a flow of blood came—we went straight to our work, met a constable, and made a statement to him—my son worked for two or three days, and then got ill, and has done no work since; he is disarranged in his mind, and my brother is looking after him.

Cross-examined. He is not here—this was just before we got to the swing bridge—I started at ten o'clock and this was about 11.30; I had to get to my work at twelve—the thing which whizzed knocked my son down—a second blow was struck, and it would have knocked Nelson down, who was just behind me, if I had not spoken in time; I said, "Look out, Nelson!" and pushed him on one side—at the time the blow was struck I heard some one say, "Here is another blackleg; let them have it!"

Re-examined. My son's health was all right till then.

CHARLES BULL . I live at Glenster Road, Greenwich, and was working as a free labourer at the Hermitage Wharf while the strike was going on—at that time I have seen Butler walk up and down outside the wharf—I came to London Bridge Station to go to my work, and went by

myself with no police escort—I carried my food in a handkerchief in my hand—about a quarter to twelve p.m. on 1st November I was going towards the Hermitage Wharf, and when I got to the bottom of the lane, just by the bridge, I saw some men, one of whom said to me (it was not one of the prisoners), "We will have you out of it in a week's time," and called me a f—g bastard—I walked on—Butler, who had been on the opposite side by the corn wharf when those expressions were made use of loud enough for him to hear, followed me and said, "What will you do?" and as he spoke he struck at me; I put up my left arm to defend my face, at which the blow was aimed, and he caught me on the arm—he was arrested in the act by a plain-clothes constable—I went to the station and charged him.

Cross-examined. I am employed by the Shipping Federation—there was a very great crowd about there—I cannot say if they were with Butler—I don't know who the three or four men who spoke to me were; they did not attempt to assault me—it was past twelve when the assault was all over and I got to the Hermitage Wharf—only a bridge, not quite so long as this Court, divides it from the Carron Wharf—I did not, at about the time I was going in, see thirty free labourers charging a lot of Union men; nor did I hear Sergeant White trying to dissuade them from doing it—I heard no suggestion that they did charge the crowd—there were a lot of women and children in the crowd—I did nothing to Butler—I did not use my stevedore's hook, it was in my pocket; my hand was on it—I should have been obliged in self-defence to nee it if a great many had been on me; I don't say I should have used it; it was half-way out of my pocket—I did not try to strike anybody—I stopped Butler's blow with my left arm; it hurt me for a time—it was with his fist.

Re-examined. I was assaulted close to the swing-bridge, just outside the wharf gates—I should reckon there were over a hundred there at the time; it was the time that all the free labourers would be going into work—the men were going about in twenties and thirties.

EDMUND STREETER (314 H). On the night of 1st November I was sent in plain clothes to Hermitage Wharf—I was with another plain-clothes constable—I was at the bridge at nearly twelve o'clock, and saw the crowd outside as the men were going to their work—I saw Butler strike at Bull, who guarded the blow off with his arm, and I ran up and put my hand on to Butler, and said I was a police constable, and should take him into custody for assaulting the man while following his employment—Bull ran into the wharf; I called him back from the door—I took Butler to the station.

Cross-examined. I was coming over the bridge when Butler struck Bull, and was about twelve yards off; no persons were between me and Bull—I did not see two or three men speak to Bull—I did not hear anything said by Butler or Bull—I and another constable were together all the time.

ETHELBERT AUSTEN (60 H). On 1st November I was sent with the last witness to the wharf, in consequence of what was going on—I went into Hermitage Wharf about a quarter to twelve—I saw about 100 people scattered about outside—I saw Butler raise his hand to strike Bull, and Bull raise his to protect his face—as Butler struck at him he said, "You b——bastard!"—I went up at once to take him into

custody—I took him part of the way to the station, and then handed him to Streeter—I and the other constable were sent to the wharf between half-past eleven and a quarter to twelve, and we hurried there sharply on account of what was happening there.

Cross-examined. I and Streeter were not exactly together on Hermitage Bridge; he was a little behind me, two or three yards or a foot—I distinctly heard Butler use the expression; he said it pretty loud—I did not hear Bull make any reply—when I first saw Butler and Bull they were walking over the bridge together, not in a friendly way; Butler was halloaing at him—I did not take any notice of the words that were said until this blow was struck.

Re-examined. There was a good deal of shouting and noise there as these men were going in at the wharf gates.

CHARLES MADDOX . I was in November, Constable 148 H—at twelve o'clock on the night of 1st November I was on duty at the Hermitage Bridge, where I had been sent in plain clothes in consequence of the state of things—I found a number of people outside the gates; there was a great deal of noise; the free labourers were going in to their work at the time—I saw Appleby quarrelling with several men—I saw him strike a man several blows, I think about the shoulders—I cannot say if he was a free labourer—he came across and complained to me—I at once told Appleby I was a constable, and should take him into custody for an assault on a man—he struck me across the head and body with a stick and ran away—I followed, caught him, and with another constable's assistance took him to the station; he said, "I will go quietly."

Cross-examined. The man I saw assaulted by Appleby made no complaint at the station that I am aware of, and I do not know that he is going to be called here to-day—I was in plain clothes—there was a great deal of noise and disturbance—Appleby is a little man; he was rather excited he smashed my hat in with his stick, I was not hurt—he said at the station, when charged, "I ran because the crowd ran"—he went quietly to the station.

FREDERICK HERBERT (223 H). About twelve on this night I was on duty on the bridge—I saw Appleby running away, followed by Maddox; I went to his assistance and caught Appleby; he went quietly to the station.

Cross-examined. I did not see any assault.

WILLIAM GEORGE TURNER . I am employed at Hermitage Wharf—I know Appleby by sight, he worked at the coffee-shop opposite the wharf, where a crowd of thirty to fifty men used to stand while this strike was going on—I have noticed Appleby, while I was at work, standing at the door laughing and jeering at us.

Cross-examined. I don't object to his laughing, but it was not right when we were at work—I have seen him for about six months, but have had no dealings with him—I don't know about his character.

Re-examined. I did not use the coffee-shop.

FREDERICK STYLES . I live at Graveney Road, Tooting—I am not a member of the Union; I was employed at the Hermitage Wharf while the strike was going on, as a warehouseman—on this night I went to work about 11.45—I had to go out of East Smithfield and by Nightingale Lane, the corner of which is about five minutes' walk from the wharf—I saw there several men on one side of the way, and Hayes standing by

himself on the other side—four men were going directly in front of me I directly we turned the corner Hayes, who had no beard then, struck me across the head with something of metal; my hat took the brunt of the blow, but it cut my head; and when I took my hat off the blood came out of my hat—it knocked me to the ground—I got up and I looked at the man; he stood there and never moved, and I had plenty of opportunity of observing him—I looked round and saw such a menacing crowd of from ten to twenty men as to put me in fear, and I went to the wharf—afterwards a doctor was sent for, and my head was dressed—I described Hayes, and afterwards I saw him in custody and charged him.

Cross-examined. My head is all right now—I had never seen Hayes before to my knowledge—I heard no word when I was struck—he did not move away after he struck me, but stood still, and I got up and looked at him—I said nothing; I was not going to argue with an armed man—I saw no weapon in his hand—I did not see a constable—there were no women and children in the crowd; I met them afterwards with the other crowd on the bridge—there seemed to be an absence of police on this night.

Re-examined. I should think two hundred free labourers were employed at the Carron and Hermitage Wharves at this time; we could not nave a constable to look after each of us.

FREDERICK DICCONSON . (254 H). On this night, about 11.55, I was in uniform near the corner of Upper East Smithfield and Nightingale Lane—I saw between twenty and thirty people standing near that corner—I saw Hayes strike Styles, and went to arrest him, when I was struck in the middle of my back by some one else, and turned round—I then went after the man who struck me, but he got away—I then went back, and, with the assistance of another constable, took Hayes, who was with some men, to the station—I afterwards went to the wharf, where I found Styles—I took him to the station, and he picked out Hayes from other men—at the time Hayes struck Styles he said, "These are some of the blacklegs, let us give it them "

Cross-examined. I saw Hayes strike him and knock him to the ground—I was six feet away, and heard his observation distinctly—I came back in ten minutes after chasing the man who hit me, and found Hayes standing about ten yards from the place where the assault took place—he lives at 18, Upper East Smithfield, about three hundred or four hundred yards from this place.

Re-examined. Upper East Smithfield leads up to this bridge; it is at the top of Nightingale Lane, and Lower East Smithfield at the bottom.

PERCY JOHN CLARK , M. R. C. S. I practice at Spital Square—I examined Sells on 13th November—I found a punctured wound, almost entirely healed, on the bottom of his spine—I saw a corresponding hole in his trousers—it was such a wound as would be caused by the pointed end of a stevedore's hook—I examined Styles on the morning of 2nd November; he was suffering from a contused wound, about one inch long, on the left side of his head, at the back; such as would have been caused by some heavy, blunt instrument, such as the edge of this hook—it had bled a good deal, but was not serious.

Cross-examined. A good many other things might have caused it; a poker would not, it would require something with more edge.

ARTHUR THOMAS ASKEW . I live at Bower Street, and am a free labourer, and I was working at Carron Wharf during the strike—on this night I was coming down Nightingale Lane to go to work a little before twelve, with Armstrong and Stroud—Armstrong was ten or fifteen yards in front, and Stroud some distance behind me—as I went up to the wharf I saw a party of men—one of them spoke to me, and another, whom I do not identify, struck me with his fist on the right side of the mouth—he was partly behind and half covered by the man who spoke to me—I complained to a constable.

Cross-examined. I was in the road.

FREDERICK WINSLEY (402 H). On this night, about 11.40, I was on duty in Nightingale Lane—I saw Askew and Armstrong approaching to go to their work, and McCarthy and about thirteen or fourteen men were running backwards and forwards on the road that leads to the docks, halloaing and shouting—I watched them and saw McCarthy strike Askew in the face; Askew ran towards the docks—I apprehended McCarthy for the assault—he had been shouting and halloaing with the crowd—I had seen him and Hampshire before with others against the walls, when I was one of an escort taking free labourers to the wharves—I was patrolling Nightingale Lane—I took him to the station—I never took my eyes off him after the assault till I apprehended him—another man was a few yards behind when Askew was struck, but there was no one with him—Hampshire was not there at the time.

Cross-examined. McCarthy and his party were going towards the London Docks the opposite way to Askew—I arrested McCarthy immediately after he assaulted Askew; he only ran about five yards and then stood still; he ran after Askew, who ran away—he said, "I ran because the crowd ran; I did not strike him"—Askew failed to identify him—I was not ten yards away—there were only about twelve or fourteen people about—I did not ask them to identify him, because they were with him—none of the other prisoners were with him at the time.

PERCY JOHN CLARK (Re-examined). Serjeant Rolfe is suffering from bronchitis, and unable to leave his bed.

WILLIAM HENRY NELSON . I live at Carnbrook Terrace, Old Kent Road, and was working at Hermitage Wharf, and on this night I was going to work down Nightingale Lane about 11.30—I walked behind Chad wick and his son—I saw men coming from the opposite direction, and as they got close to me they said, "Here come some more b——blacklegs, let them have it"—Butler, whom I knew by sight, struck young Chadwick with either a piece of leather or a piece of rope with something at the end of it; it made a sissing noise as it went through the air—a second blow was aimed at me, and Chadwick said, "Look out, old pal" and pushed me on one side, and I escaped—I made my way off as quickly as I could.

EDWARD ARMSTRONG . I am a labourer—on November 1st I was going to work at Carron Wharf, and Hampshire, who was with another man, said, "Where are you going to?"—I said, "Mind your own business"—I was advised to go back by the men with me, and attempted to do so—I had a bundle in my hand—the crowd got round me, and Hampshire said, "This is one of the b——y blacklegs," and made a blow at me; I drew back, and tried to get out of the crowd—I received kicks from persons who I cannot identify; I staggered, and got another

kick—Hampshire said, "You b——y well shall not go to work tonight"—I was kicked on my thigh and testicles, and went to the hospital.

PETER HENDERSON (178 H). I took Armstrong to the hospital.

HARRY SLY (455 H). On November 1st, about 11.45 p.m., I was on duty in Nightingale Lane, and saw Armstrong coming along shouting "Police!"—he pointed out Hampshire as the man who assaulted him, and charged him; he said, "All right, I will go quietly to the station."

Cross-examined. He said to the inspector at the station, "I only crossed the street."

JAMES PROUD . I live at Stone Street, Limehouse; I was working at Carron Wharf; on November 1st Armstrong and I went to work together—we met some men in Nightingale Lane, and Hampshire said, "Here is another of the cows' sons coming," and asked Armstrong where he was going and what he had his tommy for—that is the name for food—he hit at Armstrong—thirty or forty others came round, and I went back; I did not go through the crowd.

Cross-examined. It was about 11.40—I did not say at the Police-court, "I told Armstrong not to answer."

JOHN OWEN (349 H). On the night of November 1st I was on fixed point duty, and was told off to assist some labourers to the Hermitage and Carron wharves; there was a disturbance in Nightingale Lane, and I saw Hampshire there; he saw Armstrong speaking to me and ran up the Lane; I called to No. 274, who. stopped him and took him to Leman Street-station.

Cross-examined. This was about 11.40; Hampshire might have heard Armstrong say that he had assaulted him—he only ran seven or nine yards.

WILLIAM WRIGHT . I am one of the free labourers working at Carron Wharf; I live at Edmonton—on this Sunday evening I left home so as to get to my work by twelve o'clock—I saw a man on the ground on Tower Hill, surrounded by a crowd, but I did not see them do anything to him; there was too much of a scuffle—I was with two other men—I heard a yell at the top of Nightingale Lane—I got a blow on the side of my face from a tall man in a light suit, which knocked me down—I heard one of my friends screaming—I managed to dodge away—I felt something which I thought was a hook—I was carrying my bag in my hand.

Cross-examined. I was given in custody by mistake.

JOSIAH SLATTENDEN (Police Inspector). Complaints were lodged with me, and I placed constables on special duty outside the wharves, and had men, some in uniform and some in plain clothes, to escort the men—I did not know Appleby till the charge was made against him; I believe he keeps a cook-shop opposite Hermitage Wharf; I have seen a bill posted in the window, "No blacklegs served here"—I was on duty in Leman Street on Sunday night when Hayes was brought in and charged with assault—I sent for Styles, who identified him—Hayes said, "When outside my place, seeing some men standing about down there, I went to see what it was, when I was arrested and brought here"—I took the charge against Hampshire—Hayes said, "I paced the distance out, and it would take 176 yards; there is a bend in the road, and he would not be able to see"—Hampshire said, "I stepped up to him and

asked him if ho was going to work, and ho said, (What has that to do with you?' I said, 'You had bettor go back'"—I thon wont down Nightingale Lane, and saw fragments of broken bottles and some hats and food; a number of people complained of assaults—most of the people going to work take their food in their handkerchief.

Cross-examined. Hampshire was charged with attempted assaults—the Union men have not come to mo to complain—the strike ended at the end of November—a great number of Union men have been taken back; I believe Hayes said he was standing outside his house and wont to see what it was; ho did not say that he could see anything from his house.

FRANCIS SMITH . I am a labourer at Hermitage Wharf; I went there after the strike—I used to go from Deptford to Wapping Station, where I arrived at 11.20 or 11. '30, and five or six constables mot me, and under their protection I went to my work—going down Union Street, Wapping, I passed the Union Hall; it is ton minutes' walk from Hermitage wharf—on Sunday, November 1st, I came to Wapping Station with my companions, and mot five or six constables waiting outside; we went down with them, and the doors of the Union Hall were thrown open, and about 150 men rushed out and said, "Here they are, lads; let us set about them"—they followed us down, bullying us all the way—when we got close to Coleman's Wharf I was caught hold of by my arm, and pulled among the crowd—I had my food in my hand; they took it away from mo, and also my hat—I was hit on the side of my face—I ran towards my fellow-workmen, and got into Hermitage Wharf; the Union men followed us there—my face was swollen from the blow, and I could not oat anything for two days.

Cross-examined. I did not notice any of the defendants there—it is a little over a quarter of a mile from Hermitage Wharf to Carron Wharf; it would take about ten minutes to walk.

FRANK MORRIS (38 Y). On the night of November 1st I went to Wapping Station with four other constables to escort those men to Hermitage Wharf—when we got to the Union nail, about 150 men came out into the roadway; they opened and allowed us to pass—we were in uniform—they were shouting, hooting, and halloaing—some of thorn went forward to the bridge to make a stand and prevent us crossing, but other constables came to our assistance, and enabled us to pass over, and we got the men in.

GEORGE LISLEY . I live at St. Olave's Chambers, Borough—on Nov. 1st I was going to work at Hermitage Wharf—I turned into Nightingale Lane about 12.40, and saw about fifty men coming towards St. George's Street from the wharf, and another crowd about twenty yards from me coming from Hermitage Wharf—they joined the first crowd and assaulted four men, struck them, and kicked thorn after they were down—I heard a man groaning, and heard someone say, "Give the b-s work; let them have it!"—I then saw three men going in the same direction towards the wharf with handkerchiefs in their hands, carrying their food—the crowd went over to them and knocked them down and kicked them in the same manner; I heard groans from them—there were 100 or 120 in the crowd—I also saw three other men assaulted and kicked—I saw three or four men leaving, and thought it host to leave with them—I walked right into the crowd unrecognised—I had no food with me—I ran to Leman Street Police-station and gave information.

Cross-examined. I did not see any of the prisoners.

GEORGE NEWBURY . I was employed at Carron Wharf—I was going to work on this Sunday night down Nightingale Lane about 11.60, and mot twenty or thirty men, one of whom gave me a blow on my cheek with a hook like this (produced)—it cut my cheek—I was knocked senseless, and taken to the hospital—a policeman came across to meet me—I saw lots of people chased, but did not see anyone struck.

Cross-examined. I do not know the prisoners.

DR. ARTHUR ST. LEDGER STATHAM . I examined the witness Armstrong, and found his left nostril a good deal swollen—that is consistent with such a kick as he has described; it would cause considerable pain—Newbury was brought to the hospital at the same time with an incised wound, just below his right eye, down to the bone; it might have been caused by this hook.

Cross-examined. Any sharp instrument would do it.

WILLIAM O'SHEE . I am a free labourer—on Sunday night, November 1st, about twelve o'clock, I was in Nightingale Lane, going to work, ahead of other labourers, and a mob of twenty or twenty-five men ran across my face, knocked me down, kicked me, and said, "Give it to him!"—I was struck on my face and bled; it knocked me down.

Cross-examined. I am a stevedore—I had a hook like this, and so had all the men who were going to work.

JAMES WHITE (Police Sergeant). I was on duty outside Carron Wharf, and saw the workmen coming to the wharf followed by a crowd, which surrounded them as they got close to the wharf, and shouted—with assistance I got some of the men out of the mob, and got them safely on to the wharf—the crowd shouted "Blackleg!" and used bad language.

Cross-examined. A suggestion was made that the "blacklegs"should charge the crowd, and about thirty of them left the wharf and went for the crowd, which consisted of men and women—directly they charged the crowd dispersed, and about half an hour afterwards we managed to get them away—the crowd scattered, but many of them returned again at about 11.55.

Re-examined. A number of them came in with signs of assault—the people who rushed out on the crowd came along Lower East Smithfield, after the other labourers had arrived.


APPLEBY, GUILTY of a common assault Discharged on Recognisances. BUTLER, Eight Months' Hard Labour; HAYES, Four Months' Hard Labour; McCARTHY, Three Months Hard Labour; and HAMPSHIRE, Six Months Hard Labour.

OLD COURT.—Wednesday, January 27th, 1802.

Before Mr. Common Serjeant.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-224
VerdictGuilty > with recommendation
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

224. EMILE COSTER , Forging and uttering an authority for the delivery of two cases of eggs.

MR. SANDS Prosecuted, and MR. BAYLISS Defended.

GEORGE STONE (Constable Great Pattern Railway). I am in charge of the Spitalfields Station dopot—persons coming to fetch goods from there bring an order signed by Andrews, the foreman porter—I have known

for eighteen months the prisoner, who has been employed by different egg merchants to repair cases of eggs and sample them—he has had opportunities of being aware of the course of business required to get goods out—on 5th January, about 4 p.m., he came and said he was coming presently for two cases of eggs, and he pointed to two cases on the bank—he came back about an hour afterwards with a barrow, and said he had come for the two cases of eggs, and added, "And you may as well take the pass now"—he gave me this pass and pointed to the same two cases and said, "These are the two cases I want. "(The pass was, "Pass Liver man with two cants of eggs.—Andrews. ')—I looked at the pass, which is made out irregularly, as there is no date on it—I asked him where he got it from; he said he got it from the Jew to whom the eggs belonged—I asked him where the Jew was; he said he was gone to sign for the eggs, and was coming down—I asked him where the Jew got the pass; he said, "From Foreman Andrews"—I said, "Andrews never made out this pass; this is not Andrews's writing; you will have to wait"—I detained him in my box—Andrews came along, and I asked Andrews if he knew anything about the pass; he said, "No"—I took the prisoner to the station, and he was handed over to the Metropolitan Police—the two egg cases he pointed out were standing close to my box—I have found out since that they belong to Mr. Uhl—they were marked with a round 0 in a ring, not with Uhl's name.

Cross-examined. I only knew the prisoner by the name of Jack—he speaks English—I know nothing against his character; he has never been charged with anything of this sort before—there were lots of cases of eggs there; those two were lying separate from the others, two or three yards off—I never saw the prisoner write, and do not know if this is his writing or not—he put the barrow up where the eggs were standing—I would not let him load them—it is not usual for people to give up a pass till they have got the goods on the barrow, and are coming out of the gate; he understood the conduct of business there very well—he did not say he was going to wait till the man came down—he could not go away; he did not try to—if he had taken them I might not have known who had done so; they might not have been missed for two or three months—he gave me no description of the Jew.

Re-examined. We have no means of ear-marking a box that goes out, and I could not have identified the person who took those particular boxes—these two cases lying separate were the easiest to load up at once.

EDGAR ANDREWS . lama foreman porter of the Great Eastern Railway at Spitalfields depot—it is my duty to give passes to enable persons to take goods from the depot—this pass is not my writing—it is not exactly the regular form—it is a good imitation of my writing—if a strange police man who did not know my writing had been on the gate he might very likely have passed them out—I aid not authorise anyone to write this; I did not give any such note as this to the prisoner—I was called by Stone to his box on 5th January, and I saw the prisoner detained there—Stone asked me if it was my writing—I said no—the prisoner said, "It is not my writing, some Jew man gave it to me"—he did not give me the Jew's name nor tell me where he had met him—no one came to my office at that time to sign for two cases of eggs.

Cross-examined. I have known the prisoner for six or seven years, I daresay, coming for cases of eggs—as far as I know he is a perfectly

honest man—I have never seen him write, and cannot say if this is his writing—these eggs are consigned to different people—the prisoner has been acting as porter lately; I don't know that he has taken any cases of eggs, but he has repacked them if damaged, or anything of that sort—the order is in the usual form, so that the prisoner would have no reason to suppose it was wrong if some one else gave it to him—at first he said I gave it to him, and afterwards, when I said it was not my writing, that a Jew did; he did not describe the Jew—the prisoner said the eggs were signed for in the book, and I went to the office to see—I believe another officer was there when Stone went for a constable.

Re-examined. When I came back from the office I told him there was no such name in the book, and that they had not been signed for—I give passes on a foreman's order, which is checked by our weigher—the prisoner told me nothing about the man, except that he was a Jew.

By the JURY. We have plenty of genuine orders with no numbers on, and we have them different sizes.

JAMES WEDGE . I live with my father at 4, Hunt Street, Spitalfields; he lets out costermongers' barrows—on 5th January, about a quarter to four p.m., the prisoner, whom I knew, came for a barrow, saying he was going to the Great Eastern depot—I did not see anyone with him—he went away with it.

Cross-examined. He has hired barrows before.

GEORGE MANSFIELD (447 H). On 5th January the prisoner was given into my custody at the Spitalfields depot at twenty minutes past five for forging an order—when charged at the station he said, not write the order; it was given to me by a Jew man; I did not touch the eggs"—he has given no further description of the Jew, or told me anything more about him; that is the only statement he has made so far as I. know.

The prisoner's statement before the Magistrate: "The pass is not in my writing; I had no intention to take the eggs. I did not touch them. "

The prisoner received a good character from an employer.

GUILTY.—Recommended to mercy by the JURY on account of his previous good character. Six Months' Hard Labour.


Before Mr. Justice Cave.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-225
VerdictGuilty > with recommendation
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

225. EDMUND OSBORNE (54) , Feloniously wounding Annie Osborne, with intent to murder. Second Count, with intent to do grievous bodily harm.

MESSRS. FORREST FULTON and C. F. GILL Prosecuted, and MR. CHARLES MATHEWS Defended. ANNIE OSBORNE. I live at of Roberts Road, West Ham—the prisoner is my husband—we have been married about twenty-seven years; we only occupied the upper part of the house—on 10th November I got home about ten minutes to six in the evening and went upstairs; there was no light in the room—I went to take off my things, and was going to get a light, when I heard somebody come upstairs and come into the room; I believe it was my husband; I saw no one, it was dark, it was a man; I got a blow on the right side of my head, and I don't remember

any more—I was standing, undoing my bonnet—I don't remember hearing anything said before I was struck; I don't remember being taken to the hospital; when I recovered consciousness I found myself there, being attended by the doctors.

Cross-examined. My husband was always very kind to me and also to his children; we have four living, one died—on 9th January, 1887, he had a very severe accident, and he has not been like the same man since; he fell from a ladder when working at the Board school at West Ham, he has since suffered very much from his head—he was laid up for six weeks from the accident, and I had to nurse him—since then he has been strange at times, very excitable, and complained very much of his head—sometimes I have had to bathe his head all night long, sometimes he has been raving, clasping his head with his hands, and frothing at the mouth very much—very little drink excites him, two glasses of mild ale will disturb him—when we were first married he was a licensed victualler, and kept the Fountain public-house at Lower Clapton, from there we went to the Bull's Head at Stepney—after that he took to making a living by window and blind cleaning, and so supported himself and us—he has a brother Thomas; he was queer in his head, and almost all the family—Thomas had a daughter named Milly—I know her quite well; I have not seen her for two or three years—she was very strange in her manner—my husband had two sisters; Emma, who is living, and Mary Ann, who is dead—I saw her a day or two before she died—she suffered from epileptic fits, and I believe she died in one—I believe she was 42 years of age—I had known her all my life—she was subject to these fits up to the end of her life—the sister Emma is insane, and is at the Essex County Asylum at Brentwood—I believe she has been there for seventeen years; She was at the Asylum at Bow before she went to Brentwood.

Re-examined. My husband never assaulted me before, never to give me a blow; sometimes he has been rather cross in family affairs, but never to give me a blow—I do not remember making any statement at the hospital—I can write (looking at a paper); I put my cross to this—I don't remember having this read over to me; I might, but I was very bad that night—my husband was not given to drink very often, but when he went out and he met with anyone to give him a glass or two, it made him like a madman—after he gave up the public-house he was employed as a potman at the Freemasons' Hotel—he had been backwards and forwards there two or three years, off and on, when they wanted anyone; he had not been there for two months before 10th November—he bas suffered from delirium tremens very much; he used to see all kinds of strange things—I don't think he ever went to a doctor for it.

THOMAS SMITH . I live at 6, Roberts Road—the prisoner, his wife, and family lived in the two rooms above me—on Tuesday night, 10th November, about seven, I was in my mother's room—I heard the prisoner come in and go upstairs; I did not see him—about a quarter of an hour afterwards his wife came in; I saw her—as she went upstairs I heard her say, "Oh, here you are, then!" she went into the front room—I heard somebody moving about in that room—shortly afterwards I heard him beating her with a poker; I heard Mows, and I heard her say, "Oh, let me be!"—I went to the stairs and listened; I did not go upstairs; I was alone in the house—the prisoner's door was closed—the blows went on for about half-an-hour—afterwards I heard the prisoner come down-stairs;

I did not see him go out—I was in the kitchen then—I went out, and when I came back the doctor and the policemen were there—my father and mother have lived there about a year—I have often seen the prisoner during that time.

WILLIAM JARVIS . I am a labourer, and live at 7, Franklin Street,. Bromley—I married a daughter of the prisoner—on 10th November, about seven in the evening, the prisoner walked into my room and said, "Take that off of that chair;"there was a wash hand basin on the chair—my wife was in the room—he then put his hand in his pocket and took out a piece of bread and bacon and a piece of cord, and put it on the table, and said, "That is all I have to give you; I have been and killed your mother"—he had had a drop; he appeared to be under the influence of drink—I jumped up, and he said, "Here you are," and he shook hands and asked how I was getting on—I said, "All right," and then he said, "Bill, you won't see me any more; I have been and killed my missus"—he said he was going to give himself up at West Ham; he kissed my wife and said, "Good-bye; I am going to give myself up at West Ham"—he repeated that—I did not notice anything on his hand—he then left—I went to his house; it is all half a mile from mine—Godwin, my landlord, went with me—I went half-way up the stairs, and I heard the woman groaning; I did not go into the room; I turned down again and fetched Dixon from the next door, returned with him, and we both went upstairs; he tried the room door, but could not get in—we came down again and saw the prisoner; he was going into the house; Dixon went for a policeman, and! went for a doctor—I did not go into the room at all, and did not see the woman before she was taken to the hospital—I had only married the prisoner's daughter two days before this; I had been courting her for about two years—during that time I saw a good deal of the prisoner—I don't know much about his habits.

Cross-examined. He was very queer on this night, very strange—I had not seen much of him during the last two years—my attention was not called to his strange manner at any time.

JOSHUA DIXON . I am a labourer, and live at 8, Roberts Road—I have known the prisoner and his wife about five years—on the night of 10th November, about half-past seven, Jarvis came to my house, and from what he said I went next door to No. 6, and went upstairs; I turned the handle of the door, but could not get in—I could just put my head round, and I could see into the room, and I saw Mrs. Osborne lying behind the door, groaning—there was no light in the room, it had just gone out—I came downstairs to get a policeman, and met the prisoner on the doorstep—he said nothing—I went out and got a constable and came back with him—we went up into the room, and I saw the prisoner there sitting on a chair near the window—Mrs. Osborne was still lying on the floor—there was a quantity of blood behind the door, and splashes on the wall—Mrs. Osborne said, "Lock that old s-up"—he was very drunk—I have seen him on other occasions under the influence of drink, but not very often.

Cross-examined. I have described them as hard-working couple, but both addicted to drink.

By the COURT. I saw the prisoner in the street as I was going for the constable, and he could hardly stand as he came along.

THOMAS COUCH (575 K). I was called by the last witness to 6, Roberts

Road, Abbey Lane—I went upstairs and heard someone talking in the front-room—I knocked at the door and received an answer telling me to come in; I went in—I had a great deal of trouble to push the door open, and when I got in I found the woman lying against it on the ground, on her left side, insensible—there was a very large amount of blood on the floor, and her head was covered with blood—someone brought a light—the prisoner was sitting on a chair in the room—I said to him, "What have you been doing?"—he said, "I don't know"—I asked him to assist "me to lift his wife on to a chair; he made no reply, and never moved to assist me at all—some man had followed me upstairs, and I got the woman into a chair, and sent for Dr. Grogono—a plain-clothes officer arrived shortly after—I searched the room and found this poker lying against the wall, under a piece of metal; it was covered over, but I think it had got there accidentally; I don't think it was put there; it was covered with dry blood—when Dr. Grogono came he dressed the wounds temporarily, and ordered her to be removed to the hospital in a cab—I do not know the prisoner personally; I believe he is well known to the police; he has lived there some time—I had seen him that evening, about a quarter of an hour before I was fetched; he passed me when I was on fixed point duty in High Street, Stratford—I saw him go into a corn dealer's shop and come out again—he seemed very unsteady, and was evidently under the influence of drink, from the whole of his demeanour.

BENJAMIN GULLY (98 K). From something I heard on this night I we it to No. 6, and saw the last witness there bathing the woman's head—I saw the prisoner in the room—I asked Couch, in the prisoner's presence, what he had done it with; he said, "Look;" and I saw this poker at the end of the bed; I took possession of it—I said to the prisoner, "You must consider yourself in custody"—he said, "I think I have killed my missus, I hope I have"—I searched him, and took him to the station—he there said, "Is that woman, my wife, dead or alive? I want to know; I hope she is dead, she has been cruel to me; if I dont see her in this world, I will in the next; I know I have done it, and I hope she is dead, and I shall be too, soon; her blood is on my hands; I done it with a poker, and you will find it at 6, Roberts Road; what a wicked man I am; is she in the mortuary?"—he was drunk.

Cross-examined. I formed that conclusion from his manner, and he smelt of drink—I took down at the time what he said—he said it at intervals—he was sitting at the table in the station.

WALTER ATKINS GROGONO . I am Divisional Surgeon at Stratford—on Tuesday evening, 10th November, about a quarter to eight. I was called to 6, Roberts Road—I went into the upstairs front room, and there found Annie Osborne, supported by the constable; the prisoner was there, sitting on a chair by the window—the woman was suffering from severe injury to the right side of the head; the parietal bone was fractured, the temple bone and the mala bone—she was bleeding profusely, and there was a large amount of blood about the room—she was not conscious—she was also suffering from a number of punctured wounds about the face—I dressed the wounds as well as I could, and arranged for her removal to the West Ham Hospital in a cab—I saw the constable find the poker; these were blood-stains on the handle, not on the point; it was fresh blood—this is the poker; the injuries to the head were caused by the knob at the end, and the punctures by the point—the prisoner was not

present all the time I was there—T had him removed first; the constable took him away; he was simply mumbling; I did not take much notice of him.

Cross-examined. I have known the prisoner for some years, and have attended him professionally, first in 1890, and the commencement of 1891—he came to me suffering from nervous excitement and melancholia, severe pains in the head, and restlessness at night—I prescribed for him; he continued to come for some little time—I heard of his accident from a fall from a ladder, from a considerable height, on his head—I did not connect his complaints to me with the fall at the time; I did afterwards—the first time he came to me I was not told of the accident; I first heard of that at the commencement of 1891, and then I did connect them—I did not hear at that time that there was insanity in the family; I heard of that since this investigation—I now know that his sister Emma has been in the County Asylum seventeen years; that his brother Thomas is said to be an odd man; that his daughter Milly is said to be very strange; and that his sister Mary Ann suffered from epilepsy, and is said to have died in an epileptic fit—epilepsy is likely to be hereditary, and if so, likely to be communicated to more than one of the children—there is a form of epilepsy known as masked epilepsy; that is a very insidious form of mental disease; the victim to that disease may go on for a long time without betraying that the brain is in any way affected by it, and then may have an outbreak of suicidal or maniacal mania, that is perfectly objectless—when the fit is on, the patient may be betrayed into very aggravated violence, during which time he would be perfectly insane, perfectly unable to control his actions, or distinguishing right from wrong—I saw the prisoner before the Magistrate on the second and third or fourth remands; I had no conversation with him; I noticed that his appearance was wild and scared on both those occasions—it did not impress me with the appearance of his being a sane man; he appeared to be watching, and staring about the Court, and in a most anxious and nervous condition—he had then been over a fortnight in custody.

Re-examined. It is almost impossible for me to say how many times I attended him before 10th November; he was under my care altogether for two or three months, coming to the surgery every third day or so—I know something about his relations, and have conversed with him on the subject—his symptoms were those of a man of a highly nervous temperament, and perhaps taking too much; it was hardly a case of chronic alcoholism—I gave him nux vomica and bromide of potassium—I have had a good deal to do with lunatics, and am constantly called on as a witness—I should certainly expect a man charged with attempting to murder his wife to be sometimes wild and scared; but I think there was something more than that here; he had a peculiar wild appearance—I think absence from drink, while in custody, would improve his condition; it might at first have a delirious effect, but not for any length of time—I once saw him bordering on delirium tremens, that was in 1890, the first time I saw him—masked epilepsy is a kind of false epilepsy; a man may have a kind of fit, without the distinct symptoms; it is epilepsy where there is an absence of the ordinary symptoms accompanying the disease.

By the COURT. In masked epilepsy there is not the frothing of the mouth, or twitching of the mouth and limbs; the man may tumble

down insensible; so may a man who has had too much to drink; but then his breath would smell strongly of alcohol—the diagnosis of the complaint is somewhat obscure—I did not see anything about him on 10th November, I did not examine him; in my opinion he had not the complaint then.

WILLIAM FRANCIS . I am House Surgeon at West Ham Hospital—on 10th November, at a quarter-past eight, Annie Osborne was brought there, suffering from compound depressed fracture of the skull, fracture of the frontal bone, and a compound fracture of the mala bone; all the injuries were on the right side—there were fourteen scalp wounds—she was conscious—I helped to perform an operation on the skull, which was successful—she was under my care for some time—she was in danger three weeks; she has not entirely recovered now, she has to some extent; the dead bone is still coming away from the skull, but she is doing perfectly well; she is still in the hospital—she was not able to give evidence for a considerable time.

JAMES HARVEY (Inspector). On 10th November I went to the West Ham Police-station—I there saw the prisoner in custody—he said, "Is she dead?"—I said, "No; she is not"—he said, "She ought to be; I hoped she was"—I went to the hospital and saw the wife, and on my return I charged him with attempting to murder his wife—when the charge was read over to him he said, "I hope she will not die now"—he made several statements, hoping she would die, and hoping she was dead—afterwards he said, "God bless her! I hope she will not die now"I first saw him at five minutes to nine, he was then drunk—I saw him again at 9.45, he was still drunk; so drunk that I could not take him to the hospital; he could not walk, he was sitting on a chair in the reserve room.

Cross-examined. He was mumbling the whole time in an indistinct way—I was at the Police-court on 25th November and 2nd December—I should say he had nothing to drink on those days—he would have none while in custody of the police—there have been no complaints against him to the police; I knew him personally.

JOHN JAMES PITCAIRN . I am one of the medical officers of Her Majesty's Prison at Holloway—I am an M. R. O. P. and L. RC. P.—I have studied insanity—I have a diploma with regard to that—I assist Dr. Gilbert, who is ill—I have had the prisoner under my observation from 11th November; at first every day, recently every other day—I have had conversations with him—from instructions I specially directed my attention to him—I have formed the opinion that he is sane, and responsible for his actions.

Cross-examined. That is an opinion based upon my examination since he has been in custody—I first saw him on 11th November, the night of his arrival—I have not had him under my special observation from that time; he has been under Dr. Gilbert's observation up to 20th December; from then down to 13th January my attention has been specially directed to him, daily; I have seen nothing during that time to lead me to think him otherwise than sane—I have been in Court since the hearing of this case, and heard the evidence—during the time he has been under my observations he has shown no sign of suffering from the head—epilepsy is frequently found in members of the same family—there is such a thing as masked epilepsy; it is a word frequently advanced in the case

of criminals; it is held in great doubt by high authorities; it is impossible to cite them offhand; I think Dr. Savage throws some doubt upon it—Dr. Blandford is a well-known authority on diseases of the mind—I am not aware that he advances it as a well ascertained disease, or that he does not; I am myself somewhat sceptical with regard to it—I have never seen a case; I will not deny that there are men of science in the profession who have asserted its existence—I do not think that epileptic fits may be absent, and yet masked epilepsy exist—an act may be committed without motive in an epileptic fit; he might be the victim of homicidal or suicidal mania, and if so took life he would not be responsible—frothing of the mouth is not an indication of epilepsy in all cases; it is in ninety-nine cases out of a hundred; I have never seen a case without frothing; I have read of cases without it; in every case I have seen it has invariably occurred.

Re-examined. Frothing would only be while the fit was on; it is very transitory—an injury to the head would render a man more liable to the effects of drink than an ordinary person; delirium tremens would be consonant with such a condition—I examine a very large number of prisoners during the year—I was in communication with Dr. Gilbert with regard to the prisoner's condition.

By the COURT. In my opinion the prisoner was not suffering from epilepsy on 10th November, nor from masked epilepsy—assuming this savage attack was in a fit of epilepsy, a man would not be likely, either while the fit was on or immediately afterwards, to go about talking of what he had done; from the evidence I have heard the actions were those of a drunken man; in epilepsy there would not be the slightest recollection of it; in confirmed epilepsy the fits have a tendency to occur at stated intervals of a day or a night, perhaps a week or a month—it is uncertain in different individuals.

GUILTY. Recommended to mercy by the JURY.— Eighteen Years' Penal Servitude.

Before Mr. Common Serjeant.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-226
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

226. ALFRED HAYDEN , Feloniously receiving a quantity of granite pitching, the property of the North Metropolitan Tramway Company.


CHRISTOPHER CHARLES FROST . I am a carman, of 17, South Grove, Mile End Road—on 9th October I was in the employ of the North Metropolitan Tramway Company, and was carting stones in the Barking Road—I left the job about a quarter to nine, and was going through the Commercial Road to Barking; there were two carts besides mine, driven by Shea and Richards; we met a man with a rubbish cart, and had some conversation wit a him, in consequence of which I left my cart in the road, and went up a gateway, and saw the prisoner—I asked him if he could do with the stones—he asked if they had come down the street—I said, "Yes"—he said he would come and have a look at them—we went on, and he followed in a horse and van with another person—he came and had a look at the stones—he asked what we wanted for them; we said 15s.; he said he would give 12s., and said, "Very well, this man will settle with you"—that was a dark man, Brown—we went up a sort

of mews, and threw over the three loads of stones into a yard, and Brown paid us 13s. between the three of us, and we shared it—the initials of the company were on our carts, with the numbers—I was afterwards charged with stealing the stones, and convicted.

Cross-examined. I first saw a young man, and asked him if the governors could do with some old stones; I did not call them rubbish stones; they were half stones; there was not much more than half a load in each cart—the carts were standing in a line, one behind the other—the prisoner looked at each cart from behind; he might be there five minutes—I told him they were worth 25s.; I had never seen him before—we thought we were going to get 15s., and another 1s. for beer.

JOHN SHEA . I am a carman—on 9th October I was employed by the North Metropolitan Tramway Company to take a load from Whitechapel to Barking depôt, with Frost and Richards—the name of the Company was painted on the front of the cart, and the words "permanent way"—we met the prisoner, and Frost had some conversation with him, and he came to the carts with a dark gentleman, and then saw the prisoner; he came and walked round the carts; Frost said he wanted 15s. for the stones—the prisoner said he would give 12s., and the dark man said, "And is. for a pot of beer each"—we then went and threw the stones into a yard—the dark man went with us, and told us where to put them—we then left and shared the money—I was afterwards convicted of stealing the stones.

Cross-examined. The prisoner and the dark man were there about five minutes; they stopped and considered together; I did not hear what they said—these stones were old and dirty.

CHARLES EDWARD RICHAEDS . I am a carman—I was employed with the others to take these stones to Barking depôt—we stopped on the road, and were told that a man wanted some stones over at the piggeries—we saw the prisoner, and Frost asked him if he could do with a load of stones—he said he would come and look at them—he came with a dark gentleman and looked at them—I can't say whether he saw the names on the carts—I was convicted at West Ham of stealing the stones.

MARTHA MOORCROFT . I am the wife of George Moorcroft, of la, Blanche Street, Hermit Road, opposite Mr. Chambers' yard—on 9th October I was in the shop, and saw Frost go up the gateway with a load of stones; the other two waited outside—a dark man drove up and spoke to them—all the carts were then taken into the gateway and unloaded—I can't say if the prisoner was there at that time; he was there in the course of the day.

Cross-examined. The yard belongs to Mr. Chambers—I know the prisoner by sight as an agent; he comes to see that everything goes on right at the yard.

JIM SMITH . I am a road foreman in the employ of the Company—on 9th October I was at work in High Street, Whitechapel, we were taking up old stones and putting down new—we send the old ones to the Barking depot—Frost was working for us as a carman—at 8.15 I sent him with a load to the depot with the other two men—afterwards, on 16th October, I went with my employer, Mr. Ansell, to the yard in Hermit Road, and identified the stones there.

JOHN WILMER RANSELL . I live at 297, Amhurst Road—I am resident engineer of the Company—Frost was employed by us under Smith

on 9th October—on 15th October I went with Detective Sergeant Dicker to a yard in Blanche Street, Hermit Road, and there identified a quantity of stones, the property of the Company, which had been used in Whitechapel; there were about three tons and a quarter, the value of them would be about £3 4s.—on the evening of 16th October I went to Plaistow Station and saw Frost, Shea, and Richards there in custody; the prisoner came there and said that the men came to him in the yard and asked if he could do with some old stones, that he went and looked at them, and gave 16s. for them; and he produced a book with an entry of 16s. as having been paid for them—he said he was foreman to Mr. Chambers.

Gross-examined. I said before the Magistrate that the value of the stones was 15s. a load—they were good stones, going to Barking depot to be redressed—I think the Magistrate said that the man who received the stones should be prosecuted—the three men pleaded guilty, so the prisoner was not called as a witness—he said to me that he had bought the stones for his master, and that he was in the habit of buying things in that way—the stones were not concealed, they were lying in the road—we do sell stones sometimes, but always from the depot, not in this way—the prisoner spoke to me very freely, and answered any questions I asked.

Re-examined. We do not sell stones before their second dressing, then we sell them from our depot—I believe Mr. Chambers has been a customer of ours.

FREDERICK DICKER (Detective Sergeant). On 15th October I accompanied Mr. Ransell to a yard in Hermit Road, and showed him a pile of stones, which he identified—about four in the afternoon of the 16th I went to Montague Street, Coburg Square, and there saw the prisoner—I said to him, "You have a pile of stones in your yard at Hermit Road which has been identified as stolen, can you tell me from whom you bought them?"—he said, "I don't know the men, but I might if I saw them again"—I said, "Did you get a receipt for them?"—he said, "No"—I said, "Did you take the name and address of the carts?"—he said, "I only had a few minutes to see them; I asked them to wait and I would come and look at them; I went to the corner and looked at them, and offered them 16s.; I then went away, and left the money with the man who was working for me to pay for them"—I then asked him to accompany me to the Police station to see if he could identify the men, as I had some in custody; he went went with me to Plaistow Station and identified Richards and Shea; he did not identify Frost at first.

Cross-examined. He gave his evidence freely—I did not think it necessary to caution him—I saw the stones in the yard—I saw two carts in the mews; it struck me as suspicious—I did not make inquiry; I was engaged in another case—I have made inquiries about the prisoner; he bears the highest character.


11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-227
VerdictNot Guilty > no evidence

Related Material

227. JOHN WILLIAMS was indicted for a like offence— No evidence was offered.


Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-228
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

228. JOHN McCULLOCK (26) and JOHN STEVENSON (28), Obtaining, by false pretences, from Max Joseph Michalowsky, two coats and other goods and £2, with intent to defraud. Second Count, for conspiring with others to defraud.

MR. LAWLESS Prosecuted.

MAX JOSEPH MICHALOWSKY . I am an outfitter, of 7, Dock Street—about 1.30 on 23rd November the prisoner came to my shop—McCullock said they had been recommended to stop at my place, and asked what I would charge; I said 16s. a week, or half-a-crown a day, for board and lodging; they said yes—I asked what ship they came from; both said the Australasian, and that they were going to be paid off the next day at the Ship, ping office, Tower Hill—we agreed the price, and one stopped in the shop while the other fetched their bags—I served them with two pairs of boots at 13s. 6d., an overcoat for McCullock at £1 17s. 6d., and lent 3s. 6d., to McCullock and 2s. 6d. to Stevenson, as they said they wanted to go to the barber—when they returned I served them with a suit of clothing and Stephenson with an overcoat, hat, collar, and tie—they asked for the loan of a sovereign—I said I had not much change, but lent them 15s. each—they went away and said they would come back for tea—I next saw them in custody—I was induced to part with my goods by their saying they were going to be paid off the next day, and I saw they had tickets.

Cross-examined by McCullock. I employ a man, Max—he did not come with you—I have not been cheated before by sailors with a Board of Trade ticket as you had—I said at the Police-court I had been cheated—your bags contained rags, the sweepings of the forecastle; they were shown at the Thames Police-court, and were not worth one shilling—nobody could wear those clothes—I deny that Max brought you; one of my men was in the shop—two when I sold you the clothes, and a man stopping at my place entered the transaction, as I can't write—Max was not then in the shop—the money I advanced was not your change—we went over to the public and stood drinks.

Cross-examined by Stevenson. You bought the clothes, and went to the barber while the missus got your dinner ready—you put the boots on in the shop, and your clothes on in a back room—you did not pay for the clothes.

MYER KOUMISKI . I am a shoemaker, of 38, Wentworth Street—I work for the prosecutor—I heard the arrangements made for boarding the prisoners, 16s. a week—the prisoners said they were going to be paid to-morrow—they went upstairs to get their clothes—they asked for a little money to go to the barber—I did not see them after that day.

Cross-examined by McCullock. I was working when you came about four yards from the door—Max went upstairs with you for the clothes—I do not know if he came in with you—he was not in the shop, that is a mistake.

LOUIS JOHN BOWDEN . I live at 71, Wellington Street, Gravesend—I am a Board of Trade Inspector—on 22nd November I boarded the ss. Australasian in the river—it is my duty, and I questioned the prisoners, who were sailors, as to how much of their pay they wished sent home or receive on account, and where they wished it to be sent; they said to Glasgow, and their money transferred to Greenock—I agreed to that—I ascertained over £11 was due to each—that was forwarded by the superintendent at the pay-office—the prisoners signed forms which I

handed to the superintendent directly where the money was to be sent—one asked for £1 and the other 15s.; I advanced them 10s., the amount allowed by the Board of Trade—they said they would sleep in the ship, and go home in the morning.

Cross-examined by McCullock. Your wages must be paid through the medium of the Board of Trade.

FREDERICK CHARLES GILBERT . I am a Board of Trade officer at Tower Hill—I produce the prisoners' pay warrants. (MR. BOWDEN identified the prisoners signatures.)—I received those from Greenock—the prisoners were paid off at Greenock.

HENRY WHITBREAD (Detective H). I received warrants for the prisoners' arrest; the prisoners were handed over to me by the Glasgow police on 16th December—I read the warrants to them—McCullock said, "If we were not drunk, we should not have gone there"—Stevenson said, "We paid for all we had. "

The prisoners in defence stated they were induced to go to the prosecutors by his "runner,"Max, and paid for what they had, and drank together with the change the prosecutor gave them.


11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-229
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

229. HUGH LANG (27) , Robbery, with other persons unknown, on Thomas Jones; putting him in fear, and stealing his watch and chain and £1 10s.

MR. WARBURTON Prosecuted.

THOMAS JONES . I live at 18, Hill Street, Custom House—I am a fireman—on 4th January I saw the prisoner in the Marine Hotel bar; we had a drink, and then I had to pay my Union subscription—I went away and returned to the Marine Hotel—the prisoner, when I went to the back, came behind and struck me in the eye, and sung out to three men—he put his arms round my neck and his hand in my pocket; I had thirty shillings and my watch and chain—he hauled it out and slung me down; by the time I got up they had gone—I was bleeding—I made a complaint at the Seamen's Union—at the Police-station, when the prisoner lifted his hat up, I identified him.

Cross-examined by the Prisoner, You are a stranger to me—I asked you to have a drink about two p.m.—the Seamen's Union is about 150 yards from the Marine Hotel—I left the Marine Hotel about 3.30 or 3.45—I did not identify another man at the Police-station.

WILLIAM HARRIS . I live at. 30, Cleaver Road, Custom House—about four p.m. I was at the Union office—the prisoner was standing alongside the counter and speaking to the secretary—I have known the prisoner a great many years by sight—I saw him with the prosecutor in the office of the Union—they went out together.

FRANCIS FOWLER . I live at 52, New Mill Street—I am the secretary of the Tidal Basin branch of the Sailors' Union—the Railway Tavern and the Marine Hotel are about 150 yards off—on 4th January I was in the office between three and four—the prosecutor came in and paid 9s. 6d. contribution and 2s. 6d. levy—he knew what he was doing—the prisoner followed him—fifty minutes afterwards the prosecutor came back bleeding from the eye—he made a complaint—in consequence of that complaint I gave information to the police, and put the prosecutor on the right track.

GEORGE PHILLIPS (160 K). Between three and four on 4th January

the prosecutor was brought to me by Fowler, bleeding and in a bad state—in consequence of information given I looked for the prisoner—I called him outside the Lilliput, and said, "I shall take you on suspicion of assaulting and robbing a man of £2 and his watch and chain"—he said, "All right; I suppose I shall have to suffer for somebody else"—the prisoner wanted to change his overcoat with another man who came into the station, but was refused; then he put his hat over his eyes, and said he was not there, but the moment he lifted his hat the prosecutor said, "That was the man "at once.

Cross-examined. Another man was not arrested before you.

Witness for the defence.

HUGH MONAGEN . I did not see the prisoner at the Union office—I saw him in the public-house with the prosecutor, who called for drink—the prisoner came out of the Marine Hotel between two and three—I did not see you on the wooden bridge when you said you were going home—nor on the kerbstone—I saw you go into "Charley Short's"—I saw you going towards the Marine Hotel, and then going back to Short's—when you came out of Charley Short's you went back to the Marine Hotel—yon stopped there a considerable time—I saw you come out and go back to Short's.

Cross-examined. I signed my deposition, and was bound over to appear here—I cannot swear to what happened between three and four.

The prisoner, in his defence, said he drank with the prosecutor, but was anxious to get home, and was innocent of robbing him.


He also PLEADED GUILTY to a conviction in Clerkenwell in October, 1883.— Six Months' Hard Labour.


Before Mr. Common Serjeant.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-230
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

230. GEORGE DUFF (62) PLEADED GUILTY** to burglary in the dwelling-house of Alexander McKnight, and stealing two coats and other articles, having been convicted of felony at this Court in October, 1887.— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-231
VerdictNot Guilty > no evidence

Related Material

231. ARNOLD BRABB (39) , Burglary in the dwelling-house of John Fenn, and stealing twelve rings and other articles, his property.

MR. MUIR, for the prosecution, stated that this was a case of mistaken identity, and not a shadow of imputation rested upon the prisoner; he therefore offered no evidence.


11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-232
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

232. MARY ANNE GILBY (33) , Unlawfully neglecting Thomas Gilby, in a manner likely to cause injury to his health.




Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-233
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

233. EDWARD SMITH (21) and JOHN CARTER (22) , Robbery with violence on Thomas Raven, and stealing a watch and chain, his property.

MR. TYRRELL Prosecuted, and MR. SANDS appeared for Smith.

THOMAS RAVEN . I am a railway porter, of 12, Gifford Street, Wandsworth—on 26th December I was with Thomas Sylvester in High Street, Clapham, and was about to enter the Two Brewers public-house when the prisoner Smith hit me across my nose and snatched my watch and chain—I had not said anything to him—I held on to him, and Garter hit me across my nose, and took my watch and chain from Smith, who broke away from me and got into a court; I followed, and saw a constable take him—I saw Carter in the Perseverance public-house on the Sunday night, and gave him in custody.

Cross-examined by MR. SANDS. This was Boxing Night, but I had not had a holiday—I was coming home from work, and had £2 5s. 8d. on me; that was not taken—four or five others were with the prisoner—there was plenty of room for any one to pass, but they did not make way for us—they were between me and the public-house, and I was about four yards from the door—I got hustled by the prisoners—I knew them both by sight—I do not know Lycett—I could not recognise Carter that night, being too much knocked about and from loss of blood—I did not know very well what I was doing, but I had the prisoners' faces in my head, and could pick them out when I came round a bit—the first blow nearly stunned me.

Cross-examined by Carter. The prisoner said, "Is there anybody here you can recognise?" and I said I would look at them another time.

THOMAS SYLVESTER . I was with Raven, going into a public-house, and the prisoner Smith rushed up and stole Raven's watch and chain, and handed them to Carter, who told Smith to pinch him—I saw both the prisoners strike him—after Carter got the watch he got up in a cart, and Raven ran after Smith and held him till a constable was coming up; he then broke away, but was given in custody—I knew Carter before, and have no doubt about him.

Cross-examined by MR. SANDS. Five or six men were standing between me and the public-house, all rough-looking characters—Smith was not one of the group; he rushed out of the public-house—I was very much frightened—it was Boxing Night; I had not been at work—Raven was very much dazed.

Cross-examined by Carter. You went down to the station that night, and when I knew you were outside I called Raven.

GEORGE BENNETT (Policeman). I went to the Two Brewers, and saw a number of people outside, and the two prisoners; Carter had & pony-barrow, and Smith got in—Raven came up from the same direction, and Smith ran—he made a communication to me, and I took Smith to the station and charged him with stealing a watch and chain, and violently assaulting Raven, whose nose and mouth were bleeding; he looked dazed, as if he had had a thorough good hiding; his face was smothered with blood—Smith made no reply to the charge—on the Sunday afternoon I went out, in plain clothes, with Raven, who gave me a signal by raising

his hat; Carter came out of a public-house, and Raven said, "That is the man who received the watch from Smith"—Carter said, "I will go with you, governor; I know nothing about it. "

Cross-examined. There were a number of rough-looking men about-Smith was admitted to bail after he had been on remand a week.

Witness for Carter.

MR. LYCETT. I was with you, and followed Smith to the station Raven came out, and you said to him, "What do you charge Smith with? has he got a watch and chain about him?" he said, "No"; the constable came up, and Raven said he could not identify you.

By MR. SANDS. I did not see Raven knocked about; I saw no one struck. I did not see Raven covered with blood—it was I who had the struggle with him—he struck me first, and I struck him in self-defence—Smith was standing by—Carter was not there—I only struck Raven once; he struck me and knocked me down, and I struck him; we had a bit of a tussle, and he got up and said that Smith, who was standing by, had his watch.

Smith received a good character.


Carter then PLEADED GUILTY** to or conviction of felony at Wandsworth Police-court on February 26th, 1885.— Twelve Months' Hard Labour each.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-234
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

234. FREDERICK PAVEY , Unlawfully uttering counterfeit coin.

MR. WILKINSON Prosecuted, and MR. ROUTH Defended.

JOHN ASPLAND . I keep the King's Head, Tooting—on the night of December 16th I served the prisoner with half a pint of 4d. ale; he paid with a penny, and then called for a second half-pint and put down a florin before he was served; my barman Jeffreys took it up and showed it to me—I bit a piece out of it; it felt gritty—I told the prisoner it was bad; he said he did not know it—I said that I should give him in charge; he said he did not mind that—I told him he had passed one three weeks before; he said he did not know it was bad—that was a half-crown, three weeks before Boxing Day—I had spoken to him about it at the time.

Cross-examined. He comes in about twice a week, but he had only been in once in the interval—he knew that I knew him—I thought he was a respectable man until he brought the second coin—he made no attempt to run away—I have said, "I know he has been a little bit strange in the bar"—I gave the half-crown back to him because he said he received it in his wages—three farthings were found on him, not sufficient to pay for the beer.

Re-examined. I bit the half-crown, and it was gritty.

GEORGE FELLOWS (Detective V). Mr. Aspland gave the prisoner into my custody at the King's Head—I told him the charge—he said, "I received it in change at a tobacconist's shop up the road—I took him to the station, and then he said, "I found it under the carpet in the room—he might have had drink, but was not the slightest the worse for it—I searched him in the house, and found three farthings—the landlord gave me this piece of coin, and said to the prisoner, "You brought a bad half crown here about three weeks ago"—he said, "I did not know it was bad. "

Cross-examined. He has been in Wandsworth Infirmary in consequence of a heavy fall—he suffers from giddiness, and I have been told he is not

quite right in his head—he is a respectable man; there is nothing against him.

MARY ASPLAND . I am the prosecutor's wife—about three weeks before Christmas I saw the prisoner in the bar about 9.30—he asked for half a pint of beer; I served him; he gave me 1d., and about twenty minutes afterwards he called for more, and put down a half-crown—I took it up, And said, "This is bad; did you know it was bad?"—he said, "No, I nave just taken it"—I showed it to my husband.

WILLIAM JOHN WEBSTER . I am Inspector of Coin to the Queen's Mint—this coin is bad; it is bent—grittiness is one of the indications of a coin being counterfeit if the teeth sink into it."


Before Mr. Common Serjeant.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-235
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown; Guilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

235. JAMES WARREN (31) and MARY ANN SULLIVAN (24) , Unlawfully administering to Katherine Moore certain rum with intent to stupefy her, and enable Warren to have connection with her.

MR. HUTTON Prosecuted.


SULLIVAN— GUILTY** on all counts except those for assault. Twelve Months' Hard Labour.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-236
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude; Imprisonment > hard labour; Imprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

236. OSBORN HINBEST (36), CATHERINE HINBEST (40), and JOSEPH WARD (17) , Stealing a basket of tools, the property of Robert Thompson. Second Count, Feloniously receiving the same.

MR. MUIR Prosecuted, MR. LAWLESS appeared for 0. Hinbest, and MR. SANDS for Catherine Hinbest.

ROBERT THOMPSON . I am a carpenter, of Montagu Terrace, Forest Hill—on 28th November I was working at a house at Forest Hill; I think it was No. 272—at the end of the day, about 6.30,1 left my tools locked in a room—I returned at seven a.m., and found the door-jamb split right down, and the tools gone; these are them (produced)—I gave no authority to anyone to take them away.

Cross-examined. It is very uncommon for workmen to sell their tools; they sometimes pawn them.

BERNARD WENNESTEIN . I am a jeweller and watchmaker, of 157, High Street, Battersea—my premises were broken into on 27th July, and I missed over thirty watches, and a box with some rings and little bits of gold—I identify these two watches as stolen from my place.

Cross-examined. They are-Worth more than 15s. each to the customers they belong to.

ALFRED HOOK . I am a carpenter, of 20, Eastman Road, Penge—on 2nd October I was working at a house at Lavender Hill—I left soma, tools in a room upstairs at 6.30, and at 6.30 a.m. I found the room door forced open and the tools gone; two saws, a plane, and a chisel—these are them (produced).

HENRY PERCY THOMPSON . I am a clerk in holy orders, of Raven House, Bridge Road, Battersea—on 28th October I missed this hose (produced), which was screwed on to a tap in my back garden—it was partly cut off and partly jagged—it is mine, and is worth 30s.

NATHANIEL HITCHMAN . I am a mason's assistant, of 2, St. James's Grove, Battersea—this is my watch—I lost it on November 7 at the Havelock public-house, Battersea Park Road; that is half a mile from 151, Battersea Park Road, and 150 yards from Ashwin Street—there

was a little scuffle with some lads rushing to get out, and when I got home I missed my watch—it had a bow and a chain then—I value it at £1

JOHN CHARLES BELL . I am an estate-agent, at 470, Battersea Park Road—this india-rubber mat is mine—I know it because I had it specially made to fit the lobby outside my office—I missed it after dark on November 19, and informed the police.

Cross-examined by MR. SANDS. I only know it by the shape; the front edge is longer than the back edge—I value it at £1.

HENRY MYER . I am manager to William Gardner and Co., sugar-refiners, of Plough Lane, Battersea—I have seen a sack containing fifty-six lbs. of saccharine, marked, "B. B. and Co."—we stamped that sack for a customer as distinguished from our own mark, but it is one of our bags, and the saccharine is exactly like ours—here are other sacks here marked, "B. B. and Co."—these others are bags, not marked, but exactly like ours, and these marked, "Gardner, Hill and Co. "are ours—we never send out empty bags—we get some back and some we do not—these two have been used—Hampton is our principal carrier—the carriers' men have access to the place where the bags are stored—we keep thousands of bags in stock, and have no means of checking the loss of a few.

Cross-examined by MR. SANDS. We supply a great quantity of saccharine—I believe there is one other manufacturer of it—I should not miss a bag of it; there is nothing to identify it by—these are not old sacks, they have never been used; this one has been used and has our mark on it.

HENRY PERRETT . I am a solicitor, of 75, Bank Buildings, Queen Victoria Street—prior to 1890 I acted for the owners of two houses, 2 and 4, Hart Street, Battersea, and in April, 1891, Osborn Hinbest came to know whether I had a client who would lend £450 on two houses belonging to his wife—I told him I had, but I must have his wife's retainer or authority to get the money—that was brought me, signed by Mrs. Hinbest—I secured the money, and the loan was (completed—I wrote this letter to Hinbest. (This stated that as the prisoner had not called according to promise, he would be charged 10s. 6d. extra).

Cross-examined by MR. LAWLESS. It was freehold property; I advanced the money on mortgage—the title-deed is in Mrs. Catherine Hinbest's name, conveying to her the freehold, dated May 15th, 1888, conveying it to her absolutely—he only paid me one or two small sums, she paid me the rest—I paid the insurance, which was made out in her name also—I see her here; she is the female prisoner.

Cross-examined by MR. SANDS. I had not known her before this—she is described in this document as the wife of Osborn Giuseppe Hinbest I inquired of her whether she was Mrs. Hinbest; she said, "Yes"—I made all necessary inquiries to protect my clients—Osborn Hinbest was not a party to either deed—I went to the premises and saw the female prisoner there—the result was that I felt justified.

Re-examined. No question of title turned on the question as to whether she was married to Hinbest or not—I made no investigation to verify whether that was the fact—I asked her whether she was his wife, and she said, "Yes"—I found she was trading as Catherine Ward, and I put that into the transfer.

ALFRED BEECHAM . I live at 141D, Battersea Park Road; the house

belongs to me; it is a shop—there are two rooms and a wash-house at the back, and a yard, and a piece of ground, but no sheds—I let it on June 1st to Mr. Hinbest at 12s. per week—I never took the rent myself; these are two receipts. (Dated May 29th, and June 2nd, 1891.)

Cross-examined by MR. LAWLESS. I frequently passed by; he was more frequently there than anybody else—there are two rooms behind the shop on the same floor, and my boy told me that he slept there—it has been a greengrocer's shop, it is now a marine store dealer's shop.

JOHN WHITE . I married the daughter of the female prisoner on August 3rd, 1890—I have known the female prisoner between three and four years—I did not know her when her late husband was alive—I have been in the shop in Arthur Street—the mistress managed the top shop and Mr. Hinbest managed the bottom shop, No. 141, since 1890—I have seen Hinbest at two, three, or four shops since 1890, attending to the place—since he took No. 141 he has not attended to the other business, but he used to come up of a night when the business at 141 was closed, but not every night—if he got to Arthur Street before the business closed he generally sat in the kitchen—the mistress paid the sorters since 1890—I fix 1890 as the date because after I got married I used towork somewhere else, and I came back at the beginning of 1891—I know nothing about it for that year—at the beginning of 1891 the mistress paid the sorters—I am the son-in-law of Catherine "Ward—I do not know whether Osborn Hinbest is married to her, but I hear they are not married.

Cross-examined by MR. LAWLESS. Osborn Hinbest took the place, and slept there every night—the female prisoner managed the business—he slept at No. 141.

Cross-examined by MR. SANDS. It was a week or two ago that I heard they were not married—they have been living four years as man and wife, and I believed they were married till Mr. Herry, the solicitor who defended her at Wandsworth, told me a week or two ago that they were not—the solicitor has been changed since then.

JOHN WINDSOR (Detective Sergeant V), On 3rd December I received two search-warrants for Nos. 2 and 4, Arthur Street, and 141, Battersea Park Road, and went with an officer to 4, Arthur Street, between three and four p.m.—No. 2 and No. 4 are both marine store shops; No. 3 is a shed on the opposite side of the way, used for stowing rags, bottles, and bones—I saw the female* prisoner at No. 4, and said, "You are Mrs. Hinbest?"—she said, "Yes"—I said, "I know Mr. Hinbest is not in; we are police-officers, and have a warrant to search your place"—she said, "You won't find anything here"—Sergeant Bancroft commenced searching the kitchen and the shop; and among some rags he found this watch and two spoons (produced) and handed them to me—I did not actually see them found—while I was searching the shop the male prisoner came to the door, which was bolted; I let him in and said, "You know me?"—he said, "No; what are you doing here?"—I said, "We are police-officers, and are searching your premises under a search-warrant"—he said, "Let me see it"—I read it to him; he said, "I don't know anything about it"—I showed him the watch and spoons, and said they had been found among the rags on the premises; he said, "I don't know anything about them, I am not in the business; if there is anything here I know nothing about it"—he remained in the kitchen,

and I and other officers were engaged in searching; and in a back room up among a large quantity of rags, entirely covered, I found this basket with two lots of tools in it, and in the shop downstairs, among a quantity of rags and bones, I found two india rubber mats, one of which has been identified by Mr. Bell—I showed them to the three prisoners at No. 4, and said, "These things will ultimately form the proceeds of various larcenies, and you will be taken in custody for receiving them"—they were taken to the station, when the female prisoner said she bought the mat for 3s. of a man whose name she gave—"Ward said, u Yes, he left some lead for us; he has not yet been paid"—these things were before them at the time—with regard to the tools, she said, "They have been there a long time"—the hose was found next morning upstairs, also covered with rags—at the Police-court the female prisoner said as to the hose, "I purchased that from a man named Coleman; I do not know his address, but he is well known; I gave 3s. for it"—Ward said, "Yes, that is quite right"—I subsequently gave directions for Coleman's arrest; he was taken, and said, "I know nothing about it"—he was taken to the Police court and confronted with the three prisoners—I said to the female prisoner, "Is this the man you bought the watch of?"—she said, "Yes"; I said to Coleman, "If this person says she gave you 3s. for that watch, is that true?"—he said, "No"—he was placed with several others, and Hitchman failed to identify him—he was charged and discharged—the female prisoner said, "Yes, that is true; I did give you 3s. "; he said, "No, that is all that I owe her, half-a-crown"—Coleman was discharged—I served a copy of this notice on Osboro Hinbest on the 2nd at Holloway—this is the original—the name at 4, Arthur Street, was "Catherine Ward, Marine Store Dealer"—when 141, Battersea Park Road was searched, Sergeant Foley showed me four finger-plates which he found; they were taken away with other things—I found these letters, one on the female prisoner and one among the papers; also this letter, from Mr. Perrett, and a half-sovereign; and these papers, at 4, Arthur Street, not on the person of anybody—I have known the prisoners in Arthur Street three years, and during the last six months I have seen the three prisoners there and a younger son of the female prisoner—I have seen Osborn there, morning and evening, once or twice a week, but I was not always that way. (Several receipts were here put in.)

Cross-examined by MR. LAWLESS. There were six remands at the Policecourt—I was put into the box, but not, I think, four times—I did not see the finger-plates found—I was called after Sergeant Foley.

Cross-examined by MR. SANDS. I never saw a place so full as it was; every room, even the kitchen and bedroom, had all sorts of lumber—Coleman was arrested in consequence of the female prisoner's statement; it was her word against Coleman's.

Re-examined. I found no books at Arthur Street.

JOHN FOLEY (Police Sergeant). On December 3rd I assisted in searching at Arthur Street and 141, Battersea Park Road—at Arthur Street I found, in an anteroom at the top of the stairs, a bag of saccharine marked "B. B. and Co.,"concealed under some rags—I also assisted in the search of the next shop, No. 2, and found fifty new sacks, and other sacks, amounting to between 400 and 500, distributed in various parts, and somewhat concealed; the prisoners, I believe, had let that shop, and were clearing it out to make room for the incoming tenant—the bags

wore all loose, not tied up in any way—some of the bags, with the name of "Gordon, Hill, and Co.,"had been turned inside out to conceal the marking, and other bags packed into them—they are identified by Mr. Myer—I went to Battersea Park Road, with other officers, on the 4th, and in a room at the back of the shop, just alongside the bed which Hinbest was supposed to occupy, I found these four finger-plates, which were taken to the station and shown to the prisoners with the other property, and they were asked how they accounted for the sacks—Ward said, "These sacks were brought with the saccharine by one of Austin's men on Tuesday morning"; that would be December 1st—I asked how much he paid for them—he said, "I did not pay for them, my mother was not at home at the time"—the mother said she had not seen the property—the lad gave a description of the man who brought them—Hinbest said he knew nothing at all about them—I found no business books at either house.

Cross-examined by MR. LAWLESS. The bed looked as if it had been used; there were bed-clothes on it—I saw no washing utensils—the finger-plates are worth about 8d. each.

Cross-examined by MR. SANDS. I found the new bags at No. 2 with a lot of rubbish—that was the place where the sorters worked—I found bags full of bags turned inside out.

HENRY JARMAN (Detective Serjeant W). I assisted the other officers at the search at Arthur Street—I went upstairs with Ward, and in the front bedroom found two watches, part of a watch-chain, seven brooches, two bangles, a silver necklace, a coral necklace, a plated tankard, two chains, four rings, a meerschaum pipe, and a watch bow; some were in a chest of drawers, some in the drawers, and some on the mantelpiece and in various parts of the room—Mr. Wennestein identified the two watches; I found this one on the drawers, and Ward said, "That is my watch, and the other is my brother's; I bought them; that one has a bow, but one hand is off"—I said, "You are a young man buying things like these"—he said, "I am seventeen, and am a partner in the business"—we also found a quantity of new silk in the drawers.

Cross-examined by Mr. SANDS. The articles were lying about all over the place, not locked up—this is all the jewellery I could find—there is one English lever watch.

JOHN PATRICK (Police Sergeant 69 V). I am located in Battersea—I assisted in searching 2 and 4, Arthur Street, and found a watch without a bow, concealed under a quantity of rags; I was present on 2nd December when Osborn Hinbest charged a lad named Mulroy with' stealing some rags; he said that his business was at 141, Battersea Park Road, and that he occupied premises at 3a, Arthur Street and signed the charge-sheet—the things were supposed to be stolen from 3, Arthur Street—Hinbest said they were his property—3, Arthur Street is a warehouse, and there is a warehouse opposite No. 2 and No. 4.

Cross-examined by MR. SANDS. Mulroy made some statement when he was charged, and after that a fresh warrant was applied for.

WILLIAM STEVENS (186 V). I assisted in searching Nos. 2, 3, and 4, Arthur Street—I found at No. 4 a number of window fittings, and in this sack these 43 finger-plates, and in the backyard a number of sacks of old bottles—I have been about that neighbourhood for the last six months,

and have seen the three prisoners there frequently; I have seen Osborn at two o'clock and at eight p.m. frequently in the evening.

Cross-examined by MR. LAWLESS. It took eight or nine of us three days to search the place and turn the rags and filth over; I found a large number of other things which have not been identified.

WILLIAM HENRY RICKARDS . I am a builder—in October last I was building some houses at Footbridge Road, Clapham Common, and had a number of window fittings stored at No. 68, and 47 finger-plates—these 262 window fastenings and 47 door-plates produced, are identical with what I lost—they are worth £3

THOMAS BATES (Policeman). I was present at the London Sessions, Newington, in April, 1889, when Osborn Hinbest was convicted of receiving stolen goods, and sentenced to twelve months—the prisoner is the man.

Osborn Hinbest's statement before the Magistrate. I have nothing to say, only I have never seen the things."

Ward's Defence. I do not know anything about it.

MR. SANDS submitted that the prisoner Catherine ought to be acquitted, as she could not receive from her husband. There being no allegation as to who the thief was, the COMMON SERJEANT left it to the JURY to say whether the two Hinbests were man and wife.

GUILTY on the second count. OSBORN HINBEST**.— Five years' Penal Servitude. CATHERINE HINBEST.— Fifteen Months' Hard Labour. WARD.— Six Months' Hard Labour.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-237
VerdictsGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentencesImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

237. GEORGE HERBERT BUSH PLEADED GUILTY to two indictments for housebreaking and burglary, after a conviction at Worship Street on August 6, 1889, in the name of Arthur West.— Six Months' Hard Labour.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-238
VerdictGuilty > with recommendation
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

238. GEORGE WARNE (34) , Unlawfully taking Elizabeth Hill, aged under sixteen, out of the possession of her mother, with intent, &c.

MR. UGSMORE Prosecuted.

GUILTY. Strongly recommended to mercy by the JURY, the girl being as bad as the prisoner, and evidently looking older than sixteen. Three Months' Hard Labour.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-239
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

239. THOMAS McCAWLEY (21) and GEORGE ROBERTSON (18) , soldiers, Robbery with violence on John Hurley, and stealing 7s. 6d., his money.

MR. BAYLISS Prosecuted.

JOHN HURLEY, JUNIOR . I am a labourer, and live at Warlingham Station—on Saturday evening, the 26th December, about half-past eight, I was going from Caterham to my home—as I was passing Wapsis Lodge, which is about five minutes' walk from home, the two prisoners came up—McCawley said, "Give me the price of a drink"—I said,** I have no money to give, and I know nothing about you"—McCawley said, "We must have some," and he tried to put his hands in my coat pocket—I had nothing in that pocket; I had 7s. 6d. in three half-crowns in my left-hand trousers pocket, and is and a few halfpence in my right hand pocket—I told McCawley to keep his hands out of my pockets, and then he said to Robertson, "Of! with your belt"—they both took off their belts, and McCawley struck me on the back of my head with his

belt, knocking me to the ground—then they dragged me about thirty yards up a bye-lane, going to Upper Warlingham—both got on top of me, and one (I cannot say which) put his hands in my pockets and took these three half-crowns out—I felt the hand in my pocket—Robertson was on me and McCawley was standing up kicking me in the back—McCawley said to Robertson, "Have you got it?"—Robertson did not say anything—my father came up to my assistance and hit one of them with a half-gallon bottle which he had in his hand—they got off me then and turned on him, and when I rose up I saw they had him on the ground kicking him, and when I got to his assistance they ran away—directly I got up I found my three half-crowns were gone—I was not able to follow them—I could not see anything of them after they ran away—I had a cut on the head, and my back was very much hurt; I have not been able to do any work since.

Cross-examined by McCawley. I, my father, and another man were together when you met us; there were three of us—I don't know where my brother was; I saw him when I got up, after you had us on the ground—you knocked me down with your belt—I don't know how you did it when my father and the other man were with me—my brother is James Hurley; he came up after you struck me; we did not know he was coining—it was you put your hand in—I did not say in my last statement that it was Robertson, but you—the other man was with my father and me—I cannot say if my brother was with you; I did not see him before I got off the ground—I could not do much when you hit me on the head with your belt.

Cross-examined by Robertson. I was with my father and another man—it left an injury on my head—McCawley said to you, "Have you got it?"—I did not see my brother when I met you first—my father is an old man.

Re-examined. I was with my father and Burkis—when McCawley came and spoke to me and put his hand in my pocket and they assaulted us, Burkis turned to light his pipe, I believe, and my father was on the other side of the road—I did not know my brother was there—the prisoners had big coats on them.

JOHN HURLEY, SENIOR . I am the father of the last witness—I am a labourer, living at the station—on the Saturday night after Christmas, about half-past eight, I was going home from Caterham with my son and Burkis, when. the two prisoners, who were coming from Warlingham way, met us against Wapsis Lodge—they came to my son and stopped him, and wanted money for beer, and he said he did not have any money and they had a few words more, but I heard one of them, I don't know which, say, "Off with the belts," and then one of them hit him and knocked him down, and they both came down on him and dragged him about thirty yards up a bye-lane going to Warlingham—I had a bottle in my hand with half a gallon of beer in it, and I went and hit one of them with the bottle, and McCawley then came and hit me, knocked me down and kicked me, and broke my nose, with his foot I suppose—when I hit one with the bottle both were on top of my son—I recognised the two men directly, because there was a light in the house opposite, and they dragged my son into the bye-lane, and it was dark there—when they kicked me I was knocked senseless, and when I got up they were gone—I went to the

barracks and reported it, and they told me to go up next morning at ten o'clock—the postmen found some of their clothes next morning.

Re-examined by McCawley. I was with my son and the other man, and saw you knock my son down—I could not tell which of you two took off your belt; I saw the belts swinging—you both asked him for the price of a drink—you knocked up against him—I was a few steps away; I went forward; I did not think it would come to what it did—I saw one of you swing your belt and knock my son down, and you dragged him into the side road—I went over as quick as I could, as soon as you knocked him down and dragged him into that lane—the bye-road is not thirty or forty yards from the lodge—I saw it done—I had a man with me—I did not see you take any money.

Cross-examined by Robertson. I was coming with my son and one man—we did not come and flock round you—it was a bottle I hit with.

Re-examined. I and my. son were coming from Caterham—I heard them speak to my son, and went on a little bit, as I did not think it was coming to anything till I saw the belt swinging and knock him down.

HARRY BURKIS . I am a labourer, and live at Upper Caterham—on this Saturday night I was going along the road with the two John Hurleys, and when we got opposite Wapsis Lodge we met two soldiers, the two prisoners—the tall one asked John Hurley, junior, for the price of a drink—he said he had not got anything, and did not know anything about them—they then started going across the road; the three of them went across, and then the father went across—I was standing in the middle of the road lighting my pipe; Hurley shouted out, and I went across to him—the soldiers were gone then; they ran away—I did not see them do anything to Hurley; it was too dark, I could not see; I saw young Hurley lying down in the ditch—I could not see the old man—I picked the young man up—I had seen the prisoners before that evening in the valley.

Cross-examined by McCawley. I never had anything to do with you—I did not see you coming along the road before we met you; I did not see you do anything; I only heard what you said to him.

Cross-examined by Robertson. I was coming down the road, and you came up to us; you asked John Hurley for the price of a drink; I did not see you take your belts off or using them—when John Hurley got hold of you he was not lying on his back; you had gone when I got up.

Re-examined. All I heard of the disturbance was hearing them shout out.

JAMES HURLEY . I am a brother of the prosecutor, and the son of John Hurley—on Saturday night, 26th December, I was coming along Caterham Valley, in conversation with McCawley and Robertson; we went towards Warlingham, and when we got within 200 yards of Warlingham Station Robertson said, "I will go no further, as we are getting out of bounds, and shall be late at barracks"—they asked me for the price of a drink, and I put twopence into McCawley's hand he said, "I am sure you have got some more"; I said, "I have not; I have done no work since last Saturday "; McCawley said to Robertson, "Have you got your revolver?"he said, "Yes"—McCawley said to me, "You need not follow us any further"—I said, "I am not following you, I am going after my father and my brother"—we got to the he age

and met my father and brother, and they asked him for the price of a drink—my brother said, "My father has got a bottle here, and if you like to come home you can have a drink"—they answered, "We want some money, and we must have it"; and they hit my brother, I don't know what with, but he fell to the ground, and they dragged him about thirty yards up a bye-lane; I ran part of the way up, and they were on top of him—I did not hear anything said—I stopped there till my father rushed up and hit him with the bottle he had in his hand, and the prisoners got off him and knocked my father down, and kicked him and ran away, and jumped over a hedge—I did not see any more of them—I was close to them, about a dozen yards away from them—on the Sunday I found a belt with 135 on it, over the hedge where they jumped over.

Cross-examined by McCawley. Robertson asked me for the price of a drink, but I gave the twopence to you—I don't know what you did with it—my father and brother stopped behind, and I returned when I met them—I did not say anything to my father—I did not go to them and speak to them—we did not get round you—I kept half-a-dozen yards away from you—I saw one of you knock my brother down—I did not see you kick him; but I saw one of you kick my father; I cannot say which of you, because it was dark—I found the belt over the hedge the next day—you jumped over that hedge into a meadow when you ran away.

Cross-examined by Robertson. I said nothing to my father; I never went so far as my father, when you met them I stopped—the belt was over the hedge—I gave it to my father.

By the JURY. McCawley had had a drop of drink, I believe, but Robertson was quite right—none of my party was intoxicated, we were all sober; we went to the barracks afterwards, and they can prove we were sober.

THOMAS BUSH . I am postman at Warlingham Station—on Sunday, 27th December, I was coming down the road in the early morning, and came against something—I struck a match, and found this cape, cap, and stick; I picked them up and carried them to the office, and gave them into the hands of Mr. Grabholt, the Master of Warlingham Station—I found them in the middle of the road.

JOHN STEELE . I am a sergeant in the Scots Guards, quartered at Caterham—this cap, No. 209, is the property of Private George Robertson, and this cape, No. 303, is the property of Thomas McCawley; this. stick is the property of Robertson, and this belt belongs to Private McCawley—I remember the night of 26th December; I was at the barracks—I did not see any of the Hurleys; if they came to make a complaint I did not receive it.

WILLIAM TIDD JOHN . I am a surgeon, practising at Caterham Valley—on Sunday, 27th December, I saw the prosecutor, John Hurley, junior, and his father—John Hurley, junior, had a cut on the right side of his head and a bruise on the bridge of his nose, and his face was scratched—the cut on his head could be caused by a blow from something sharp; it might have been done with this belt; it was not serious—the bruises on the back of his head were not serious, but they looked as if he had had several blows—the father had his nose damaged; it was badly

broken; I cannot say how it was done; it might have been done by a kick.

Cross-examined by McCawley. It looked as if his nose had been stamped upon; I should say it could be done by one of these buckles.

JOHN BRIDE . I am an Inspector of the Surrey Police, stationed at Caterham—on 27th December, at nine a.m., the prosecutor came to the station and made a complaint; he handed me this cap, cape, and stick—I saw he was injured in the face—I told him he would have to accompany me to the barracks—we went there, with Hurley, senior, and James Hurley—I made my complaint to the sergeant-major, and the prisoners were paraded, and identified by Hurley, senior and junior—I charged them with violently assaulting John Hurley, senior, and John Hurley, junior, and stealing from the person of John Hurley, junior, the sum of 7s. 6d. in money, on the highway at Caterham, on 26th December, 1891—McCawley replied, "That is wrong; they attacked us first"—Robertson said nothing—I took them to the station; nothing was found on them—the cap was lying on the table, and Robertson said, "That is my cap. "

The prisoners' statements before the Magistrate. Robertson says:" We do not wish to say anything. "McCawley says: We are not guilty as to the money part."

McCawley's Defence. We met these men in a public-house, and they asked me the road; we walked out, I first and Robertson after me; he said, "It is as near this way as the other"; we walked about two miles on the road, and I said, "It is time to go back to barracks"; we met the two men Hurley; they got round us, and he hit me on my eye; I gave him a punch and took off my belt; he struck me, and I fell; I got up and ran; I was sober; it is all false about the money.

Robertson's Defence. We went to the public-house and were drinking there, and this man Hurley struck McCawley; he came over to me and said, "Do you know this man?"—I said, "No"; two men came in and shook hands with us; a third came and we walked out; they said, "Will you go home with us?"—we said, "Yes," and went about a mile; I said, "We are going too far," and we turned back as far as this hedge, and the son went and spoke to the father; they got round us, and the son hit McCawley, and McCawley hit him back; McCawley got knocked down, and I went to his assistance and got knocked down and kicked; the father had something tied up in a handkerchief; I ran; I was glad to get away, but John Hurley kept hold of my hand and said, "Come and kick them "; they were all drunk in the public-house.


Before Robert Malcolm Kerr, Esq.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-240
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

240. THOMAS WILLIAMS (21), JOHN DIMBER (17), and HENRY FALBY (16) PLEADED GUILTY to burglary in the dwellinghouse of Thomas Binstead, and stealing thirty-three coats and other goods.— Twelve Months' Hard Labour.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-241
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

241. GEORGE BROOKS (18), FREDERICK SMITH (37), JAMES LEWIS (18), and JOHN CONNOR (22) , Burglary in the dwellinghouse of Thomas Barrett, and stealing three jackets, eight overcoats, and other goods, his goods and chattels. Second Count, receiving the same.

THOMAS BARRETT . I live at 3, Causeway Place, Newington Causeway, S. E; I closed my premises on the evening of 8th December—I was called up by two constables about two a.m.; I saw my clothing was gone—a pane of glass was broken—I had fastened the shutter; it was lowered—I missed sixteen coats, three pairs of trousers, and two waistcoats—this coat was shown to me as having been on Connor—it is mine; there is the tacking cotton; that was there on the Wednesday night—I had just started the job, but being a particular job I could not go on with it, and so hung it up till the next morning—this handkerchief was shown to me as having been found on Lewis; that is mine.

JAMES AL (9721). On 10th December I saw the prisoners loitering in the neighbourhood of 3, Causeway Place, Borough, about two a.m.—I examined the glass of the window of No. 3—I had been there shortly after one—it was all safe—I roused the prosecutor, called the assistance of another constable, who went in—I remained outside till the prosecutor came out with the other constable and Brooks.

Cross-examined by Smith. I saw you between eleven and one o'clock that night.

WILLIAM GENTLE (Detective M). On 10th December I went with Dywell and three officers to the lodging-house at 21, Southwark Place, shortly after nine a.m.; I went up to the bedroom and saw Smith, Connor, and Lewis in bed—we awoke them—Lewis said, "What do you want?"—I said, "We are police officers, and shall arrest you for breaking and entering a tailor's shop in* the Causeway last night"—he said, "All right"—we took them downstairs, and handed them over to the other officers, who took them to the station—I searched the kitchen, and found this sack containing coats, trousers, and waistcoats—I took them to the station, they were identified by the prosecutor as his property, and having been stolen from his shop the previous night—the prisoners were charged—they made no reply—Connor was wearing this coat at the station—it was identified by the prosecutor.

Cross-examined by Smith. I think the bedroom in the lodging-house holds twenty-six beds—if another man had been sleeping where you were, and answered the description given me as accurately as you did, I should have taken him to the station.

Cross-examined by Connor. I did not notice a bundle of clothing when I first went into the lodging-house kitchen—a man named Baker was arrested, but we were unable to get sufficient evidence against him—the deputy's son identified him as the man who brought the clothes in—but we found the boy told lies.

THOMAS DYWELL (Detective M). I went with Gentle to 181, Great South wark Street on the morning of the 10th—I found Connor, Lewis, and Smith in bed—I arrested Lewis—I searched him—I found this pocket-handkerchief in his left-hand coat pocket—the prosecutor identified it—I assisted Connor to put this coat on—when I charged Smith he said, "Yes"—I said, "You will be charged with being concerned with others in committing the burglary"—the burglary had been mentioned—I saw the property at the lodging-house which was identified by Gentle.

Cross-examined by Smith. I did not say at the Police-court, "I am almost sure you are innocent"—I did not find anything on you relating to the robbery—I should have taken anyone sleeping where you were

who answered your description—I did not know Baker had committed the burglary, or I should have detained him—I apprehended him, took him to the station; but from inquiries I made, and from the statements made by the boy, I found it was impossible for the crime to have been committed by the time the boy stated—the boy said he saw Baker come into the lodging-house at 10.30 with the clothes under his arm; then he said it was a quarter to eleven, and then shortly before eleven—I do not know what you said yes to; you said it when charged—I did not try to connect you with the handkerchief found on Lewis—you did not at the Police-court correct the u underwriter" and he did not have to cross anything off, to ray knowledge.

Cross-examined by Connor. From inquiries we found it was impossible for the burglary to have been committed between ten and eleven, therefore Baker was liberated—the boy made a statement at the Police-court; he did not make this statement to me, that when he saw Baker come in with the clothes in his arms he said, "Take those out of this house, you will get my father into trouble," and that Baker replied, "Hold your noise; it is all right; don't say nothing till the morning."

Re-examined. I was cross-examined by Smith—he asked if he had been previously convicted.

PATRICK HANSHEET (138 M). I was with 97 M on 10th December, and found the window broken at 3, Causeway Place—I examined the premises with Barrett—I found Brooks under the tailor's board in the front room, concealed in brown paper; I pulled him out and asked him what he was doing; he said, "I only came in for a doss"; I said, "A quantity of clothing has been stolen "; he said, "I know nothing of it, I have not stolen it"—I took him to the station; he was charged; he made some remark, "I know nothing of the clothing"—I searched him—I found threepence on him.

JAMES NORRIS (327 M). I produce my tunic—I took it to Barrett to mend on 9th December—I next saw it at the Police-station amongst the stolen property—Dywell showed it to me.

JAMES BALL . I am the lodging-house keeper—I found three coats, two overcoats, and a short jacket under No. 40 bed—I took them to the Police-station—that property was afterwards identified by the prosecutor.

Cross-examined by Smith. The morning after the robbery I was informed of the robbery by my son—he said Baker brought some clothes into the house between 10.30 and 11—I knew Baker as a lodger—when I went my rounds at one o'clock on the 10th you were in bed.

Cross-examined by Lewis. You were in bed at one o'clock when I went my rounds.

Cross-examined by Connor* You were also in bed then.

THE COURT held there was no case except with regard to Connor and Brooks.

Brooks' defence was that he went to the tailor's shop for lodgings, when he was apprehended by the constable and told of the robbery. He could say the others were innocent, from what Baker told him of the robbery.

Connor's Defence. I found the coat in the passage when going to be! about ten minutes to one; I asked whose it was, and, no one answering, I put it on, but I had nothing to do with the burglary.

Witness for Connor. WILLIAM TAYLOR. On that very night Connor came to me at 10.15, and stayed till he went home, at about 12.45.


11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-242
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

242. JAMES PARSONSON , Unlawfully and carnally knowing Rose Silvester, a girl aged fourteen years and ten months. Second Count, attempting, etc.

MR. COLAM Prosecuted, and MR. BIRON Defended.

GUILTY .— Eighteen Months' Hard Labour.

11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-243
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

243. FREDERICK FULLER (41) , Unlawfully uttering to Ada Tiley a counterfeit sixpence.

MR. PARTRIDGE Prosecuted, and MR. LAWLESS Defended.

ADA TILEY . My father keeps a tobacconist's shop at 648, Old Kent Road—I am twelve years old—on the Sunday evening after Christmas Day, about 8.30 p.m., I was in the shop—I served the prisoner with one pennyworth of shag—he gave me this sixpence—I said, "This is a bad one"—he said, "Try it—I took it to my mother—she bit it—a piece came out of it.

Cross-examined. I was alone in the shop; mother was in the parlour at the back—my brother went for a policeman—he is sixteen years old—he was away from five to ten minutes.

Re-examined. Mother did not leave the prisoner till the policeman came.

PHOEBE TILEY . I am the mother of Ada Tiley—she brought me this sixpence—I bit it; a piece came out of it—I walked round to the shop-door—I identified the prisoner as having come in the summer—I said I should lock him up, as he was the same man as came in the summer with a bad shilling—I told him he had been before—he said he thought I had made a mistake—I said I was sure I had not—I had the sixpence in my hand—I said it was bad—on Monday, 22nd June, I was preparing for a birthday party when the girl who served brought me a shilling—I bit it, and a piece came out—the prisoner made off—I saw him through the parlour-window, which looks over the shop—I am almost sure he is the same man—the parlour is raised four steps above the shop, and commands a view of it.

Cross-examined. I was standing at the window looking through the curtain—that was just after dinner, between two and three p.m., on 22nd June.

WILLIAM HANCOCK (109 P). I was called to this house on Sunday evening, the 22nd December—Mrs. Tiley said, "This man came in with a sixpence for one pennyworth of tobacco," and that the girl Ada took the sixpence, and said it was bad—he said, "You had better examine it"—so she went in to her mother, who bit a piece out, and she knew the man as having been before—the prisoner replied he was entirely innocent, and did not know it was bad—he denied having been there before—I took him into custody—I searched him—I found nothing on him.

Cross-examined. I was about a hundred yards from the shop when fetched—this is the sixpence.

SUSIE DAY . I am assistant to Mrs. Tiley—the prisoner came with a shilling in June, and again with sixpence in December—when he gave

me the shilling I served him with a pennyworth of shag—I took it to Mrs. Tiley in the parlour, who bit a piece out of it; and when she came into the shop the prisoner made off, and we have not seen him since till he brought the sixpence—when he came the second time I was in the kitchen, but I came up into the shop a few minutes afterwards and identified the prisoner—I told Mrs. Tiley—I am positive he is the man.

Cross-examined. I could see from the kitchen into the shop through a window—I heard the prisoner ask for a pennyworth of shag.

Witnesses for the Defence.

JONATHAN NEEDHAM LEETION . I am a builder, of 292, Paradise Road Lambeth—the prisoner was in my employment from 7th or 8th June for between six and seven months in June, at 73, Paradise Road, opposite my house—his hours were from six a.m. to eight or nine p.m.—that is between two and three miles from the Old Kent Road—from my books he was painting the staircase in June—we were preparing the house for Inspector Jeffreys, of Westminster, to come in on 24th June—we were working at the house about a month—I first knew him when he came to work for me in June—he is respectable; I always found him straightforward.

Cross-examined. We worked fifteen or sixteen hours a day when pushed—the prisoner was working at this house on 22nd June—his wages were 7 1/2 d. an hour, £1 17s. 6d. a week, and overtime.

ALFRED MOSES . I am a jobbing builder, of 108, Paradise Road, Lambeth—I have known the prisoner from the 2nd April to 6th June—I employed him—I lent the ladders for Leetion's job—I could not remember the date.

Cross-examined. The prisoner has not worked for me lately—I lent the ladders in June.


11th January 1892
Reference Numbert18920111-244
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

244. GEORGE LONGDEN (45) , Feloniously marrying Euphannas Thornton, during the lifetime of his wife Hannah.

MR. A. S. HARVEY Prosecuted.

JOHN THORLEY (Detective). I arrested the prisoner in the Park Road, Battersea, at 5.45 p.m. on 9th December—I told him I was a police officer, and should take him into custody for marrying Euphannas Thornton, on 18th November, 1885, his wife Hannah Longden being still alive—he said, "I did not know I was doing wrong. When I parted with my first wife a deed of separation was drawn up and signed by a lawyer, and I thought I was doing no harm by marrying again"—I asked him if he had said anything to his second wife about having been married before—he said no, he did not think there was any occasion for it—I produce the two certificates—one certifies a marriage solemnised at the Wesleyan Chapel, Hill gate, in the district of Stockport, Cheshire, on 18th December, 1870, between George Longden and Hannah Brewers; the other a marriage between George Hamilton Longden and Euphannas Thornton, on 18th November, 1885, at Everton, in the parish of Whartonon-the-Hill, Lancashire—I asked him it he had two names—he said he had only one.

ELIZABETH BROADHURST . I live at 89, Bridge Lane, Stockport—I am a single woman—I was present at the marriage of my sister, in 1870, with the prisoner.

EUPHANNAS THORNTON . I live at Park Road, Battersea—I was married

to the prisoner on 18th November, 1885—this is the certificate I had—I did not know he was married.

Cross-examined by the Prisoner. You knocked me about and nearly murdered me—you gave me your wages and borrowed some back to spend on other women—you were very strange, and I sought your relations, and found your wife.

The prisoner said he signed "Q. H." became his first wife's name was Hannah; he had lived very unhappily, and had lost £20 and £60 worth of goods.

GUILTY .— Nine Months' Hard Labour.


View as XML