Old Bailey Proceedings.
19th November 1907
Reference Number: t19071119

ActionsCite this text | Print-friendly version | Report an error
Old Bailey Proceedings front matter.
19th November 1907
Reference Numberf19071119

Related Material


Vol. CXLVIII.] [Part 877.


Sessions Paper.







Shorthand Writer to the Court.





[Published by Annual Subscription.]









On the King's Commission of



The City of London,





Held on Tuesday, November 19th, 1907, and following days.

Before the Right Hon. Sir JOHN CHARLES BELL , Knight, Alderman, LORD MAYOR of the City of London; the Hon. Sir EDWARD RIDLIY, Knight, one of the Justices of His Majesty's High Court; Sir ALFRED J. NEWTON, Bart., Sir VAUGHAN MORGAN , Bart., Sir T. VEZEY STRONG , Sir THOMAS BOOR CROSBY, Sir T. VANSITTART BOWATER, Capt. W. C. SIMMONS, HY. HOWSE , Esq., and W. GUTHRIE, Esq., Aldermen of the said City; Sir FORREST FULTON, Knight, K.C., Recorder of the said City; Sir FREDERICK ALBERT BOSANQUET , K.C., Common Serjeant of the said City; His Honour Judge LUMLEY SMITH , K.C., Commissioner, His Majesty's Justices of Oyer and Terminer and General Gaol Delivery holden for the said City, and Judges of the Central Criminal Court.

DAVID BURNETT , Esq., Alderman











(Tuesday, November 19.)

MILLOT, Charles Paul (34, engineer), pleaded guilty on April 23, 1907, of uttering a forged telegram end fraudulently obtaining money thereby, and was bound over in his own recognisances in £250 to tome up for judgment if called upon. It was stated that he also gave an undertaking to leave the country and return no more, which he had not kept, and was now endeavouring to get money from and annoying the prosecutor. The Recorder ordered notice to be given to him to attend on Thursday morning.

(Thursday, November 21.)

The prisoner surrendered.

Mr. Elliott prosecuted. Mr. Muir defended.

The Recorder stated that prisoner had committed a breach of his recognisances, having entered into an undertaking to leave this country and not return, in consideration of which undertaking he had been allowed to go away without punishment. Prisoner would be required to enter into a fresh recognisance in £100 to appear here to receive sentence when called upon and to leave the country at the expiration of one month; also to find a surety satisfactory to the officer in the case in £100, prisoner to remain in custody until the surety is accepted.

(Tuesday, November 19.)

UGARTS, Francis Percy (24, manager), having pleaded guilty. last Sessions of forging and uttering a certain security for the payment of money. to wit, a banker's draft for the payment of £100, with intent to defraud, was bound over in recognisances of himself and Ricardo Gonzalez in £50 each to come up for judgment if called upon, the prisoner to leave for Spain forthwith.

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-1
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

RAGOE, James (56, hatter), pleaded guilty of stealing one post letter, value 2s. 6d., the property of the Postmaster-General.

Prisoner confessed to being convicted on January 8, 1906, of stealing postal letters, receiving 18 months's hard labour, after four previous convictions with short sentences, one for stealing letters. He was stated to have formerly been a member of the London County Council for Battersea.

Sentence, Nine months' hard labour.

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-1a
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

CRIPPS, Henry Windsor (46, postman), pleaded guilty of stealing a post letter containing a postal order for is and three penny stamps, the property of the Postmaster-General, he being employed under the Post Office.

Prisoner was stated to hare admitted having stolen 30 letters. Nine months' hard labour.

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-2
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

WILSON, Albert (37, photographer), pleaded guilty of stealing a post latter containing two postal orders for 10b. and 5s. respectively, and four penny postage stamps, the property of the Postmaster-General, he being employed under the Post Office.

It was stated that losses in letters under prisoners charge had been continuous since September, 1905. Sentence, Nine months' hard labour.

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-2a
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

REID, Charles (31, carman); stealing one mackintosh, the goods of John Price.

Mr. Fordham prosecuted.

JOHN PRICE , 45, Liverpool Street, hosier. On October 18, 1907, at 8.30 p.m., I saw prisoner in the street carrying mackintosh coat (produced), which I had seen hanging 10 minutes before at the door of my shop secured by a chain, the screw of which he had broken from the door. I caught hold of prisoner as he was running away and said, "I shall charge you with stealing this mackintosh." He said, "Here is the mackintosh." I sent for a constable and gave him in charge.

Police-constable HERBERT CATER, 974 City. On October 18 the last witness gave prisoner in charge. He made no reply. I took him to the station. He was quite sober. At the station he gave no addrees and refused to give any account of himself.

Prisoner. I was half drunk when I received that coat. I never took the coat.

Verdict, Guilty. Prisoner admitted being convicted January 28, 1907, receiving three months' hard labour for larceny; there were two previous convictions. Sentence, 12 months' hard labour.

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-3
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

CRYER, Edward Charles (39, accountant), pleaded guilty of being employed as a clerk to the Hanwell Urban District Council, embezzling the sum of £126 10s. 5d., received by him for and on account of the said District Council.

Prisoner was seated to have stolen at least £420 during the past and to be responsible for a number of forged receipts and false entries. He was in receipt of £210 a year salary as Assistant Clerk to the Hanwell Urban District Council and a pension of £70 a year from the Guardians of St. Olaves, where he had been a clerk for 20 yean. He was stated to have had a greet deal of illness in his family. Sentence, 15 months' hard labour.

NEWTON, Montague (34, no occupation), FISHER, Joseph D. (35. engineer). Sentence respited from last Session (Sessions Paper CXLVII., pp. 914—948).

Mr. Muir prosecuted; Mr. Fordham appeared for Nekton; Mr. G. Elliott appeared for Fisher.

Mr. Muir stated that Newton had pleaded guilty of conspiracy and common law forgery. Fisher was convicted of conspiracy to defraud, the Recorder having, on the application of Mr. George Elliott, agreed to state a case. That application was now withdrawn.

Mr. George Elliott absolutely withdrew the application for a case to be stated.

Sentences: Newton, 20 months' hard labour; Fisher, one month's imprisonment, to date from the first day of last Sessions.

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-4
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

HELBERT, Frederick (47, no occupation); having been entrusted with certain property, to wit, a cheque for £550,. for and on account of Frances McCarthy, did fraudulently convert the same to his own use and benefit; having been entrusted with certain property, to wit, the sum of £300, for and on account of Frances McCarthy, did fraudulently convert the same to his own use and benefit.

Mr. A. Moresby White prosecuted; Mr. George Elliott and Mr. Curtis Bennett defended.

FRANCES MCCARTHY . I am the owner of a flat in Burwood Place, which in May, 1906, I put in the hands of estate agents to let or sell. Prisoner called on me and stated he wished to take it furnished for the season, and afterwards to purchase my lease. In the course of conversation I told him I had practically let it, and that the agreement was in the hands of my solicitors—Cohen and Cohen. He said they were the greatest scoundrels in the profession and that I was in very dangerous hands. I said, "They have over £600 of mine in their hands". He asked me to let him know how the matter ended. I wrote to Messrs. Cohen, and getting no answer for a fortnight became alarmed and wrote to prisoner. I suffer from deafness, and prisoner offered to come with me. He asked me to give him a power of attorney, which I did. I went to Cohen's office with prisoner and received a cheque for £605. He suggested to me as a good investment to put it into £1 shares of the Gutta Perche, Company, of which he hoped to become managing director. I gave him a cheque for £550 (produced), which has been honoured by my bank, and is endorsed by prisoner. I received no shares, and some time afterwards he told me the whole thing had fallen through. I asked him to return my £550. He said he would keep it until another good investment turned up. In February, 1906, I went to Matlock. Prisoner came to see me, and said there was a motor-oar company forming of which be hoped to be managing director, which would be a very good investment for my money, and suggested my not only putting the £550 into it but to hand over to him 300 £1 shares in the Kalgoorlie Electric Lighting Company. I wrote to the secretary of the company authorising the transfer, but afterwards counter—

manded that. Prisoner came to see me again, and said if I did not hand them over to him he could get them in spite of me by the power of attorney, I had given him in 1905. I afterwards executed the transfer. Prisoner told me a should have the certificates of the shares in the Motor Company in May, or certainly in June. I have not received them. I returned to town the first week in June, 1906, and re-entered my flat in July. In that month he induced me to make a will in his favour, when I did. I have since made another will. Prisoner held the lease of my flat, which I had frequently asked him to return. Early in this year I consulted my present solicitor, Mr. Yates, who obtained from prisoner in March the lease and a receipt for the £850. I had several times written to prisoner for a receipt, which he never save me until he received a letter from Yates. On February 1, 1907, he gave me receipt (produced) stating that the money was to be invested in the Kitlene Company, which the prisoner had told me was a company for the manufacture of polish, that the works were at Slough, and that I should have my shares in two or three weeks. He agreed to give me £5 a month interest until matters were settled, which he paid for some 10 months, but I have had no interest since February 1. In February I wrote and asked him to see Mr. Yates and settle matters amicably. I got two letters from prisoner in Paris in March, giving the address of Cook and Son. Since then I have heard nothing further from him, and have not been able to find him until he was arrested. I have received no repayment in any shape or way.

(Wednesday, November 20.)

Cross-examined. I made the acquaintance of prisoner in May, 1905, through his calling about the flat in Burwood Place, which I was trying to let. The day he called I told him I could not possibly let it to him, that not only had I signed the agreement to let it to another person, But had sent the agreement to my solicitors, Messrs. Cohen and Cohen. He told me they were the lowest members of their profession and they were scoundrels. It was a great shock to me, because I had implicit trust in them and then had over £600 of my money in their hands. I finished my packing up at Burwood Place, went over to Kensington, and wrote to Cohen and Cohen, and for a fortnight they never replied to my letter. That, of course, confirmed what I had heard. I got frightened, wrote to prisoner, and that is why he offered to go with me to Cohen's office—that was how the acquaintance began. He did not say they had acted for Levine, a moneylender, who was one of the greatest scoundrels. I never heard the name of Levine before. I was not so deaf then as I am now. Not hearing from Cohen. I communicated my affairs to prisoner. I was frightened at what he told me and he offered to accompany me. I wrote letter of May 31, 1905: "Dear Mr. Helbert—Just a line to thank you for having told me what you did about Messrs. Cohen and Cohen. This day week I wrote to them to ask when my mortgage

would be paid off and the matter brought to a conclusion. So far they have not answered my letter. Last year they sent me an enormous bill of costs. Although our acquaintance is a short one, I am going to ask you a favour. Can you tell me how I can get this bill of costs taxed and what the expense would be? I shall be here until June 16. Before that date I should be very pleased to see you." He offered to go to Cohen's. On June 14 I wrote: "With regard to the document I have sent to-day, does it not give you power to represent me and to act on my behalf? I hope so. It will be a great help to me, especially now when I am about to leave town"—that was the power of attorney. On June 21 I wrote: "Do you not think it would be a good thing if you were to see Messrs. Cohen and Cohen yourself and use your personal influence with them to get their terribly heavy, not to say exorbitant, bill reduced? With the power of attorney I have given you you act the same as myself and have my fullest authority to represent me as you think best." "November 28, 1905.—If you will be responsible for my costs in the matter of Cohes. v myself, I hereby undertake not to interfere with any instructions given by you to any solicitors or to interview the latter at all, but to leave you my sole representative in the matter." Prisoner several times wrote me letters for me to copy out. He offered to act as my representative, and suggested to me to write those letters. On December 20, 1905, I wrote: "Thank you for all the trouble you have taken and for the great economies you have effected for me. I wish you to use your own judgment what company's shares you buy for me. I quite approve of your negotiations in the matter." I wrote that letter in the Great Western Hotel at prisoner's dictation. I understood what I was writing. He had got the matter of Cehen's and Cohen compromised by paying a lump sum down. I do not quarrel with what he did. The question of the Gutta Percha Company had gone by—he wanted to put the money into a motor car company, and he said there were two companies, and he did not know which was the best. He wrote to me to write that letter. I wished him to use his own judgment as to which of the two companies he put the money into. He told me both were good investments—it was a question which he could get a small share in. I do not suggest they were not good companies. I only knew what he told me; I have heard nothing for or against. In the letter of February 3, 1906, I authorised prisoner to act for me with Messrs. Avant, the house furnishers, as to a claim for insurance. Prisoner never told me he was in financial difficulties—he told me he was an English officer; he was living at the Great Western Hotel—that does not look like being in financial difficulties. With regard to copy letter (produced) I have no doubt I wrote: "I authorise you to take any steps you may think fit to reduce the amount of Avant and Co.'s charges. I authorise you to receive the dividend on the 300 Kelgoorlie Electrical shares. I quite approve the steps you have taken with respect to the motor concern." I do not remember writing: "I only hope that your financial embarrassments which you described to me

long ago will soon be at an end, and I leave it to you to do what you may think best in our joint interests"—I never wrote that. I think I wrote the early part, but I emphatically say I did not write that Last part, because I did not think prisoner was in financial difficulties. On March 24, 1906, I wrote: "This is to tell you firmly that I ratify and confirm the transfer of 300 preference shares of the Kalgoorlie Electric Power and Lighting Company, which I made to you recently, and that I am accordingly notifying the secretary of the company of my withdrawal of the letter in which I mistakenly wished to cancel the transfer." I remember that distinctly. I had stopped the transfer. Then prisoner again came down to Matlock, and said if I did not give it to him he could get them under the power of attorney which I had given. He said that the whole of the £850 was to be put into the Motor Car Company and that I was to get my certificate for the shares. I never got the shares. I wrote that letter at his dictation. At that time prisoner was acting entirely for me and constantly in communication with me and visiting me in different parts of the country. Of course, when I had given him my power of attorney I gave him carte blanche. Letter of April 23, 1906, is signed by me, but is in the prisoner's writing: "Thanks for the £5." I very reluctantly gave up these 300 Kalgoorlie shares, and the day I transferred them prisoner said the Motor Car Company was forming. I said I could not afford to lose interest for two or three months, so he said until the shares were bought he would give me £5 a month interest, and I agreed to that—"I want to confirm my previous letters giving you an entirely free hand in making what disposal you like of my funds, and I hope that your difficulties will soon be at an end." Prisoner wanted to put this money into a motor-car company in which he said he was also going to put money belonging to some members of his own family, and of which he himself would be managing director. That is what I alluded to by "the difficulties." I never knew he was a poor man or a man in difficulties. That is in the prisoner's writing. On several occasions he wrote out letters, which I signed. In fact all these letters that allude to business were dictated by him to me and I signed them. I do not suggest that I did not understand them, but I trusted and believed in him. On April 241 wrote at hit dictation: "I do not wish you to send me any certificates about the investment of the money until you are able and wish to do so." I was at Matlock and he used to come up to see me for week-ends. On December 2. 1906, I wrote from Stafford Rectory, Dorchester: "My Dear Friend,—Where does the friendship get in if your so-called friend and hostess for whom you gave up your best friend?" He said over and over again I was his best friend. That brought our social friendship to an end, but this letter had nothing in the world to do with business. (A large number of letters were put to the witness suggesting that a jealousy had arisen with regard to another lady. The Recorder said that none of these letters established that the prosecutrix gave prisoner the money to be used for his own and her interests; they showed that she had

apparently some affection for him and that she was very indignant with him for staying at a house under circumstances which the did not approve of. That did not show that the gave prisoner the money. The receipt of February, 1907, stated that the money was to be put into the Kitlene Company.) The receipt was to show that my money was put into the Kitlene Company and that I was to have my certificates of shares. At that time he had had my £850 for over a year. I told him to leave my money uninvited no longer. I knew that the Kitlene Company was a company for making polish or glue to be used in connection with machinery. I never saw the Papers produced of that company. Prisoner told me he had made a will in my favour and his solicitor suggested that I should make a similar will in his favour, otherwise my property would go to my next-of-kin, with whom I am not on good terms. I had meant to leave it to a charity. I made the will voluntarily. I knew I could revoke it at any time, and I have revoked it. I wrote and told prisoner so. He did not complain, but wrote that he would rather benefit by my friendship when living than by any money at my death. I did not believe him. I never saw him alter that; our private friendship had come to an end, and I had gone on to strictly business lines. I wrote for my lease and demanded a receipt for my money. Prisoner refused until my solicitor (Mr. Yates) wrote a very strong letter, and on February 12, 1907, prisoner handed me my lease and receipt. He told me he had bought shares in the Kitlene Company, and that I was to have the certificates in two or three weeks. He did not say he was doing his utmost with Davis, the owner of the patent, in pushing matters to a conclusion. He never said he had bought an option. The very week I put my affairs in Mr. Yates'e hands prisoner left London. I never heard till this moment that my money was spent in promotion. I never gave the money as a loan. I never was in a position to lend £850 to anyone. I gave him the money to invest for me.

Re-examined. Prisoner wrote twice from Paris, but I did not know what he was there about. It was after my solicitor had written asking him to settle up and either give me the £850 or the shares. He asked me to write to him at Cook and Son, Place de 1'Opera, Paris. I did not answer his letters, but handed them to my solicitor. I never saw or heard from prisoner again. There is not a word of truth in the suggestion that I ever gave prisoner the money or that I knew he was in financial difficulties and wanted to help him as a friend. I several times asked him to return my lease. He wrote saving he was writing under legal advice—he tried to frighten me—but he never made any allusion to the lease or the receipt. In the letter of December 13, 1906, I used the word "loan" as to the £550, but I never meant it as a loan, and when I wrote "gave you the other £300" I meant I had handed it to him to put into the Motor Car Company. I used the word "gave" and "lent" inadvertently in what I thought was a private letter. (The Recorder said the receipt showed that, even if It was originally a loan, at the date of the receipt prisoner intended to hold £850 for investment; the charge was that having

£850 to be applied for a particular purpose prisoner appropriated it to his own use.) On February 6, 1907, prisoner called and point blank refuted to give me the receipt or my lease, and said he was so advised by his solicitor, Mr. Abbott. I went immediately and put the matter in Mr. Yates's hands. Prisoner then brought me the written undertaking to invest the money in the Kitlene Company—that was worded and written by himself. He represented it as a company then caring on business.

WILLIAM ALEXANDER STEWART , clerk in the office of the Registrar of Joint Stock Companies, Somerset House. I produce file of the Kitlene Syndicate, Limited, a company registered in 1904 as "The Lightning Furniture Renovator Company," taking the name of "Kitlene, Limited," in July, 1904. The company got in arrear with its returns, and, in reply to the usual circular, in September, 1906, a note was received that the company never went to allotment. We have received no information since.

HENRY JAMES DIXON , secretary, Kalgoorlie Electric Power and Lighting Corporation, Limited. On March 5, 1906, Frances McCarthy was the registered owner of 300 £1 shares, of which I received a transfer. She wrote cancelling the transfer and afterwards withdrew the cancellation. The shares were then transferred to prisoner, and in March, April, and May were transferred to Marsh and Shirley, 25 at 18s.; 200 at 17s. 6d.; and 75 at 19s.

Detective ALEXANDER MC GINNIS , City. On July 10, 1907, I held a warrant for the arrest of the prisoner, which I could not execute until October 15, when I found him at the Great Central Hotel. I asked if his name was Frederick Helbert. He said, "Frederick Helbert is my name." I told him I was a police officer, and held a warrant for his arrest, which I read and which charges him that being entrusted with a cheque for £550 in order that he might apply the same for the purpose of investment, did fraudulently convert the same to his own use. He said, "I absolutely deny that." When charged he made no reply.

Statement of prisoner. "I plead not guilty, and I reserve my defence."

FREDERICK HELBERT (prisoner, on oath). I am 47 years of age, and was arrested when staying at the Great Central Hotel. I first met Miss McCarthy in May, 1905, at 2, Burwood Place. I was anxious to take a small cheap flat. She told me she had practically closed with a tenant, but if I would take her furniture at a higher rent she would try to arrange it. On May 31 the wrote asking me to see Messrs. Cohen. I said that they had represented the biggest scoundrel I had ever met in business in an action which he brought against me—that was Levine, a moneylender. I then assisted her in getting a considerable reduction of Cohen's bill of costs, and was negotiating with that firm for her from May 31 to December 20,1905. In June, 1905, I had a probationary appointment at £250 a year with the New Gutta Percha Company. I was given to understand that if I brought £2,000 into the company I should be made assistant manager

at a much higher salary. I told Miss McCarthy this, and when we went to Cohens to get the £600 the agreed to help me by putting this money and, as I hoped and thought, more at my disposal. On. June 10 she handed me a cheque for £550 at a loan. I received the power of attorney on June 14. I learnt that the company's invention, which was for insulating electric wires, was being superseded by a better system, and I told her it was better not to put the money into that company. (To the Recorder.) She bed given me the £550 to put into the company for our joint interest. It was not settled what name the shares would be put in. I pressed her very much to name a lawyer for herself, and I should have consulted mine. The benefit I was to get was the salary; the benefit she was to get was the return on her shares. The £550 was entrusted to me to be invested for both our benefits—I am not up to the enact meaning of the legal word "joint interest"—it was to do both of us good. (To Mr. Curtis Bennett.) It was undoubtedly for our mutual interest. I worked for the company up to the middle of July. (To the Recorder.) Miss McCarthy was to have the return on the shares and I was to get the advantage of the salaried position—she would have the whole of the interest if the company turned out a successes, and I should have had the whole of the income derived from the position of assistant manager. (To Mr. Curtis Bennett.) The money was to be permanently invested in the company. She said she would be satisfied with a 4 per cent, investment, and I paid her interest. From July I sought an investment which would effect the two objects I have named.

The Recorder. How can you contend it was a loan after the answer of the witness?.

Mr. Elliott. It was a loan under certain conditions, though possibly the money might never be invested, at in fact it was not. It was to be employed primarily to the advantage of the prisoner, and secondly to hers, but it was still a loan to him, and the great object of it was hit benefit.

The Recorder. This it the very object for which the statute was passed. It would not matter whether they were jointly or solely interested. The Act says: "Whereever being entrusted either solely or jointly with any other person with any properly in order that he may retain in his safe custody or apply, Pay, or deliver for any purpose, or to any person."

Mr. Elliott. This money was entrusted to prisoner primarily for his own advantage and benefit.

The Recorder. That is not what the prisoner says. He says the money came into his hands to be invested in this company and that this lady was to receive the interest and he was to receive another benefit, viz., that of being assistant manager.

Witness. I had negotiations with several companies. (To the Recorder.) I kept the money for a few weeks in the custody of Mr. Armstrong, chief engineer of the Great Western Railway, then in the safe of the Great Western Hotel. Eventually I used it for the purposes for which it had been lent me. There is none of it left. (To Mr. Curtis Bennett.) Miss McCarthy lent me the money to enable me to get a salaried position whilst she got a return for it of 4 per cent. It is impossible to get a position in a company in England without putting money in. The last company I negotiated with was Poole and Co., publishers. Everything was arranged and the contract

in drawn, but when I went down with my solicitor I found that the directors objected to my drawing a salary and it fell through at the last moment. The negotiation with these companies went on to the end of September, 1906. I continued on very friendly terms with Miss McCarthy and instead of the 4 per cent, she said would satisfy her I paid £5 a month interest, which is about 7 1/4 per cent. (To the Recorder.) I paid the interest out of allowances I received from friends and relations. (To Mr. Curtis Bennett.) I paid interest from June 12, 1906, for several months, and she accepted the arrangement. In December, 1906, there was correspondence regarding a certain lady, when Miss McCarthy wrote "At the time I lent you the first £550." etc. Up to that time she had never made any suggestion that the money had been given to me for a certain purpose and that I had misappropriated it. This dispute then arose, and our friendship gradually waned. On February 8, 1907, I received letter from Yates referring to the power of attorney. My lawyers had advised me that a power of attorney instead of being a help might he a very dangerous thing, and on that account I took measures in all these letters, which I dictated to Miss McCarthy and got her to sign, to be confirmed in every action I took. I returned the power of attorney on my solicitor's advice. I never acted under it. She had repeatedly asked me to negotiate the sale of the lease, and I held it for that purpose up to February, 1907. In July, 1906, Miss McCarthy was going to Dorchester, just after the Salisbury accident happened on the London and South-Western Railway, and she was talking of nothing else but the dangers of railway travelling. I said, "What arrangements have you made about your property?" She said the had made none and explained her family history, and that she bad had a very serious quarrel with her only near relative. She then told me the was going to make a will in my favour, which she did, leaving everything to me. I never told her that I had made a will in her favour. (To the Recorder.) I had nothing whatever to leave. (To Mr. Curtis Bennett.) I told her I would much prefer to receive any benefits during her life and not after her death. The arrangement had always been that she should have shares in whatever concern I should find his good enough to put the money in and in addition to that she should share in whatever profit I might get out of the company being floated, proportionately with any other money that I received, and that in addition to that I would give her a charge on my salary to insure at least 5 per cent, interest on her money. That was the arrangement she perfectly understood. She asked me for a receipt in December, 1906. I pointed out that the cheque was in itself a receipt for the £550, and that as soon as any company was formed or any concern into which I put her money wm satisfactorily started she should have shares as arranged between us. (To the Recorder.) There was very little of the money left. I had other money to invest in the company. (To Mr. Bennett.) In December, 1906, I got to know of the Kitlene business, and negotiated fur the purchase of it

with Davis. I had an agreement with him (produced and read), and in March, 1907, I received an option for the purchase of the company in consideration of £600 fully-paid shares for two months (produced). I went to France to get orders and contracts and obtained several. I returned to England in August, 1907. I was in England several times before I wm arrested, staying at the Great Central and Charing Cross Hotels. From the time I first received this money from this lady until September, 1907, I had been continuously working to try and invest it for our mutual benefit. Until December, 1906, she had made no complaint of the way I had dealt with her money.

Cross-examined. The money was a loan without security. I told her I was an undischarged bankrupt at the outset of our acqusintance, on more than one occasion. I was bankrupt in 1902, I think, for £5,000; the assets were very little; nothing has been paid to creditors that I know of. I am still undischarged. I seriously say I told Miss McCarthy I was an undischarged bankrupt, and in spite of that she lent me the money. She alluded to it in the letter which has been read, of which I have not found the original, and in the letter she wrote from Matlock. (To the Recorder.) I told her under my lawyer's advice that I should not accept money without disclosing the fact that I was a bankrupt. It is alluded to in the letter of February 10, 1906. I most positively state she signed that letter. I knew it was an offence to incur a debt without disclosing the bankruptcy. (To Mr. White.) In the letter of April 23 the phrase, "I hope that your difficulties will soon be at an end," had no relation to the Motor Car Company—I was then engaged in taking up a business belonging to Mr. Calendar. I got the £300 in April. I was going to invest it in the Motor Car Company in the same way for our mutual benefit—it would be part of a total sum which I hoped to get of £2,000. I had then some of the £550 left—it was kept under three locks and keys—in my own house, unless at the Great Western Hotel. There must have been at one time £750 in the safe. I did not know at that time that a bankrupt could open a banking account at all—that was the reason it did not go into the bank. My experience with Cohen and Cohen I admit weighed with me in my opinion of them. Miss McCarthy constantly referred to the opinion of Cohen and Cohen held by another solicitor she employed. She had no solicitor afterwards. I pressed her to employ solicitors". I was her friend during the whole period up to December, 1906. I had the power of attorney one month after Cohens ceased to act for her. She said she would not have anything more to do with solicitors. She gave me the lease with the request to sell it if I could. The will in my favour was made in my presence at the Great Western Hotel and attested by two of the servants there. she had no legal advice that I know of. I had a similar experience in making a will for a man called Murray—that was at an hotel in Paris. (Evidence objected to. Held admissible as cross-examination to credit and to show that the prisoner got other people to make wills without

legal advice.) That was also attested by the proprietor and a waiter of the hotel. Murray afterwards went with me to America and died on board the ship. I put forward a claim under the will. His relative refused to take the will back. I put on the record of the Probate Court the win, which I said had been properly executed and which was in my favour. The other side did not plead that Murray had been murdered by me. That plea is not on the record. I most indignantly deny it. I did not settle the case. (The Recorder: We will not go into this.) I feel very strongly this disgraceful insinuation made against me and ask to be allowed to state what exactly did happen. I assure you I am not ashamed of it. After making those innuendoes they did not dare to put it on the record against me, and when I was in court the other side came and took my terms I had nothing to do with the adjustment. I left myself in the hands of my legal advisers—Sir E. Canon and Messrs. Freshfield and Williams. What I did insist upon and did obtain in the fullest manner possible was a withdrawal in open court of the allegations that the will was made by undue influence. In addition to that, those who you state accused me of murdering this unfortunate gentleman, though they never did, and never dared to, offered me and paid me £25,000 and all my costs. I do not think that is a thing which you ought to have dared to bring up against me, or that I ought to be ashamed of for one moment. The will was withdrawn by my Lawyer, Sir E. Carson. By my letter of December 24, I did not threaten Miss McCarthy that I would hand her letters to the husband of the lady at Slough—I asked her not to make it the only course open to me; I asked her "not to force me to place the correspondence in the hands of the gentleman, who is the proper protector of his wife's honour, and who will most undoubtedly take steps to vindicate it." My object was what I hope and think any gentleman would have in repudiating accusations against the good name of a lady. They had been made to me in writing; nobody else knew about them and nobody else does until now. I absolutely deny that I was trying to frighten Miss McCarthy for some motive. Miss McCarthy in November, 1906. came up to London and then asked me about the Kitlene Company. I had always told her that she would have shares and a proportionate part of any profit which I got when the company should be formed and a charge upon my salary, so that the interest on her shares should never be less man 5 per cent. I told her it was impossible that she should have shares from any company until the company was formed, that the formation of the company, the obtaining of the capital, and the registration might tike a fortnight or four months. I showed her one if not both of the circulars of the Kitlene Company. I had been working for a good many months for that company with very satisfactory results. I went to see Mr. Yates after having refused several times to go there and after Miss McCarthy's urgent request several times repeated by letter. I told him I would keep him informed if it were possible to do so of the progress of the business I was doing with the company. I received no letter from

him pressing me to pay—the letter of February 22 was the last I received from Yates. I never received the letter of March 20. By my letter of February 13 I informed him that the three requests—as to the will, the power of attorney and the receipt, and the lease, had been settled between Miss McCarthy and myself. When she wrote that she revoked the will I tore it up. (To the Recorder.) The money was not given me to invest for our joint benefit. It was given for our mutual benefit to be invested in such a way as would bring me a salaried position and to her not lets than 5 per cent interest. The money has been spent in the way it was agreed—in pushing these businesses. With regard to her letter of December 20, 1905: "I wish you to the your own judgment which company's shares you buy for me," there is nothing in that which militates against the spirit in which these negotiations were always carried on between us. I can only repeat what I have maintained all along—the money was lent to me for those two purposes, her getting 5 per cent. interest and my getting a salaried position. (To Mr. White.) I had conversation about motor companies. She did not advance the £300 with reference to such a company. At that time I was taking up a polish company, of which I showed her the balance-sheet. The £300 was not given me to invest in any other sense than I have stated. When I gave her the receipt in February, 1907, I doubt if I had more than a small portion of the £850.

Re-examined. I used the power of attorney for no purpose whatever. I attached no importance to the will—I expected she would make one every month. I was on the Continent from March, to August, 1907, exclusively for the purpose of obtaining orders and contracts for the Kitlene Company. I came over to England several times and made no attempt to avoid process. The two last letters of Mr. Yates never reached me. (To the Judge.) I first heard there was a warrant out when I was arrested, which was within a week after my return. I was engaged in business interviewing people, stayed in hotels in my own name, and never attempted to conceal myself.

(Thursday, November 21.)

FREDERICK HELBERT , recalled. The only arrangement I have ever had with Miss McCarthy was that she lent me the money for my advancement to get myself a salaried position, and out of that position she was to have 5 per cent. She was to have the interest on the shares, but the money was to be a loan and not an investment. Other kind friends had given me money. I have worked on this scheme, which is not a fraudulent business but a genuine one, and if it had not been for the disgraceful way in which I have been swindled and tricked, not only Miss McCarthy but all my other kind friends would be making a very handsome thing indeed. I have here in Court hundreds of pounds worth of orders, a contract to six tons of the stuff which we sold at 5d. or 6d. a lb., at 2 francs a kilo, that is 1s. 7d. for 2 lb.; a contract for tons, next year three tons,

and the year after 12 tons. I have a very large number of orders from the first firms in England, everyone of them obtained by my own management and hard work. (The prisoner entered into a long statement as to his operations with the various companies which the Recorder stated could not be permitted: the Act was passed for the purpose of protecting people who trust money to others for investment who put it in their pocket and expend it on their own account. The simple issue in the case was whether the money was entrusted to the prisoner for investment or whether it was a loan.)

Verdict, guilty on both charges.

Prisoner was convicted on February 22, 1904, of stealing a ring from a shop in Lombard Street, and of obtaining credit whilst an undischarged bankrupt, and sentenced to four months' imprisonment on each, concurrently. It was stated that prisoner had been a mayor in the Army, had obtained the medal and clasp in Burman in 1887, had been political aide-de-camp to the Secretary of State for India and to Lord Carrington when Governor General of New South Wales. Sentence, 18 months' hard labour.


(Tuesday, November 19.)

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-5
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

BRAITHWAITE, Charles (49, tailor), pleaded guilty of possessing counterfeit coin knowing the same to be counterfeit, with intent to utter the same, having previously been convicted of uttering counterfeit coin.

He confessed to a previous conviction, and several others were proved, beginning in 1884.

Sentence, Five years' penal servitude.

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-6
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude; Imprisonment > hard labour; Miscellaneous > sureties

Related Material

YOUNG, William (40, paperhanger), MURPHY, John (27, carpenter), and BUTLER, Benjamin (21, labourer) ; all feloniously making counterfeit coin; all possessing two moulds and other articles, for the purposes of coining; all unlawfull possessing counterfeit coin with intent to utter the same; Murphy and Butler unlawfully uttering counterfeit coin well knowing the same to be counterfeit; Murphy and Butler unlawfully possessing counterfeit coin with intent to utter the same.

Each pleaded guilty of possessing the coin with intent to utter, and Young also of making. The prosecution offered no evidence on the other counts. It was stated that Young had a series of convictions against him since 1883. Murphy had also several previous convictions, one of six years' penal servitude. Butler was said to have bad a good character.

Sentences: Young, Five years' penal servitude; Murphy, 18 months' hard labour; Butler was released on his own recognisances in £10 to come up for judgment in January.

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-7
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceMiscellaneous > sureties

Related Material

SMART, Phœbe, pleaded guilty of breaking into a dwelling-house and stealing the sum of 6d.

It was stated that prisoner, who lived under prosecutor's (a policeman) flat, with a friend of the latter's wife, but lately her health had been affected by a dog-bite, and her husband having to live away, as servant to a gentleman, she had become depressed in consequence. She had hitherto borne a good character.

Released on her recognisances and the surety of her husband, Henry Smart, in £10 to come up for judgment if called upon.

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-8
VerdictGuilty > unknown; Guilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude; Imprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

COOPER, Joseph (50, dealer), and WICKER, Richard (22, dealer) ; both stealing one barrow and two sacks, the goods of Edmund Tanton.

Mr. W. S. M. Knight prosecuted.

Police-sergeant JAMES CRANE . On November 8, about 12.20 p.m., I was in St. George's Road, South Belgravin, when I saw the two prisoners. Cooper was walking on the road and Wicker was pushing a new coster's barrow containing two empty sacks. This was near Lupus Street, the embankment end. Cooper went on the footway, walked a few yards, and then joined Wicker again. I followed for 600 or 700 yards, when I saw Police-constable Davis. We followed as far as the railway at the end of St. George's Road, when I stopped Wicker and asked him if it was his borrow. He said, "No, I am trying to sell it for the other man," pointing to Cooper. The latter was then walking away. Davis went for him, and brought him back, when he said, "The barrow is not mine; I do not know that man; I an not with him." They were both taken to the station, and when charged Wicker said, "I was standing outside a public-house in Thames Street when a man asked me to take the barrow to Putney, Bridge Road. I do not know the man." Cooper said, "I was showing him the way to Putney and was going down by the embankment I put my coat on the barrow." The two coats on the barrow were afterwards owned by the prisoners. Richard Smallwood was found by the City Police, and he identified the barrow.

Cross-examined by Cooper. You did not say, when I saw you first, that you had been asked by Wicker the nearest way to Putney Bridge Road. You were walking with him for about 10 minutes or quarter of an hour before I stopped you. Part of the road is up at the back of Victoria Station; there is one particular spot where you cannot walk.

Cross-examined by Wicker. When I stopped you you did not say you were shoving the barrow for a tall man, nor say anything about a conversation you bad with him. There was something said at the station about half-a-crown, but I did not catch all of it. You mentinned Lower Thames Street or Thames Street, at the station, but not before.

To the Common Serjeant. When I first saw prisoners they were not 200 yards from the embankment, and they came half a mile out of their way to Putney. Wicker did not say that Cooper was showing

him the way when I first spoke to him; only at the station after Coopers statement.

Re-examined. From where I first saw prisoners the most direct way to Putney Bridge Road is along the Embankment.

Police-constable ROBERT DAVIS , 290 B, corroborated previous witness as to what took place after following prisoners and stopping them. At the station Wicker said, "A tall man gave me the barrow and asked me to take it to Putney Bridge Road; he would meet me there." Cooper said, "This man asked me to show him the way to Putney; I was showing him on to the Embankment to Putney, and was going some of the way with him." I did not hear anything said about the coats; there were two on the barrow.

Cross-examined by Cooper. When Wicker said, "I am trying to sell it for him," he apparently meant you.; that is what I said before. I am not sure that he meant you. There was no one else near at the time. You did not tell me in the street that you were only showing Wicker the nearest way to Putney Bridge Road. I did not put anything down in my book till you made your statements.

RICHARD SMALLWOOD , carman to Edmund Tanton, deposed to being in possession of the barrow referred to, in Upper Thames Street under an archway, on November 8, about a quarter to 11, leaving it there with two empty sacks. When he returned in about half an hour the barrow had gone. A week later he identified the barrow and sacks at Westminster. The barrow was worth about £5.

To Wicker. I never saw you take the barrow.

Detective-constable ALFRED DIXON , City, said he took the charge against prisoners.

To Cooper. I have seen you in the City, I should think off and on for about 10 years. I never caught you doing anything wrong.

Witness said he had made inquiries about Wicker at the latter's brother's place, and was told he had not been in trouble before.

To toe Common Serjeant. I have seen Cooper at the horse repositories looking for odd jobs; I have not known him to be in regular employment, and cannot say he has borne a good character during that time. I have heard since his arrest that be has been in trouble.


GEORGE ROYCE , 56 and 57, Alfred Street, Battersea, greengrocer, said he had employed Wicker about 12 months' ago, and gave him a good character.

EDGAR PILLING , Battersea, greengrocer, said that on November 8 Cooper went with him to Billingsgate Market, and from there to Covent Garden, leaving him about quarter to 11 in the morning in Vauxhall Bridge Road. Cooper had worked for him from the end of July to November 8. He had found has character good.

JOSEPH COOPER (prisoner, not on oath), said the reason he came to be with Wicker was because the latter asked him the way to Putney Bridge, and he put him on the right way; that he himself was going to call on his eldest daughter who lives at Chelsea.

RICHARD WICKER (prisoner, not on oath), hoped he would be leniently desk with as it was the first time he had been looked up; he had spoken the truth.

Verdict: Wicker, Guilty of stealing; Cooper, Guilty of being an accessory.

Cooper confessed to previous conviction. Against him 10 previous convictions were proved.

Alfred Dixon was reprimanded by the Common Serjeant for having given (as the Judge thought) the Court and the jury the idea that Cooper was an honest man during the time he had known him.

Sentences: Cooper, Three years' penal servitude; Wicker, Four months' hard labour.


(Tuesday, November 19.)

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-9
VerdictsGuilty > unknown

Related Material

CHALLIS, Henry (45, butcher) ; obtaining by false pretences from Norah Barrett the sums of 6s. 6d. and £2 9s. 6d., the moneys of Florence Barrett, with intent to defraud; obtaining by false pretences from Lilian Small the sum of £3 5s., the moneys of Messrs. Ainslie Brothers; and from Oliver Weeton the earn of £1 16s., in each case with intent to defraud; obtaining by false pretences from Frederick Charles Poole the sum of £3, the moneys of Harrington Layzell; and from Isabell Beith the sum of £1 15s., in each case with intent to defraud.

Mr. Edward Boyd prosecuted.

NORAH BARETT , wife of David Barrett, clerk, 127, Southgate Road, Islington. I live with my mother-in-law, who takes in lodgers. On August 27 prisoner came to lodge at the house. On August 29 he came downstairs and brought a cheque for £2 16s., drawn on the Burton-on-Trent branch of Parr's Bank, signed "J. Anderson," and payable to himself, and asked me to change it. I lent him 6s. 6d. then, and on August 30, after I had. seen my mother-in-law, I gave him the balance of £2 9s. 6d. My husband passed the cheque through his bank, and it was returned marked "No account." We received a letter from him written from the "Golden Lion" Hotel, Ipswich, saying he was coming back shortly. On the cheque being returned we communicated wish him at that address, and in reply received the following letter, addressed from a place near Saxmundham: "Dear Madam,—I am sorry cheque has been returned. Of course, I will make it good to you when I come up on Friday. Trust it hat not put you to any inconvenience.—Yours faithfully, H. Challis." He came and saw my mother a week or a fortnight afterwards.

FLORENCE BARRETT . On August 30 my daughter-in-law showed me the cheque produced and I gave her £2 9s. 6d. When I handed her the money I believed it to be a genuine cheque. Prisoner went

away on September 2, and owing 19s. 10d. Prisoner came to see me about three weeks afterwards, I told him if he did not pay me I would put the matter in the hands of the police.

FREDERICK CHARLES POOLE , assistant to Mr. Harrington Layzell, grocer, High Street, Colchester. I remember prisoner coming to the shop on August 10 and making a small purchase. In payment he offered a cheque for £3 15s. on the Burton on-Trent branch of Parr's Bank, signed "J. Anderson," to the order of Mr. Challis. I took the cheque to Mr. Forsdyke, the manager, who gave me cash for it. I handed the change over to the prisoner. At the time I believed the cheque to be a genuine cheque.

WILLIAM THOMAS FORSDYKE , manager to Mr. Harrington Layzell, gave evidence M to handing over cash for the cheque to last witness.

ISABELL BEITH , book-keeper, Grand Hotel, Clacton-on-Sea. In August last I was acting as book-keeper at the Cupe Hotel, Colchester. I know prisoner by sight and remember him staying at the hotel under the name of Newman. He asked me to change a chequedated August 26, drawn by "J. Anderson," on the Burton on Trent branch of Parr's Bank for £1 15s. The cheque was returned marked "Drawer unknown." When I gave him the money I accepted the cheque as genuine.

CHARLES WATWOOD COOK , manager, Parr's Bank, Burton-on-Trent, gave evidence that the three cheques produced were presented at his branch and returned marked "No account." The name of "J. Anderson" was not known at the bank. The cheques were issued to "Nathaniel Cockerel" in November, 1904, and that account was closed in June, 1905. The account was then overdrawn and a composition of 7s. 6d. in the £ was received in respect of the overdraft. Prisoner admitted at the police court that he had opened the account in the name of "Nathaniel Cockerel." The name of "Anderson" was entirely unknown to the bank.

LILIAN SMALL , cashier to Messrs. Ainslie Brothers, Electric Parade, Clarton-on-Sea. I remember prisoner calling at our shop in September last and asking me to cash a cheque for £3 5s., drawn by "J. Anderson" upon the London and County Banking Company to the order of "Mr. Waits." I cashed the cheque, which was returned through the account of my firm marked "No account." I believed the cheque was a genuine cheque.

OLIVER WESTON , valuer, living at Chelmsford. On September 9 I had a call from prisoner at my office in reference to a licensed house. In the course of the discussion he asked me to cash a cheque and handed me the document (produced) drawn upon the London and County Bank for £1 16s., to the order of "H. Challis." I passed the cheque through my account and it was returned marked "No account." On September 13 I received a letter-card from prisoner as follows: "Dear Sir,—I am surprised to hear of Mr. Anderson's cheque being returned, and am seeing him thereon. Anyway, I shall be in Chelmsford early next week when I will call upon you and settle up. I am sorry this should have occurred—H. CHALLIS, 164.,

Allen Road, Highbury." I have never received the money I gave in respect of that cheque. When I gave the money I believed it to be a genuine cheque.

FREDERICK WEBSTER COUSINS , clerk in the London and County Bank, New Oxford Street, stated that the cheques (produced) signed by "J. Anderson," were returned by the bank marked "No account." No one of the name of "J. Anderson" had an account at the bank The cheque-book from which the cheques were taken was issued on May 28, 1902, to "H. Newman." The account was closed in 1902.

Detective-sergeant DAVID LEWIS , J Division. On October 18 I saw prisoner in Holborn. I told him I was a polios officer, and should arrest him for obtaining money by worthless cheques. The specific charge I mentioned was that concerning Mrs. Barrett. I read the warrant to him. In reply, he said, "I had no intention of doing it. I thought Mrs. Barrett would have waited." I have compared the handwriting on the cheques with the letters signed "H. Chillis," and in my opinion they are in the same handwriting.

Verdict, Guilty.

Police evidence was given to the effect that on May 10, 1905, at North London Sessions, prisoner was convicted in the name of Newman of obtaining money by worthless cheques. On that occasion prisoner's wife, who is manageress of an hotel at Burton-on-Trent, paid all the people who had been defrauded, and prisoner was simply bound over. Prisoner had been doing this kind of thing for years.

Sentence, Five calendar months' in the second division.

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-10
VerdictsGuilty > lesser offence; Guilty > unknown
SentencesImprisonment; Imprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

STAPLETON, Henry (64, pawnbroker), and HAWKINS, George (35, carman) ; both stealing 35 miniatures, value £300 of thereabouts, the goods of Alfred Farquhar, in his dwelling-house in Belgrave Square, and burglariously breaking out of the said dwelling-house; both feloniously receiving 17 miniatures, value £200 or thereabouts, the goods of Alfred Farquhar, well knowing them to have been stolen.

Mr. Arthur Gill prosecuted; Mr. Schultess Young defended Stapleton.

MAUD WIGNELL , upper housemaid. On October 8 Annie Hembley, another housemaid, and myself were in charge of 11, Belgrave Square, the family being away. On the night to October 8 I looked up the house about five o'clock in the afternoon. The front door is kept fastened all day long with a catch and chain. There were a number of miniatures in the library on the ground floor. I last saw them, there on the night of Tuesday, October 8, at about half-past six. On Wednesday morning I came down soon alter six o'clock. At about half-past eight some carpet layers came. I let them in by the area entry. They had some work to do in the front hall outside the library. Soon afterwards I was called to the library by one of the men. On going into the room I found it in great disorder. A number of the miniatures which were kept in cases were missing, and some of the cases were on the floor. One of the shutters of the library was open, but the window was fastened. On the couch I found a chisel and another

instrument (a jemmy); I do not know what they call it. I communicated with the police At once. At the police court I recognised one of the prisoners, the dark one (Hawkins), whom I had seen on the Friday night before outside the front door as I was going out. He was standing about a yard and a half from the front door just round, the turning. As I came out he looked at me and then turned away again.

ANNIE HEMBLEY . When I came down between half-past six and seven on the morning of Wednesday, October 9, I noticed that the catch was up and the chain off the front door. The previous evening I had left the door on the chain with the catch down. It is a double door, and half of it was fastened by bolts.

IOSABEL FARQUHAR . I am the sister of Mr. Alfred Farquhar, and live at 11, Belgrave Square. We left town on July 11, leaving the house in charge of the servants. There was a collection of miniatures in the library, on the ground floor, a good many altogether. In consequence of a notification I received I went on October 9 to the house. A number of miniatures were missing. It is difficult to estimate their value, but I estimate it at about £300. I can only say by judging of what they were bought for some years ago. I have been shown 17 of them by Inspector Ward. The frames of some are broken, and of some the frames are intact. The miniatures recovered are the better ones of the collection. About four very good ones are missing. I should lay that about two-thirds in value of the collection have been recovered. One that is missing was the portrait of my grandfather. There are some bone enamels. One of those (produced) is a Rembrand. When they were shown to me by the inspector I recognised every one.

(Wednesday, November 20.)

ISABEL FARQUHAR , recalled, gave further evidence of identification of the miniatures.

ALFRED FARQUHAR , 11, Belgrave Square. The miniatures produced are my property. I received a letter stating that if I would pay the sum of £350 and put a notice in the "Daily Mail" to the effect that I would give my word of honour not to communicate the matter to the police the writer would be instrumental in helping me to recover the things. I do not know how Hawkins became aware that such a letter was sent.

Prisoner Hawkins. I thought this over in solitude. When there is a conspiracy against a man there are generally money matters at the bottom of it, and that is how it struck me. Of course, I did not know whether it was true that anybody had sent such a letter and I asked if it was the case.

Witness. I do not know who the letter is supposed to have come from. I cannot tell the date of it. I put it aside with a bundle of papers that I had with me in Scotland, and I could not find it on by return home. These miniatures were a collection made by my

father 40 or 50 years ago. My father was a great judge, and the probability is that every one of them has gone up in value enormously since the date they were purchased. A catalogue has been made, but the only price I could arrive at it what my father gave for them, and, so far at we can gather, that comes now to between £300 and £400. When the notice of this robbery first appeared in the newspapers the value of the property was put at £2,000 or £3,000. I do not know who made that estimate. It was purely arbitrary, and it it impossible to say what the miniatures are worth.

MAUD WIGNELL and ANNIE HEMBLEY, recalled, identified a screw-driver and jemmy found in the library.

Inspector ALFRED WARD, B Division. I went to 11, Belgrave Square on October 9 and examined the house. There was no indication of forcible entry. Steps were taken to circulate the loss of these articles, and I subsequently received certain information. On October 21 with Sergeant Jones and another officer I went to No. 1, Down Place, a turning off King Street, Hammersmith, where prisoner Stapleton lives. Keeping observation on the house about 12 o'clock in the day we saw prisoner Hawkins enter. At one o'clock prisoner Stapleton came out, accompanied by somebody, and went into a public-house in King Street. When he came out he returned to this own address by a circuitous route and got back about 1.30. As three o'clock he came out again with a jug, purchased some beer, and went back again. Observation was continued until four o'clock, when both prisoners left together and walked alone the street until they were opposite a public-house known at the "Palace of Varieties." As they were about to enter the house I and other officers stopped them. I said, "You are suspected of committing a crime." Stapleton did not speak. Hawkins said, "I do not know what you mean I do not know him," "pointing to Stapleton. I then gave instructions that Hawkins should be taken to Hammersmith Police Station, which was done by Police-constable Phelps and another officer who happened to be passing at the time. I then proceeded with Staple-ton to No. 1, down Place. On the way I said, "I have reason to believe you are in possession of valuable miniatures which have been stolen." He said, "I have not got anything at all. Hawkins broughts me some miniatures to sell about a week ago. He has taken them away again." Just before reaching the house he said, "The ministers are not here. Hawkins has broken them up. I came out to fetch some beer and on my return I found him destroying them. I do not know what he hat done with them." I made a note of that at soon at I got into hit room. I made a search of the house, and in a room in the basement behind a large picture on the mantelpiece I found the whole of these miniatures, some in their frames on one side and the remainder on the other. The miniatures were hidden by the picture, which is 4 ft. or 5 ft. square. In a disused gat stove in the rooms I found some of the frames which had been mutilated. On the sideboard I found other portions of the frames. I searched Stapleton, and in his purse I found one miniature and setting, and in

his pocket two stones corresponding to the paste frame of the miniature of Sir Joshua Reynolds, wrapped in a piece of paper. I then took Staploton to the Hammersmith Police Station, where Hawkins was detained, taking the property with me. I showed Hawkins some of the property, and said, "Stapleton states that you took these miniatures to his house about a week ago and asked him to dispose of them." Hawkins replied, "I do not know him, neither do I know anything about the property." I afterwards repeated what Stapleton had said in the presence of both prisoners, as they were close to the table when the miniatures were laid out as they are now. Hawkins said, "I do not know him, and I have never seen the stuff." Stapleton said, "That is the stuff you brought to me and I stopped you from breaking it up." They were charged with burglary and receiving. Hawkins lost his temper, and said with an oath, "As clever as you are I shall beat you at the finish. I am cast-iron. Give me fifty years and I can do it." Stapleton, pointing to Hawkins, said, "They are the things you brought me to sell. You have dragged me Into this."

Police-sergeant B. JONES, B Division. I saw a man go into Stapleton's house about the same time that Hawkins did. I took Hawkins to the Walton Street Police Station in a cab. On the way he asked if I had been to the old lady's place yet. I said, "No." I understood him to refer to his mother. He said, "It will kill her." I said, "I will see they do not upset her." He said. "They won't to 1, Down Place, and examined the kitchen grate. I found a quantity of broken glass and enamel and burnt ivory. I also found in a spare room a pair of jeweller's scales which would be used for weighing the gold settings; a piece of wedgwood used in testing gold end silver, a bottle of nitric acid used for testing precious metals. In the possession of Hawkins I found a key which fitted both Stapleton's residence and No. 13, Orford Street, where his mother lives.

To Mr. Schultess Young. Before the magistrate I corroborated Inspector Ward's account of what took place at the Hammersmith Police Station.

Detective GEORGE PHELPS , B Division, also spoke as to seeing Hawkins enter Stapleton's house.


HENRY STAPLETON (prisoner, on oath). I am 60 years of age and 31 years ago was convicted of larceny. Since my release I have led a respectable life. I was engaged by Mr. Clears, pawnbroker, in the furniture department for 13 years, and was discharged about three months ago because I was getting too old. I am married, and have one young child. My wife helps to support the home by washing and taking in work. Since I left Clears I have been living by repairing clocks for the trade. There were clocks on the premises when the police came. I have known Hawkins about five years, and

he used to bring me customer. I remember him coming to my house on October 14 and bringing me the miniatures that are on the table. He said he had them for sale and asked me to buy them or sell them for him. I told him I should not touch them, and he said he would call for them next day. I told him he could leave them. They were wrapped up in a parcel and I put them in an empty room, which is generally used for storing furniture. He came again on Saturday, the 19th, but did not take them with him then but said he would call for them on the Monday. Hawkins came on Monday about 12 o'clock. A Mr. Holmes, a commercial traveller, also called, and I left the house with him for about half an hour. He lives in Walthasmstow, and I have not seen him since. We went to the "Builders' Arms," near the Broadway. With reference to what has been said about my going back by a circuitous route, I intended being shaved that morning, but there was somebody in the hairdresser's and I passed on. That was the only reason I did not go straight home. When I got home I found Hawkins breaking the things up and I stopped him. I said it was a pity to destroy them and told him he had better take them back where they came from. Finding one of the enamels on the floor, I picked it up and put it in my purse. I know nothing whatever about the burglary. I gave to the police the explanation about the miniatures that I have given to the jury now. I told the officer that they were at my house and that some of them had been destroyed. I am well known to many residents of Hammersmith, where I had been in business for 14 yean before I went to Clears.

Cross-examined. Hawkins did not ask me to buy the miniatures, but to dispose of them. I told him I should not touch them at all. I was in a pawnbroker's shop about 27 years, in the course of which I learned to know something of the value of jewellery and curies. I saw these articles were valuable, and that is why I would not have anything to do with them. I believed at the time that Hawkins was honestly in possession of them. He said they belonged to someone else. I know that such things are sometimes sold at Christie and Manaon's, but I did not examine them closely and could not tell the value of them at all. Hawkins offered no explanation of where he got them from. I had no suspicion at all that anything was wrong. The explanation he offered of leaving them on the Saturday was that he had not seen his friend who was likely to buy them. Hawkins did not attempt to conceal at all that he what he was breaking them up. I had a doubt about them when I saw what he was doing, and concluded there was something wrong with them. I allowed him to remain in the house three hours after that. I had dinner in the kitchen about three o'clock and Hawkins had some of the beer I fetched.

Amongst the witnesses called to speak to the character of Stapleton were: DAVID JAMES CLEARS , pawnbroker; WALTER JESSE GIBBONS , jeweller; HENRY DOUGLAS KING , cashier; EDWIN FREEMAN , commercial traveller; and THOMAS CHALLENGER , manager.

GEORGE HAWKINS (prisoner, on oath) pointed out that the house being securely fattened from within it was impossible to get inside without leaving signs of forcible entry. He could not crawl under the bottom of a door or get through a keyhole. He dwelt upon the fact of the discovery of the burglary being made by the carpet-layers as tending to throw suspicion on them, and denied that he ever took the property to Stapleton's. As to the key, that, he said, had been cut for him by his brother four and a half years ago, and it was mere accident that it should fit both Stapleton's door and his own.

Verdict: Stapleton, Guilty of receiving; Hawkins, of receiving and burglary. There were previous convictions also against Hawkins.

Inspector WARD stated that Stapleton had been suspected of being a receiver for years. He had also been charged with unlawful possession since his conviction thirty years ago, but was discharged. From time to time people had given information against him, but the police had never been able to catch him. He called himself a watch repairer, but he did not believe he could do it, but it was done by a man named Holmes.

Sentences: Stapleton, 12 months' in the second division; Hawkins, Five years' penal servitude. An order for restitution of the property was made.


(Wednesday, November 20.)

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-11
VerdictNot Guilty > no evidence

Related Material

TROWBRIDGE, Ellen Maud ; manslaughter of her female child.

Mr. Grain, appearing for the prosecution, offered no evidence, in which course the Court concurred, and a verdict of Not guilty was returned.

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-12
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

WERNER, Hans (30, waiter) ; feloniously accusing John Conrad Rahder of the infamous crime of buggery, with intent to extort from him certain moneys.

Mr. Elliott and Mr. Fitch prosecuted.

> JOHN CONRAD RAHDER , 7, Neville Court, St. John's Wood. I am a naturalised Englishman. In the spring of 1900 I was in Kohn at the time of the carnival, where I was introduced to Mr. Kogson, who told me he was joint proprietor of the hotel in Neuweid, on the Rhine, where I stopped a few days and was well treated. I then want to Switzerland. I saw nothing more of Kogson till February or March of this year, when he called on me at my business in Regent Street (Gerard and Co.) with prisoner. I desiring to return his hospitality invited him to dinner, and included prisoner. We dined together, and then went to the Euston Music Hall. I made an appointment with Kogson for the next day, but did not keep it, and have not seen him again. Prisoner was arrested on October 11. I had not seen prisoner again till about a fortnight before when he

called at my business place. I did not know him. Then he said "I am Mr. Kogson's friend, and I have come from him for a loan of 50s. for him to return to Germany." I was surprised, as I thought he was well off, or could send to his mother in Germany, who has an hotel there. I said if Kogson called himself and explained why he wanted it I would be able to let him have the money. I gave him no money, and he left. I next saw him at Oxford Circus at nine a.m. on October 11. My sister pointed him out. He called that day at 11 a.m. He said, "This time I have come to ask you for a loan on my I.O.U. for myself," because he wanted to go back to Germany. I said, "This is the second time you have been here. I will on no account let you have any money. Will you kindly go down?" He would not go, and followed me to my private office. I said, "I should like to know why you insist on asking me for money?" He said, "You know very well why." (Witness then related how prisoner imputed to him the commission of an abominable crime with Kogson and another man.) I said I should call at once for the police. He said, "Fetch the police. I have nothing to lose—you have, I don't care what you do." He shouted it very loudly, and was very excited. He drew a revolver and pointed it at me and said, "Here is something for you—you must give me some money or otherwise I will shoot myself." I thought I had better get rid of him quickly, and I went up to him and said, "You are very desperate—I will do something to help you." He had told me he was a waiter, and I said, "I will go at lunch time to one of the restaurants where I lunch and will try to get you a situation there." I said I would meet him at six o'clock at the Tube Station, Oxford Circus, and if I did not get him a place I would perhaps 1st him have some money. I did not want the publicity of getting the police there so I did all I could to calm him. He calmed down and cried. Immediately he went I went to Scotland Yard and was referred to the inspector aft Bow Street. I kept the appointment at six o'clock with Inspector Bower and Sergeant Mercer at the Tube Station. Prisoner was there. I said, "You are early," and the moment I said it he was in the hands of the police. I saw the revolver taken from him. He was taken to the police station, where he said to me, "If you say I pointed the revolver at you I will take my revenge when I come out of prison." At the police court he said to me in German that he should have me up for the offence he had alleged against me. On October 16 I received a letter from him dated the 15th from Brixton Prison. There is no truth in the prisoner's charges against me.

Cross-examined by prisoner (by interpretation). You did dine with me. You did not say directly you would shoot me, but you said, "Here is something for you, and if you don't give me some money I will shoot myself." I did not give you 2s. 6d. or any money.

Re-examined. I have done all I can to find Kogson, and sent my solicitor, Mr. Matthews, to Neuweid and to Kohn to find him, but could not.

Inspector ELIAS BOWER , C Division. Mr. Rahder called on me at Vine Street on October 11, and I went with him and Sergeant Mercer at six o'clock to the Tube Station, Oxford Circus. Mr. Rahder, on seeing prisoner, went up and spoke to him. I seized him by the right arm and Mercer by the left. I told him he would be charged with threatening to accuse Mr. Rahder of an infamous crime with the view to extort money from him. We walked out of the station, and Mercer put his hand in prisoner's left hip pocket and took from it this revolver. He handed it to me, and at the police station I examined it. It was loaded in three chambers and in perfect working condition. A pull of the trigger would have exploded a live cartridge. It was not protected as it could have been by putting the ram-rod in one of the chambers. He made a long reply to the charge in Gorman, which was taken down and translated. (The statement in question containing the accusations against prosecutor was then read.)

Police-sergeant GEORGE MERCER . I assisted in taking prisoner as stated by the last witness and took the revolver from him. I saw Inspector Bower take the live cartridges from it. The next pull of the trigger would have struck a cartridge. It was not protected. He gave his address at Mrs. Hoffman's, Great Titchfield Street. I want there the same evening, where he occupied a back room. I found a box of white powder and rouge, a box of Vaseline, a bottle containing white face cream. I found a halfpenny on prisoner.

WILLIAM HERNY PARKER , assistant warder, Brixton Prison. On October 15 I received from prisoner this letter marked A. I was present when he wrote it.

WILLIAM HUGH TWIGG , assistant warder, Brixton Prison. On October 14 I received this letter marked B from prisoner, for which I supplied him with writing materials.

HUGO MEYES , interpreter, 6, Greek Street, W. I went to the Marylebone Police Station at 6.30 p.m. on October 11, and interpreted the charge to prisoner. I took down the statement he made and translated it. This is a correct translation. I also translated the letters A and B. They are correct.

PRISONER (interpreted). I asked Mr. Rahder to oblige me with some money to enable me to travel back to Germany by giving him a promissory note for the money he would give me, and he laughed at me and my impudence in coming to him.


HENS WERNER (prisoner, on oath) repeated the narrative given in evidence, and referred to the charges that he alleged he could bring against prosecutor.

Verdict, Guilty.

Sergeant MERCER, on being recalled, stated that from the property found in prisoner's possession and certain letters he was believed to belong to the most despicable class of men.

Sentence, Five years' penal servitude.

Mr. Justice Ridley. At the close of the five years I shall recommend that the Home Secretary send you back to Germany.


(Wednesday, November 20.)

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-13
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty

Related Material

CHAMBERS, William (61, stockbroker) ; being an undischarged bankrupt, obtaining credit to the extent of £20 and upwards, to wit, from Malcolm Cooke and another to the extent of £226 17s. 4d., from Frederick John Charles and others to the extent of £438 9s. 2d., and from Richard Cooke May and another to the extent of £385 6s. 3d., without informing them that he was an undischarged bankrupt.

Sentence respited from last Session.

Mr. Bodkin stated that prisoner had pleaded guilty of offences under the Bankruptcy Act, 1883, of obtaining credit from three members of the Stock Exchange in respect of cottage and commissions, he having been speculating very largely.

Sentence, One month's imprisonment, dating from the first day of last Session.

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-14
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

HARRIS, Alfred, pleaded guilty of breaking into a dwelling-house and stealing a jewel oase, brooch, and other goods value £2, the property of William Peter Robertson, and feloniously receiving same; also of having been convicted on February 10, 1902, receiving seven years' penal servitude for house-breaking. A large number of other convictions were proved, including 20 months' and five years' penal servitude for house-breaking.

The Recorder said there was no doubt he ought to pass another sentence of penal servitude, but having regard to the fact that prisoner had one year and 244 days to serve on his last sentence, he would pass a sentence of 18 months' hard labour.

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-15
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceMiscellaneous > sureties

Related Material

LETTS, William George, pleaded guilty, having been entrusted with certain property, to wit, the sum of £71 16s., for and on account of the Rev. William Barker, did fraudulently convert the same to hit own use and benefit.

Mr. Curtis Bennett prosecuted. Mr. Horton appeared for prisoner.

Rev. WILLIAM BARKER, Canon and Rector of St. Marylebone, stated that he had no desire to press the charge—he would be only too glad to give prisoner an opportunity to amend; he had known the prisoner's family for 25 years, and the prisoner's father was remembered for 50 years' faithful discharge of duty in the church. He recommended prisoner to the mercy of the Court.

Mr. Horton said the prisoner expressed his very great regret and that he had devoted the money to his own use through some pressing necessity of an urgent nature. He desired to make restitution by the sale of a reversionary interest in a house and would do his best to do so if judgment were respited till next Session.

Prisoner was released on recognisances of himself in £50 and Richard Eck in £50 id come up for judgment next Sessions.


(Wednesday, November 20.)

SOLOMONS, Lewis (see last volume, p. 969). Mr. Muir said that he had an application to make in this case ex parte, although notice of it had been given to the defendant. His Lordship would remember that last Sessions the defendant was brought before his Lordship to answer an indictment for libel, to which he had pleaded justification. By an arrangement between the prosecution and the defence (which it was thought would put an end to the series of libels which the defendant had published), it was arranged that the plea of justification should be withdrawn from the file, that the indictment should remain but should be adjourned sine die, the intention being that if no attempt wm made to repeat those libels nothing further should be done. Mr. Solomons (who was represented at the trial by Mr. Elliott, Mr. Arthur Gill, and Mr. Forrest Fulton), apparently, was not satisfied with that arrangement, and he had written one letter to the Inspector General of the Board of Trade of the Bankruptcy Department (in which department the prosecutor, Mr. Child, did an enormous amount of his business as an accountant in bankruptcy), and the letter practically amounted to this—that this arrangement was forced upon Mr. Solomons by hit counsel and his friends; that he (Mr. Solomons) was profoundly dissatisfied with it, that he did not withdraw a single word of what he had written, and, although he would not write any more, he hoped that Mr. Child, or expected that Mr. Child, would get his punishment elsewhere. That, practically, amounted to a repetition of the whole of the substance of the libels which were directed against the prosecutor, who was not disposed to sit down any longer under this, and he therefore asked his Lordship to restore the indictment to the file and to allow defendant, if he was so advised, to restore his plea of justification to the file, so that the matter might be tried and the verdict of a jury pasted upon it once and for all.

The learned Judge said that after the plea of justification had been withdrawn in Court and the whole matter had stood over by an arrangement and the indictment and plea of "Not guilty" remained, he did not know that it would be right to put the plea of justification back again.

Mr. Muir asked his Lordship to restore the indictment to the list at the next Sessions, and then counsel on the other side would have the opportunity of making such application to his Lordship as they might think fit.

The learned Judge said that notice might be given to the other side that the ease would be in the list for next Sessions, but it was not to be taken that his Lordship in any way pledged himself to put back the plea of justification.

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-17
VerdictsGuilty > pleaded guilty; Not Guilty > unknown

Related Material

DROUET, Cecil Edward Peter, and BENNETT, Frank Ernest ; both conspiring and agreeing together to obtain by false pretences from Spiers and Pond, Limited, divers sums of money, with intent to defraud; both obtaining by false pretences from Spiers and Pond, Limited, the several sums of 12s. 6d., £1 2s. 6d., £1 0s. 9 1/2 d., 7s. lid., 14s. 3d., £3, £1 7s., and £5 12s. 6d. respectively, with intent to defraud; Dronet being a servant to Spiers and Pond, Limited, unlawfully falsifying certain accounts belonging to his said employers; Bennett aiding and abetting Dronet to falsify the said books.

Dronet pleaded Guilty.

Mr. Muir and Mr. Redgrave prosecuted. Mr. Travers Humphreys appeared for Bennett.

CECIL EDWARD PETER DROUET . Petib Deouit. I have been 10 years in the service of Spiers and Pond. In July and August last I occupied the position of query clerk at their warehouses called "The City Mills," in Upper Thames Street. That was not part of the stores which dealt directly wish the public. It would be part of my duty, when goods were returned to the "Returns Department," to see whether the customers were entitled to credit for them. If they were so entitled I should make out a "credit advice" or instruct my assistant to do so. If he was a deposit account customer this would entitle him to credit in his deposit account, alter it had been passed by me, and finally pasted by the manager of the department, Mr. Willis, the manager of the whole grocery department if the customer was a cash customer he would get payment by means of a credit note or cheque. I have known Bennett about 12 years. In June of this year I owed him between £10 and £11. He hinted once or twice that he would like repayment of I.O.U.S I had given him. I cannot call to mind any direct proposal being made as to how they should be replied, but he certainly said he would like the money, and I said I would try and get it paid. The transactions in question first started by Bennett suggesting that if I could send him some little delicacies and tinned stuff he would be glad of them, and that he would make it all right. I did not accept that proposal at first because I could not possibly do so. Some time after that this plan of Bennett opening a deposit account and my passing credits to it was arranged with him. Exhibit 7 is a duplicate of a "credit advice." It is my writing. I got it initialled by Mr. Harris, Mr. Wallis's assistant. It is made out to "F. E. Bennett, Esq., 78, Colehill Lane, Fulham." In the ordinary course a duplicate of this (Exhibit 4) would be sent to the customer from the accountant's department. This credit advice is headed, "F. E. Bannett, in account with Spiers and Pond." The goods therein referred to had never been sent to Bennett or returned by him. At that time Bennett was not a deposit account customer; in the ordinary course credit advice (Exhibit 8) would be sent to him. I saw him after that had been sent to him. It would be initialled by the customer and returned, and then a credit note would be made out. That was not done in this case, as far as I remember. After a certain time had

elapsed the accountant's department would issue the credit note. I first saw this credit note (for 12s. 6d.) in Bennett's hands about the first few days of July at the City Mills. He called there and we went out together; he showed it to me. Bennett, I believe, took it up to the cash office and presented it over the counter. That it his signature on it. I got the chief part of it, about 10s. Outside the metropolis Spiers and Pond make a charge for drums in which they send out paraffin oil. Exhibit 10 is a credit I passed in favour of Bennett, of Wantage, for £1 2s. 6d., for two oil drums and a tap, which had never been supplied. Bennett had been connected with that address, and I used it because I had to use some address in the country. I told him I was going to use it and what I was going to use it for I can't remember his saying anything against it or for it. He only said, "I suppose there is no risk." I said "No." I suggested that Bennett should open a deposit account at Spiers and Pond's, so that I could pats the credits to his account, otherwise it would look strange if I kept passing credits which had to be remitted to him in cash. I drafted the letter that he wrote about opening the account, and he paid in £2. After that I passed other credits to him in the same way. Exhibit 11 is made out in my writing, initialled by me, and signed by Mr. Harris. That represents goods to the value of £1 0s. 9 1/2 d., and Exhibit 12 goods to the value of 7s. 11d. Exhibit 13 (for a dozen tins of sardines) is addressed to "D'Erlon, 78, Colehill Lane, Fulham." "D'Erlon" is part of my name, but one that I have dropped. The note upon it was written in the Sales Department, on telephonic instructions from me. Exhibit 14, purporting to show the return of two oil drums, a tap, and a cask, of the value of £1 7s., is marked at the bottom "Ex wharf from Wantage." I do not know of anybody called "S. Carlton." It is a name I used when in business myself some years ago. Exhibit 15 A and B is a credit made out by me in favour of "S. Carlton, Esq., care of F. E. Bennett. Esq.," for the purchase of 120 lb. of coffee amounting to £3. There was no such purchase at all. I think I told Bennett I was using that name. He only made the usual remark, "I suppose there is no risk?" I said I did not see that there could be. I drafted the letter (Exhibit 16) addressed to Carlton enclosing a cheque for £3. That would be posted in the ordinary way by the accountant's department. Bennett brought the letter and cheque to me at the City tills. The letter was open. He asked me how he should get the cheque cached. As far as I can remember, we went into a public-house, and there I endorsed the cheque, "S. Carlton" and handed the cheque back to Bennett and he gave me another one in place of it. I forget the amount of it. There was some talk of his stopping something out of it. I was very hard up at the time and told him I had to meet my liabilities and I got the full amount. Exhibits 18A and 18B are the original duplicates of further credits to "S. Carlton" for more coffee, the amount being £5 12s. 6d. Exhibit 20 is my draft of the letter sent to "S. Carlton" purporting to be a purchase of more coffee. Exhibit 21 is the cheque sent with it. The letter

and cheque were brought to me by Bennett. I endorsed the cheque in the same way as the other one and handed it back to Bennett. He gave me his cheque for £4, keeping buck £1 12s. 6d. off my debt to him. Exhibit 22 is a credit advice which I drew up in order to credit "S. Carlton" with a further sum of £3 for coffee. I placed that before Mr. Wallis, who questioned me about it a couple of days afterwards, and I then admitted that I had been guilty of these frauds.

Cross-examined. It would be Mr. Wallis's duty to check what I had done in my department. I made all investigations really on account of my manager, who accepted my statements as facts. I has always given Mr. Wallis reason for trusting me up till then. Before these credit notes were sent out to customers they would be verified to a certain extent by the checking department, with which I had nothing at all to do. In order to carry out these frauds it was necessary to have some name and address to which false credit notes or cheques could be sent. I adopted about six different names for carrying out this fraud—Carlton, D'Erlon, Cavendish, Power, Graham, Fraser, and Goodwin. During the first few years of my acquaintance with Bennett he was a lodger in my house, and therefore I knew him vary intimately. I knew that his brothers had a brewery at Wantage, and that he had at one time been connected with it and that he had parted with his interest in the concern. About five years go I knew that he was a man who had private means. As far as I know he has not done anything for a living for the last few years. In the early part of this year I had seen him frequently. I have not lately borrowed money from him. I first began to do so about nine years ago. That continued up to about I do not remember having borrowed money from him since then except a few shillings. The I.O.U. for £9, dated September 10, represents a debt of my wife's that I made myself responsible for. I think I borrowed half a crown about the end of August. He may have lent me also 25s. Bennett first began to press me for the return of moneys for which he had I.O.U.'s about May of this year. He said he would like them settled. As far as I remember I said I would try and pay him off as beat I could, directly I got many other debts squired up. One day when we were talking about things he said, "Could not you send me up some nice things—tinned stuff, or something like that?" I understood that it amounted to a suggestion that I should steal some from my employers and send it to him. Up till then I had never been dishonest. I do not think I said anything particular in reply at the time. I suggested that the safest way to do it would be to open an account, and then I could credit his account with certain things supposed to be returned. He simply asked me, as on other occasions, if there would be any risk. With the exception of his writing on Exhibit 8, I have not seen any of his writing on any documents in the case. The forged endorsement on the two cheques is in my writing; the two letters purporting to be written by Spiers and Pond to Carlton are not in my writing, but

they are dictated by me. They are purely fictitious letters. Bennett did not assist me to concoct that fraud. It is my suggestion that this fraudulent scheme was entered into for the purpose of enabling me to pay back Bennett the money I owed him. It was suggested by him, although the way it was to be carried out was suggested by me. The amount I have misappropriated is about £28—£20 in cash. Out of this Bennett has been credited with £2 or £3—I mean in actual cash. The £2 with which Bennett opened the account came from him; that was not provided out of any fraud. Bennett has not been concerned in all the different frauds perpetrated in the different names of "Cavendish," "Fraser," and so forth. Cavendish was a registered moneylender to whom I owed money. I believe I had about three credit notes made out in his name. The first credit advance passed in the name of Cavendish is June 26. I cannot remember whether that is the tame date as the first one I passed in the name of Bennett. The address I gave first, the first credit advice, to Cavendish was 61, Kempstall Road, Hampatead. That was not the address of Cavendish—a Mr. Reynolds lived there who keeps a general shop. I said to him, "If a letter comes in the name of Cavendish will you kindly take it in for me?" and he said, "Yes." He is a thoroughly respectable man, and I certainly do not say that he had any part in the fraud which I then carried out. Reynolds gave me the letter when it arrived; he had not opened it. It was a credit note which was returned to the firm and a cheque was sent in place of it, and a cheque for 6s. 6d. was handed to Cavendish for an instalment due to him and he simply took it. He knew nothing about that fraud. As far as I know him, he is a respectable man. The two other credit notes for 19s. 6d. each, dated July 23 and August 13 were addressed in the name of Cavendish to 10, Willesden Lane. That is a barber's shops, where letters are taken in at a penny apiece. I got cheques for those and handed them to Cavendish, who accepted them. He had no idea that any fraud was being carried on. The name of "Goodwin" was also one of the fictitious names I used in order to obtain money from my employers by means of false credit notes. The address I used in connection with that name was "Swagg's Farm, Lee-on-the-solent, Hants." A Mr. and Mrs. Carter (very distant relations of mine) live there. I asked them to take in letters for me in the name of "Goodwin" and forward them to my business address. Spiers and Pond, under cover. Mrs. Carter did not exactly agree to do it. but I heard no further word until they were returned afterwards, and then they wrote and told me that they had been returned by the servant, as Mrs. Carter happened to be out. They were returned to Spiers and Pond and went to the Central Department. I was asked to explain the matter, and I believe I wrote a letter explaining that they had been sent to the wrong address by mistake or something, and they were reforwarded to a London address. I believe I told the Central Office it was a clerical error. It has always been the custom to take my word in such matters. They were sent to 4. Devonshire Terrace. Brondesbury, the address of a Mr. Goodwin,

who was my landlord. I wrote to him and explained that through some clerical error the credit had got mixed up and sent to another man of the same name at Lee-on-the-Solent, but I had arranged with my firm to send him a cheque far the amount of his rent on my account. I suppose he accepted that explanation because be never replied to it. Two or three days after they reached him he left them at my house in Kenilworth Road when I was not at home. One cheque was for the amount which covered his rent and the other was for another mount which, of course, he was not entitled to. They were drawn to the order of "Goodwin." My wife took one cheque round to him on her own responsibility. I never had a receipt or have seen or heard of him again. I believe he took the premises over and seized the furniture. The other cheque I endorsed in the name of "A Goodwin," and to the best of my belief paid it to Cavendish. He did not ask how I came to have the cheque, I borrowed the money in the name of Dronet. Neither Cavendish, Goodwin, nor Mrs. Carter knew I was committing a fraud. Other names used by me were "Fraser," "Graham," and "Power." The first fictitious credit went to Bennett in the form of a credit note. He came up to cash it and he asked me to what office be should go, and I explained to him. It is Exhibit 8—an ordinary credit note for 12s. 6d. I told him to go to the cash office and showed him the place. I have borrowed money from time to time from Mr. Wallis, the head of my department—I should think very nearly £70. I paid it all back with the exception of £5. During June, July, and August last Bennett may have been drinking rather hard. I was not with him daily. His wife died somewhere about the early part of May.

Re-examined. I have always known him to have been a very keen business men. He came about a dozen times or more to see me at my office at the Citv Mills.

HARRY GEORGE SMEATH , director of Spiers and Pond. I had heard about this matter, and I was in the offices on August 28. Bennett happened to come to the Stores that day. Some other members of the firm were also at the offices, and Mr. Woodhouse, a solicitor. When we heard that Bennett was in the stores he was asked to come over; be came. Mr. Woodhouse asked him if he knew Drouet, and he said he had known him for some years. Mr. Woodhouse also asked him if he knew anybody of the name of Carlton, and he said he did not. He was asked if the signature on the credit note was his and he admitted that it was. He Was also asked if he had any address at Wantage, and he replied, "My brothers have a browery there, and I have some connection with that brewery." He was asked if be ever purchased anything from Spiers and Pond for the brewery. and he replied he had; he was asked what, and replied, "Hops." Spiers and Pond do not sell hope for brewery purposes, only for domestic purposes. The two cheques in favour of "S. Carlton" for £3 and £5 12s. 6d. were shown to him, and it was pointed out that these were cashed through the same bank as he banked at, the Covent Garden branch of the London and County Bank. He

replied that he cashed them for Drouet. It was pointed out that they were drawn to Carlton. He admitted that. He was asked if the endorsement was Carlton's. He hesitated very much, but was understood to say it was. Mr. Woodhouse then told him that he had denied knowing Carlton. He then admitted that he did know him. He said he had known him at a friend for some years. He was asked to describe him, and he said he was a tall, big, fair man, and was an electrical engineer. Mr. Woodhouse asked him whether it was not the fact that Carlton and Drouet were one and the same person, and he said they were different individuals. It was pointed out to him that the letters containing these two cheques were addressed to "Carlton, c/o Bennett." He agreed that that was so. He was asked what he did with them. He said he handed them back to Drouet. It was then pointed out to him that his bank pass-book contained a record of cheques paid to Drouet, and he was asked what the money was for; he replied, "Money I lent to Drouet." We asked him whether he did not think it was wrong to cash cheques drawn by Spiers and Pond, whom he knew to be Drouet's employers, and to cash them for Drouet, and he replied that he did it to oblige a friend. He asked if he could have his goods which he had been ordering before he came round to the central office, and Mr. Hanford remarked, "I don't think you want them to-day." He also told him that he would probably hear further from us. He then left. Credit advices are only sent to a customer when there is a deposit account with the customer.

Cross-examined. When there is no deposit amount then a credit note is sent, which the customer would sign and cash. The individuals present at the interview were Mr. Woodhouse, the solicitor; Mr. Hanford, the general manager; Mr. Wallis, the manager of the grocery department; Mr. French, our assistant secretary; and myself. Mr. Woodhouse had only shortly previously arrived; he had been told a little about it. He was there by appointment to go into the case with us. At that time we had got a confession from Drouet, which I had read, and I believe Mr. Woodhouse. When we heard that Bennett was in the stores buying goods we asked for him to be asked to came and see us. We did not tell him that Drouet had made a statement implicating him, or that one of the people present was a solicitor. I believe Mr. Woodhouse made a few notes of what Bennett said—I have not seen them. I made none. I am relying on my memory of the conversation which took place on August 28. I knew, later, that Bennett had voluntarily left his deposit book on the counter. He also voluntarily produced and handed to us his pass-book. I am certain he said, "My brothers have a brewery at Wantage with which I have some connection"—not had Mr. Wood-house did not ask him if his brothers or himself ever bought oil for the brewery. The credit notes for the brewery were in respect of oil. Bennett did not say, "Oil—no, more likely hopes."

ABRAHAM GREGORY WALLIS , manager of the grocery department at Spiers and Pond. It is part of Drouet's duties, or his assistant's, to

check goods returned. I trusted Drouet. If I saw credit advices written by Drouet I assumed in recent years that they were right. I simply signed them and sent them to the central office. We only charge country customers with oil drums, not London customers. All the exhibits that I saw at the Mansion House were all bogus documents, not relating to genuine transactions. On August 22 I spoke to Drouet about Exhibit 22, which relates to the sale of 150 lb. of coffee for £3 15s. He admitted it was a fraud. I was present at the interview on August 28. I heard Mr. Woodhouse ask questions of Bennett. I particularly heard what Bennett said about hops—I remember that distinctly. Bennett said he had made purchases for the Wantage firm from us. He was asked what purchases he made, and he said, "Hops." I pointed out to my senior that we did not sell hops except in hop bitters in small packets. I heard Bennett questioned about Carlton. Bennett first said he knew him, and was asked to describe him; he said he was a tall, fair man. Later on he said that he had never seen him. He was asked whether Carlton and Drouet were one and the same, and he did not seem to know. I am a little hard of hearing. I did not hear everything. I have stated to the best of my recollection what it was.

Cross-examined. I am certain I have sot it right about the hops. With regard to checking Drouet, if a credit note for a large amount was put in front of me I naturally should find out something about it. What raised the query was this question of £3 15s. Our credit notes are usually for 1s., 2s., and 2s. 6d. As long as it is a small amount I should not take any trouble about it all. That has been the practice in this department since Bennett has been there, shout 10 years. Drouet's assistant came to me and said, "I have my suspicions that some credit notes are not correct." So I said, "Right; I will watch them." I have lent Drouet money. I never lent him more than £25 at one time. I have lent him smaller sums—£5, £10, and he has always paid me back with the exception of one £5. I had every confidence in him. His wages were £2 a week. I thought he was a worthy man.

ARTHUR EDWARD HANFORD . I was not called before the magistrate. I am the general manager of Spiers and Pond. I was present at the central offices on August 28 when Bennett came in. Mr. Woodhouse asked him if he knew Drouet. He said he did, he had known him for some years. As far as I recollect he was asked what transactions he had had with him, and he was shown, I believe, certain credit notes. He was asked if he had signed the credit note for 12s. 6d., and he said, "Yes." He was asked if he knew Carlton, and he said, "No," he did not know Carlton. He was then shown the cheques. He said he had nothing to hide; that he was a very substantial man, and he said, "When my men comes in I will show you my pass-book." While we were waiting for his man to come in he was asked if he had a business at Wantage, or had ever purchased anything from us for Wantage. He said his brothers had a business at Wantage and might have purchseed goods. We asked him what

goods, and he said, "Hops." I think at that moment his man came in; he produced his pass-book and handed it over to us for inspection. We did not know until we saw his pass-book that these two cheques for £3 and £5 12s. 6d. had gone through his bank. He was asked if he knew the endorsement, and he said, "Yes." We said, "Is it Carlton's writing?" and he said, "Yes." Mr. Woodhouse then said to him, "Then you dc know Carlton?" and after a little hesitation he said, "Yes, I do." Then it was pointed out to him that he had previously said he did not know Carlton, and he said, "I have known him for some years." He was asked how it was that he had cashed a cheque drawn to Carlton for Drouet, and how he got hold of the cheque. His answer was, "I had the cheque and handed it back." I remarked, "You had a chequs addressed to you, care of yourself, for Carlton, and made payable to Carlton; you endorsed it, handed it to Drouet, who handed it to you, and you gave him a cheque in place." He seemed rather bewildered at that, and made no reply. He was told by Mr. Woodhouse that that was all. He aaked if he could have the goods he had bought in the stores, and he was told, "No."

Cross-examined. Mr. Woodhouse did not tell him he was a solicitor. At the end of the interview Mr. Woodhouse said, "That is all now." I have been sitting in Court during the latter part of the examination of the last witness. I was not aware that all the witnesses should be out of Court. I was not aware that I should be called. I heard Mr. Wallis's account of the conversation. I do not agree with it. He was in error on one point. I did not hear Mr. Sneath's account of the conversation. With regard to the Wantage question, I have given the exact words Bennett used about that. He seemed a little bit dazed all through.

WALTER FREDERICK VENUS . I was assistant to Drouet. I have seen Bennett in Drouet's office during this year. I have heard him ask Drouet for the stores deposit book. I made a communication to Mr. Wallis with reference to something I had found.

Cross-examined. What I found was a credit advice for 20 lb. of tea. I thought there was something suspicious about it and told Mr. 'Wallis's assistant. It was I who found it out. Bennett came to see Drouet during business hours perfectly openly.

JOHN OSBORN . I am a timekeeper in the employ of Spiers and Pond. I know Drouet well and Bennett by sight. I have seen Bennett at Drouet's office about six times from the end of June and during July and part of August.

WILLIAM TYLER . I am superintendent of the grocery department at Sriers and Pond, Water Lane. I remember seeing Bennett there on August 28. He said he wished for some grocery. I sent him to an assistant at the counter named Hearn to be served in the usual way. He made Bennett out a cash bill, and then Bennett remarked that he had a deposit account and produced his book. The cash bill was concelled and the amount entered in the deposit book. After the bill was made out to the deposit account I had a telephone message

through from the central office with reference to the deposit account. I informed them that Bennett was in my department; I took Bennett to the central office. I was not present at the interview there.

Cross-examined. When Bennett went to the central office he left his deposit account book an the counter.

To the Common Serjeant. Bennett was asked to step across.

(Thursday, November 21.)

JAMES JOHN RICKHAM . I am a clerk in the sales office of Spiers and Pond. It is my duty to make up the ledger account of the customers. I produce the ledger from which Exhibit 9 (Bennett's pass-book) is made up. It was seat to him on July 8, and received back from him on August 25, 29.

Cross-examined. On June 29 Bennett paid in £2 in cash. As far as the deposit book shows, he never had goods of the value of more than £l 2s. 10d. He has still got a balance of 17s. 10d. in cash.

ARTHUR PERCY WAUGH . I was a clerk at the Covent Garden branch of the London and County Bank. I am now at the Wimbledon Common branch. I produce the two cheques for £3 and £5 12s. 6d. (Exhibits 26 and 27), and I produce paying-in slips. They are in Bennett's handwriting. His pass-book shows the various payments in and out.

Cross-examined. We make up our customers' accounts at the end of every third month. The past-book shows that on June 30 Bennett had a credit balance of about £238. On August 27 his credit balance was about £156. The account has been opened since 1901. It has always been a substantial account. The payments in were made at all times in irregular amounts.

Detective-constable ARTHUR THORPE , City Police. On September 2 I went with Detective-sergeant Miller to 78, Colehill Lane, Fulham. I saw Bennett. He was in bed. Sergeant Miller told him we were police officers, and said he had a warrant for his arrest on a charge of conspiracy with a man named Drouet, of Spiers and good. Sergeant Miller read the warrant to Bennett. He made no reply. He was taken to the station, and on the way he made a statement to me. He said, "I have fourteen houses, £500 on deposit, a current account of about £200, and securities to the value of about £5,000 deposited at the London and County Bank. Drouet sent the Credit notes to my address, 78, Colehill Lane, when I was away at Brighton"—(I had not then mentioned anything about credit notes to him)—"I thought they were in payment of two I.O.U.'s which I hold of his." He gave me two I.O.U.'s for £11 0s. 2d. together. He also said, "I deposited £2 with Spiers and Pond; I do not think I have exhausted that yet." He gave Sergeant Miller a credit slip for that amount from Spiers and Pond (Exhibit 3). He also said, "And I have never made any use of the credit notes." He said nothing more. He war taken to the station, where I saw Drouet, who had surrendered at 10 o'clock

that morning to Spiers and Pond. They were placed in the dock together, and the warrant was read again to them, but they made no reply. Bennett said that he had lost his wife about a month prior to that, and since then he had been practically in a state of collapse. He handed me his past book at the station.

Cross-examined. His pass book practically confirmed his statement. The warrant was granted on August 30. I had no difficulty at all in finding him. From the appearance of the man and the appearance of the room it was clear that he had been drinking very heavily.

Mr. Travers Humphries said that he did not call any witnesses, but asked his Lordship whether he thought there was any corroboration at all of the evidence of Drouet which ought to carry the case any further.

The learned Judge thought that it was for the jury to decide and not for his Lordship to express an opinion at present.

Verdict, Not guilty.

Drouet was sentenced to nine months in the second division.


(Wednesday, November 20.)

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-18
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

FRANCIS, Fredecrick (61), pleaded guilty of attempting to procure one, Joseph Harry Popple, a male person, for the commission of an act of gross indecency.

Prisoner was stated to be of independent means.

Sentence, Three months' hard labour.

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-19
VerdictsGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentencesImprisonment > other institution

Related Material

ISLER, Leon Alexander (16, errand boy), pleaded guilty of stealing a banker's cheque, value 1d., the goods of Alexander Daniel Narra-more; forging and uttering a certain order for the payment of money, to wit, a banker's cheque for the payment of £18, with intent to defraud.

Sentence, Eighteen months under the Borstal system.

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-20
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

WILLIAMS, Benjamin (61, coster), pleaded guilty of stealing a gelding, a van and harness, and divers quantities of drapery, the goods of Edwin Bateman.

Sentence, Four months' hard labour.

It was stated to be a common practice to drive off with a van, unload it, and then abandon it.

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-21
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

HOPE, John Burton (36, motor mechanic) ; feloniously marrying Marie Grayling Myhill, his wife being then alive.

Sentence, Three months' hard labour.

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-22
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour; Imprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

MILLIST, Frederick (23 labourer), MULFORD, George (20, labourer), and BARRETT, Charles (23. labourer), all pleaded guilty of breaking and entering the shop of John Stutchbury and stealing therein nine boots, his goods; maliciously damaging a plate-glass window, value £8, the property of John Stutchbury.

Sentences: Millist, 18 months' hard labour; Mulford and Barrett, 12 months' hard labour.

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-23
VerdictsGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentencesImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

NASH, Walter Frederick Gilbert Nash (47, waiter), pleaded guilty of obtaining by false prentences from Arthur Charles Kent the sum, of 6s., with intent to defraud; forging and uttering certain written instruments, to wit, tickets for admission to a theatre, with intent to defraud. This was a theatre ticket fraud. Prisoner had printed forged tickets of admission to various theatres and sold them to the unwary.

Sentence, Three months' hard labour.


(Thursday, November 21.)

ROBINSON, Frederick (31, printer), who pleaded guilty last Session of maliciously wounding Elsie Hawes, with intent to do her some grievous bodily harm, was brought up for sentence.

Dr. SCOTT, medical officer, Brixton Prison, said he had kept prisoner under observation, but was unable to certify him as insane.

Sentence, Six months' hard labour.

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-25
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

POWER, George Gordon (30, manager) ; feloniously sending and causing to be received by Arthur Henry Thompson certain letters threatening to accuse him of having committed a certain infamous crime, with intent to extort money from him.

Mr. Horace Avory, K.C., Mr. J. R. Randolph, and Mr. Barrington Ward prosecuted.

ARTHUR HENRY THOMPSON said that he had met prisoner first at Margate, where they had drinks together. In the following year he was in the Criterion Restaurant, when prisoner claimed acquaintance with him. That night witness had too much to drink and went to an hotel which prisoner suggested. Later on prisoner began to write postcards and letters asking for money, and witness lent him money from time to time. (Witness proved numerous communications which has bean sent to him by prisoner, and which threatened to expose him unless more money was lent. The letters were handed to the Jury.) In all about £150 was given to prisoner, until at last the letter which formed the subject of the indictment was handed to a solicitor.

ARTHUR BURGESS , managing clerk to Mr. T. D. Dutton, solicitor, deposed to visiting prisoner at Charlwood Street on September 4 and handing him a letter asking if he made any accusation against Mr. Thompson, to which prisoner said "No." Prisoner also said that he would write no more letters, and witness replied, "If you do you will find yourself at the Old Bailey." Prisoner subsequently wrote further letters.

Sergeant GEORGE SMITH deposed to arresting prisoner, who said, "All right, I have been expecting you. I wrote and asked Thompson for the loan of £10 and put certain facts into the letters concerning our past life to let him see that I was desperate, so that if he sent

the letter to Dutton he would know the full facts of the case. I sent a letter and telegram to-day, saying I would not write to him again for the sake of a dear friend." When charged at the station he said, "Than is not true."


GEORGE GORDOIN POWER (prisoner, on oath) began to make statement about certain things which happened between him and prosecutor, when Mr. Justice Ridley said it could not be allowed. Witness said that his letters had been misconstrued. He admitted that he made a great mistake in mentioning certain facts in one letter. His last situation he left about two years ago. Before that he had been manager at the "Golden Cross Hotel," Charing Cross.

Verdict, Guilty.

Sergeant SMITH said that prisoner undoubtedly was a blackmailer of the worst description and an associate of very bad characters in the West End. Two other cases had been brought to the notice of the police, in which prisoner was implicated.

Mr. Justice Ridley, in passing sentence, said that he did not believe a word prisoner said. Sentence, 10 yean' penal servitude.

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-26
VerdictsGuilty > unknown; Not Guilty > unknown
SentencesImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

PERKINS, Elizabeth (52, brush maker) ; feloniously using a certain instrument with intent to procure the miscarriage of Ellen Warren. GADSBY, Annie ; feloniously aiding and abetting Elizabeth Perkins to use an instrument to procure the miscarriage of Ellen Warren.

Mr. R. D. Muir, Mr. Arthur Gill, and Mr. Oddie prosecuted. Mr. Purcell defended Perkins and Mr. Curtis Bennett defended Gadsby.

Verdict: Perikins, Guilty;

Gadsby, Not guilty.

Perkins was sentenced to Three years' penal servitude.


(Thursday, November 21.)

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-27
VerdictsGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentencesImprisonment > hard labour; Imprisonment > hard labour; Imprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

PRICE. Alfred, SCULLY, William, WILSON, George, pleaded guilty of having by night committed wilful damage exceeding £5 by breaking a plate-glass window; also to breaking and entering the premises of Dale and Co., Limited, with intent to steal.

Price confessed to having been convicted at this Court on September 11, 1906, receiving 12 months' hard labour for breaking and entering; three other convictions of two months' each for damage were proved. On June 26, 1905, Scully was sentenced to two months' for wilful damage.

Sentence: Price, 12 months' hard labour; Wilson, nine months' hard labour; Scully, 10 months' hard labour.

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-28
VerdictsMiscellaneous > unfit to plead

Related Material

WALKER, John Joseph (53, butcher) ; conspiring with Harold Edward Skinner to cheat and defraud the managers of the Central London Sick Asylum District, and obtaining by false pretences from the said managers certain valuable securities, to wit, cheques of the value of £331 18s. 3d., £199 1s. 7 1/2 d., £197 5s. 11d., and £249 3s., in each case with intent to defraud; obtaining the said cheques by false pretences, with intent to defraud; conspiring with Harold Edward Skinner to make certain false entries in the monthly accounts of the managers of the Central London Sick Asylum District, and un awfully falsifying the monthly accounts of the said managers.

It was stated that the prisoner was in a lunatic asylum and under restraint. Recognisances of the bail and of the witnesses ordered to be enlarged generally until notice is given by the prosecution.


(Thursday, November 21.)

CHILDS , (23, photographer), PRESTON, Guy Richard (37, agent), CAMPBELL, Malcolm (32, electrician), COLEMAN, Arthur (59, agent), McQUEEN, Leonard Elston (46, tailor). Preston, Coleman, and Campbell were indicated for having, on August of the present year feloniously forged an order for the delivery of goods, vis., an order on the London City and Midland Bank for the delivery of a cheque book. A second count charged them feloniously, with intent to defraud, uttering the tame forged order for the delivery of goods. The same three were further charged with having on August 2 in the present year forged an order for the payment of money, viz., a cheque on the London City and Midland Bank for a sum of £12 3s. with intent to defraud; and feloniously uttering the same forged cheque, well knowing it to have been forged. Preston, Coleman, Campbell, and McQueen having, on August 6 of the present year, feloniously, with intent to defraud, forged an order for the payment of money, viz., a cheque drawn on the same bank for a sum of £153 17s. with intent to defraud, and uttering the same forged cheque, well knowing it to have been forced. Coleman pleaded guilty to presenting she cheque for payment, but Not guilty to forging it or knowing it to be forged. Preston, Coleman, Campbell, and Childs, having, on August 8 in the present year feloniously, with intent to defraud, forged an order for me payment of money, viz., a cheque on the same bank for £153 11s. and feloniously, with intent to defraud, uttering the same well knowing to have been forged. Childs pleaded guilty of uttering the cheque, knowing it to be forged. Preston, Colman, Campbell, and Childs were further indicted with having, on August 12 in the present year, feloniously, with intent to defraud, forged an order for the payment of money, viz., a cheque drawn on the same bank for the sum of £94 2s., and feloniously uttering the same, well knowing it to have been forged, with intent to defraud. Childs pleaded guilty of uttering the cheque. A further indictment charged Preston, Coleman, Campbell, and Childs with having, on August 12, in the present year, feloniously forged a certain order for the payment of money, viz., a cheque drawn on the same bank for the payment of £37 9s., a second count charging them with uttering the same forged cheque well knowing it to be forged with intent to defraud. To this indictment Childs pleaded guilty of uttering. The same four, having, on the 14th day of August in the present year, feloniously, with intent to defraud, forged an order for the payment of money, viz, a cheque for £61 14s., with intent to defraud, and feloniously uttering the same well knowing it to have been forged. Childs pleaded guilty of uttering.

A further indictment charged Preston, Coleman, Campbell, McQueen, and Childs with having, on the 16th day of July, in the present year, and divers other dates, fraudulently conspired, and agreed together with other persons (names unknown), feloniously to forge and utter, knowing the same to have been forged, orders for the payment of money, viz., cheques drawn on the London City and Midland Bank, the National Provincial Bank, Limited, the London and County Bank, and divers other banks, and to cheat and defraud the banks of their said moneys and properties. To this indictment Preston pleaded guilty of conspiring to defraud the London City and Midland Bank. Coleman pleaded guilty of conspiracy, Campbell and McQueen pleaded not guilty, and Childs guilty.

Mr. R.D. Muir and Mr. H. C. Holden appeared for the prosecution. Mr. J. A. Slater appeared for Preston, Coleman, and Childs. Mr. W. G. Hawtin appeared for McQueen. Campbell was undefended.

Mr. Muir stated that as Childs had pleaded guilty to uttering four forged cheques, and had also pleaded guilty to a conspiracy, he proposed to try the indictment under which all the prisoners were included except Childs, viz., the indictment of August 6.

JOSEPH GIBSON . I am a solicitor carrying on business at 28, Martin's Lane, Cannon Street, E.C. I made the acquaintance of the prisoner Preston or Redgrave about eight years since. I only knew him by the name of "Harold Charles James." I only met him four times, the first being on November 15 1900. The signature on the receipt dated November 20, 1900 (Exhibit 19), is in "James's" hand-writing. The other handwriting is my clerk's. The signature to Exhibit 20 is also in the handwriting of Preston. In July last I received a letter from Messrs. Davenport and Co., which I have not now got. The date of it was July 23, I think. I received a letter similar in purport to Exhibit No. 21, but it was shorter, making some inquiries. I replied to that letter. The "14th" is a clerical error for "24th." In the year 1900, during the dealings I had with Preston under the name of "James," I gave him a cheque (Exhibit 15) for £50 in exchange for a Bank of England note for £200. The cheque was drawn on the London City and Midland Bank, Ludgate

Hill branch. It is the same branch that my account is now with. It is endorsed in the name of "Harold Charles James." Exhibit 16 is another cheque of mine for £250, payable to "Howard C. James"—that should be "Harold C. James." It is endorsed in Preston's handwriting. It is drawn on the same branch and signed by me. These two letters (produced) are both in she same handwriting, and both signed by "Harold C. James." The date of the first cheque in the bundle of cheques, marked Exhibit 10, is July 25, 1907, and the last date is August 19, 1907. They are all genuine cheques of mine, and are signed by me. The order form for a cheque book (Exhibit 4) is not signed by me. The cheques (Exhibits 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 2) are not signed by me. They appear to agree with one another exactly. They appear to be exact imitations of this letter (Exhibit 3). All the signatures on the cheques in bundle of cheques (Exhibit 10) differ in one respect or another. I cannot sign my handwriting the same time.

(Friday, November 22.)

ALFRED ERNEST HARRISON . I am clerk to Messrs. Gray, Mounsey and Fuller, solicitors, of 9, Staple Inn. My firm received this letter of July 23, this year. It purports to be from Davenport and Co., making some inquiries with regard to the bankruptcy of J. B. Red grave. A reply was sent on the same day, signed by one of the members of our firm.

Cross-examined by the prisoner Campbell. I do not know you at all.

Inspector JOHN WILLIS . I am a detective-inspector of the City Police. Sometime before October 14 this year I got a communication and went to Brixton Prison, where I saw the prisoner Preston, or "Redgrave." Inspector Hallam was with me. Redgrave made a verbel statement to me, and then himself suggested that he should put it into writing. He afterwards handed me a written statement somewhere afoul September 30. I made in a inquiries with regard to the contents of that statement. On each occasion that I have seen Redgrave he has expressed his willingness to give evidence in support of that statement. On October 14 and 21 last he did in fact give evidence before Sir George Smallman, at the Mansion House, against the three prisoners who were then before the court—Coleman, Campbell, and McQueen. Redgrave was cautioned before he gave his evidence, and told that he need not say anything to incriminate himself, and if he made a statement it must be an entirely voluntary one. He was then asked if he was willing to give evidence, and his reply was that he was. He was then represented by a solicitor. He then gave evidence, which was taken down as a deposition in the usual way on October 14 and 21, which was read over to him in the usual way and I saw him sign it. (To the Judge.) He was sworn under the name of "Preston." (The material portions of Preston's depositions were then read, in the course of which the witness said that the initials "A.B." were used to indicate a man of the name of "Greenbaum," and the initials "C.D." a man of the name of "Butt")

Cross-examined by Mr. Slater. The statement I got from Preston was a very long one. It has been of very great assistance to the police.

Cross-examined by the prisoner Campbell. I am not aware that any inquiry has been made with regard to the contents of the safe at your employers. I have not made any inquiries personally.

HEEBERT ARTHUR CHILDS (prisoner, on oath), called as a witness for the prosecution. (To Mr. Muir.) I am willing to give evidence. (To the Common Serjeant.) I understand that as I am on my trial I am not bound to give any evidence or to answer any questions which I think might be used against me either in this trial or another. (To Mr. Muir.) I am a plasterer's labourer by occupation. In July of this year I was living at 39, Lancaster Road, New Barnet. I knew Redgrave by the name of "Redgrave." I knew him well in 1900 and In July of this year he was living in the same road as myself. He spoke to me one day, on August 4, Sunday, and asked me to go to town with him and spend the day in town. He said he had an appointment on Tuesday, August 6, at Ludgate Hill, where he was to receive some money, and after he got it we would spend the day in town together and go to a music-hall in the evening. On Tuesday I went with him from Oakleigh Park Station to King's Cross, and from there we walked down to the "King Lud" at Ludgaie Hill, where we waited from about 12 o'clock until 1.30. Redgrave said at the "King Lud" that he was to meet someone who was to bring him some money. They did not come. At 1.30 we got into a cab and drove to the West End. Near Charing Cross Station we met another cab, in which were seated three men. Coleman was sitting on the knees of Campbell and McQueen. I had never seen either of those three men before, but I saw them afterwards—I saw McQueen afterwards. Of course, I have seen Campbell and Coleman in prison. I did not see them again afterwards. I am quite sure of the men. When we met this other cab with the three men in it, Redgrave shouted out, "There they are; stop them!" and we got out of our cab and ran down the street alter the other cab. In the traffic I mistook the cab and stopped another one; Redgrave came up and apologised to a gentleman for the mistake. Redgrave then told me that they were the men he should have received the money from, he would be unable to spend the day in town with me as arranged, and that he must go to the City after having seen them. I left Redgrave at 2.30 in Piccadilly Circus. I took the Tube to Finsbury Park and went home. I saw Redgrave again on the Wednesday evening at New Rarnet. He had a gentleman with him whom he introduced to me as Mr. Greenbaum, who asked me to meet him, Redgrave, on the following day. August 8. I met them at 8.30 outside Finsbury Park Station. We all went by tube to Piccadilly Circus. While Redgrave went to get a shave I had a conversation with Greenbaum. When Redgrave came back we all three went first to the International Letter Bureau, 4, Duke Street, Adelphi, where Greenbaum told me he had left a cheque over night. He said this while Redgrave was

there. Greenbaum went in there alone, and Redgrave and I stood outside. Greenbaum and I went into the Hotel Cecil. Greenbaum filled up the cheque which he had fetched from the Internatioal Bureau. This is the cheque (Exhibit No. 7). (To the Judge.) Greenbaum made it oat; the signature was already on it. After Greenbaum had filled it up he gave me a piece of paper, upon which was written "Percy Tindall," and told me I was to write that on the top of the back of the cheque. I wrote it at the desk in the Hotel Cecil. The endorsement on the cheque is in my handwriting. Acting on Greenbaum's instructions, I pat it in an envelope and went and sat down for about two minutes while he went oat of the Hotel Cecil. I then went, as he had instructed me, and asked for a commissionaire to be sent to me there, and one came. That was commissionaire Garnon. I gave him the envelope and instructed what to do with it. I then went into a public-house opposite, as Greenbaum had instructed me to do, and waited there. After a then Greenbaum came with Redgrave. Greenbaum said I was to go back with him to the Hotel Cecil and get the money. Redgrave was quite near; he ought to have heard what Greenbaum said even if he did not. I went to the Hotel Cecil with Greenbaum. He showed me the room which I had come oat of because I had lost my way. He said, "There he is," and I went to the commissionaire and asked him for the money. He handed it to me and I gave it to Greenbaum as we were walking out of the hotel. There were notes and some coin. We went outside the Hotel Cecil to join Redgrave. He was in the street I then went with Greenbaum to a money changer's. Redgrave came as well. I do not know exactly where the money changer's was, bat it was on the way to Charing Cross in the West End. Greenbaum told me to write "D. Peters, 153, Maida Vale," on a note and on all the notes if I was asked to write on all the notices. The endorsement on one of the noted (Exhibit 42) is mine. I took these two notes to the money changer's and got French notes. Greenbaum came in then to get some stamp—I think at the money changer's—so that I should not get into any difficulties about rates of exchange, or something of the sort. I then went with Greenbaum and Redgrave to a money changer's at Charing Cross Station and changed the French notes into gold, which I gave to Greenbaum. We went to a restaurant, where Greenbaum divided it. Greenbaum, Redgrave, and myself were there. Greenbaum took £15 out of ours equally for a man named Butt, and £21 for a man named Davenport, and £5 for another man. I do not know for certain who the other man was. Greenbaum took £15 for Butt, a friend of his. Redgrave took £21—£7 from each of us—for Davenport and £5 for another man. Greenbaum did not give the name to me then, but it was understood between Greenbaum and Red grave. I got one-third after that lot was taken out of it. Redgrave had one-third and Greenbaum had one-third. (To the Judge.) This was English coin, which I got for the French notes. (To Mr. Muir.) I went with Redgrave to 14, Coventry Street to pay Davenport his money. Greenbaum stayed in Scott's Restaurant. Redgrave told

me to stand on the stairs and see him pay Davenport his money. I did so. Redgrave knocked at Davenports door and Davenport came in the passage, and I saw Redgrave count out £21 into Davenport's hands. I had not seen Davenport before. I do not remember if I saw him afterwards. I saw him in the witness-box at the Mansion House. Davenport said, "I feel so nervous; if Greenbaum is caught he will tell the police that I lent him the Gibson letter." Redgrave said, "Well, if he does, you have had your share." Davenport said, "Do not stay now; tell me all to-morrow; I shall buy carpets with this money." Davenport then went in and Redgrave went out, and I followed Redgrave and we joined Greenbaum in Scott's. That day I went home to New Barnet with Redgrave and came to town again on August 9 with Redgrave. We went to his office, 10, Duke Street, Manchester Square. While I was there Greenbaum came in about 12 or 12.30. He said he had called on Davenport, who wanted to see Redgrave, as he had got something for him. On August 10 I was in Redgrave's office and Greenbaum came there about 12 or 12.30. Redgrave was not there; he had gone to the City to see Campbell. Greenbaum gave me an envelope containing two blank cheques on the Cambridge Circus Bank of the London City and Midland Bank (Exhibitt 71 and 72). There was also a piece of paper with those cheques. Greenbaum waited there until nearly two o'clock. Redgrave had not come in by that time. Greenbaum went away after making an arrangement to see me on the Monday outside the Midland Hotel, King's Cross, when he would bring up two more cheques with the signature on. I saw Redgrave on the Sunday. I gave him the piece of paper which had come from Davenport's with the cheques. I did not give him the blank forms at Greenbaum had taken them away with him to where he lived. I asked him if he would mind them. The piece of paper I gave to Redgrave had on it, "Please call and see me. Can arrange about P." I did not know what that meant. I told Redgrave that Greenbaum had said be would meet us at the Midland Hotel, King's Cross, on Monday, when he would bring up the cheques from Butt with the Gibson signature on. On the Monday Redgrave and I went to town and met Greenbaum, and with him was Butt, whom he introduced to me. We met outside the Midland Hotel soon after nine o'clock in the morning. Greenbaum told me I was to go with him to Featherstone Buildings. I went there and engaged an office for a month in the name of "Gray," as Greenbaum had instructed me. I paid three or four weeks' rent in advance, which Greenbaum gave me. I went back to the public-house where Greenbaum, Redgrave, and Butt were writing. Butt put his hand in his pocket and handed Greenbaum two cheques with the Gibson signature on. I then went with Greenbaum to the First Avenue Hotel. I endorsed one note from a copy in the same way as I had done at the Hotel Cecil. That is Exhibit No. 8. I waited until Greenbaum got out, told then gave it Commissionaire Davis to take to the London City and Midland Bank. I then went, as Greenbaum had told me, buck to the public-house and joined Redgrave, who was waiting there

alone. After I waited there some time, Butt and Greenbaum returned, and Greenbaum touched me on the shoulder and said, "Come on now and get the money from the hotel." I then went to the First Avenue Hotel and got the money from Commissionaire Davis. I gave it to Greenbaum in the street just outside the public-house. I then went with the others in a four-wheeled cab to a money changer's and got French notes for it, which I afterwards changed back into gold at another money changer's at Charing Cross Station. I handed all the gold to Greenbaum and we got a little room in a public-house and divided the money. Redgrave, Greenbaum, Butt, and myself were present at the division. We divided it in equal proportions, after having taken out £12 for Davenport and £5 for another man. I do not know who he was. We also had to pay Greenbaum a bill of about £10 for his own expenses—what he had spent in bringing Butt up and what he had to pay. After we divided this money I went with Redgrave to pay Davenport his amount, and Greenbaum and Butt went to the Holborn Restaurant to have lunch. When I got to 14, Coventry Street, Redgrave said, "Stand on the stein like you did before." I stood on the stairs and Davenport came out into tlit passage and Redgrave said, "Here you are Davenport, I have got another £12 for you." Davenport said, "I need it badly, I am pressed for money; but I should tell Greenbaum not to do any more on Gibson's account but try someone else's." Redgrave went out and I followed him, and we went to the Holborn Restaurant, where we met Greenbaum and Butt, and Greenbaum said he had got another cheque, and I was to go and get a messenger to take the cheque to the bank, and tell him to go back with the money to Featherstone Buildings. I went to the Post Office and got a messenger and sent him to the bank, and told him to go back to Featherstone Buildings and bring the money there. That was messenger Fanner. I then went to the P.H. and waited for Greenbaum and Butt, as I had done before, and Greenbaun and Butt came back, and Greenbaum said, "Now go to the office in Featherstone Buildings and rot the money from the messenger." I went. He said it was perfectly safe. The name "Gray on Exhibit 28 is written by me, and the address 18, Feathertone Buildings. The messenger brought that to me, and I had to sign it before I took the money from him. Exhibit 9 is the cheque which went by that messenger. The endorsement "Arthur Ellit," war written by Butt. We divided the proceeds of that—£37 or £39 in gold—in a cab, I believe, 'into four equal portions; there were five pounds for Davenport for his portion and £2 for another man first deducted. After dividing the money from the cheque made out to Arthur Ellis I made an arrangement to meet Greenbaun and Butt on August 14. Greenbaum explained to me how Butt had taken a photograph of the letter in July which Davenport had lent Greenbaum, and had forged the signatures from the photograph. Redgrave was present when it was stated how this forgery was managed. I said to Greenbaun, "How do you do these things." Redgrave was a little bit off, cutting his finger nails. I cannot say whether he heard that. He must

have heard something, I should think. Greenbaum said, "I will tell you how it is, my boy. Davenport lent me the Gibson letter by leaving it out on his desk for me to take, and I took it down to Mr. Butt and photographed it, and forged the signatures from the photograph. I said, "That explains why you are giving Davenport a share, because I wanted to know why he was having something out of it." At the meeting on the 14th it was arranged that we were to try to cash one more cheque, which was to be the last. We met at Redgrave's office, 10, Duke Street, Adelphi. I was there with Redgrave and Greenbaum, and Butt came up. A cheque was produced. Butt gave it to Greenbaum, and Greenbaum handed it to me and told me I was to go to the Bodega in Mill Street. We then went into a public-house. Greenbaum borrowed pen and ink and filled up the cheque, and he said, "Now when you get to the 'Bodega' you put 'Stanley Marsh' on it." The cheque then ran, "Pay Stanley Marsh, Esq., or order, £61 14s." I then went to the "Bodega, where, however, I could not get a messenger. I went out and met a telegraph boy coming along. (Witness here identified Burroughs, the telegraph boy, Miss Melsom, the past office clerk, but could not identify Richardson, the messenger.) Burroughs took me to the Regent Street Post Office where the young lady handed me a telegraph envelope, and I wrote on it, "London City and Midland Bank." I endorsed the cheque in the pretence of the lady, placed it in the envelope, handed it to the messenger, and give the lady clerk 2s. 6d. for expenses. After that I went to the Cafe in Regent Street, where Redgrave was waiting alone. I sat with him until Greenbaum and Butt came back, and when they came beck Greenbaum said, "The bank has discovered everything, and I will see you tomorrow at Redgrave's office." Redgrave said, "I must go at once to see McQueen." I got into a cab with Redgrave, and the other two went off. Redgrave got out at the top of Rathbone Place. I drove to Kings Cross and went home. Before parting with Redgrave I made an appointment, to meet him next morning, and he left me in Lyons's Restaurant, in Oxford Street, while he went round to his office to •§• that everything was clear. I waited a long time, and when he came back he said Greenbaum had been to the office and had left a message to say that he would see us at King's Cross about 2 or 2.30, and he said he had left McQueen in the office. We then went round to Redgrave's office, where McQueen was waiting alone. Butt afterwards drove up in a cab, and there was a long talk about the whole affair. McQueen expressed the opinion that the bank had been very slow in letting so many cheques be cashed from day to day. Amongst other things, they said it was all over with Gibson's signature now. Redgrave said he supposed Greenbaum had got his head under the bed clothes down at Southend. Finally Redgrave said, "I will go round to Davenport and see if he has heard anything. With reference to other cheques, McQueen said, "What are we going to give Taplin?" Redgrave said, "I do not know, but we must all give him something." McQueen said, "Well, I have had to give him £20. and

as he expects £30, if he does not get another £10 he will cackle." Redgrave said he would tee what could be done at Taplin was a dangerous man. As to what was said about how many other cheques had been passed, I sat back in the armchair and did not pay much attention really; I did not trouble myself. After Redgrave had gone I said to McQueen, "Do you know greenbaun, then?" and he said, "I should think I do; I know him well." He said Greenbaum had left him a cheque book, and he pulled it out of his pocket and gave it to me and said, "I want you to put this in a clock room and hand me the ticket." The cheque book was done up in a parcel. He said I was not to mention it to Redgrave, as he had a private reason. Eventually I gave the parcel to Butt, when I met him at King's Cross. Butt gave me the ticket, and I put it in my pocket, but eventually I lost it. I told McQueen the cheque book was taken to a cloak room buy a friend who had the ticket McQueen afterwards asked me about the cheque book when he came to see me in Brixton Prison, and I told him I did not know where it was. linen I was alone with McQueen he told me he had got the signatures of about 14 big firms, amongst which he mentioned the names of Maude and Tunnicliffe, Hampton's, and Attree, Johnson, and Ward and he said that he and Campbell intended to do very extensive forgeries and raise over £20,000. This was at Redgrave's office. McQueen is a tailor, and I arranged to have some clothes. Redgrave came back and said Davenport was all right, but wanted more money. McQuetn then suggested opening an account at Barclay's and asked me if I knew of any Barclay's banks near where I lived. I said there was one at New Barnet and one at New Southgate and that I thought there was one at Wood Green. Then McQueen said, "I suggest that you go down there and open an account at Barclay's, and I will transfer that to some branch in London, as I have pot a big firm's name (Hampton's) upon whom I intend to forge a cheque for £4,000." He wrote down on paper his name and address and told me I was to give that as a reference. I said, "Why not open the account at the London branch—why send me down to New Southgate?" and he said, "My name could not be used as a reference there, where the forgery is going to be committed." Then we arranged to see Redgrave, and I arranged to see McQueen the next morning. Redgrave and I went to King's, Cross, where we met Greenbaun and Butt. Butt said he would go down with me to New Southgate and instruct me what to do in opening the account. When I went with Butt to New Southgate I asked him to put the cheque book in a cloak room. At New Southgate Butt wasted for me while I opened the account. I paid in £100 in gold out of Redgrave's share and my own, which came to £59 each. I gave the name of Herbert John Watson and gave as references the name of McQueen, The Chalet, Deodar Road, Putney, and that of Devenport, I described myself as a photographer and signed in the signature book of the bank. I reported to Redgrave that night what I had done, and I also told him that as I came out of the bank a clerk named Portions had followed me and seen me join Butt, who

was waiting for me against the shops. Redgrave said, "Him," so I said, "I suppose he thinks it funny me having £100." Next morning, the 16th, I told McQueen about this bank clerk, and I also said to him, "The bank say they are going to write to you about that reference," and he said, M Yes, I expected that, but I have had no letter from the bank." Redgrave said, "That is funny," and McQueen said, "I will go down to New Squthgate and make some inquiries." He brought round with him that morning to Redgraves office a lot of letters and some tracing paper and wanted copies of signatures made at once. I recognise the roll of tracing paper produced by the pieces cut out of it. We all three went down to New Southgate and I pointed out the bank to McQueen and McQueen made a sketch of it. A man came out of the bank Whom I recognise as being the caretaker at New Barnet, and I ran away. I made my way back to 32, Rathbone Place, where I waited with McQueen's son, and was presently joined by McQueen and Redgrave. McQueen wanted to know why I had run away, and I told him I was frightened. He said I had had a fit of the "jumps," and was very angry with me for running away, and said, "To-morrow you will have to go down there and get the money out. See how you like that." I did not want to go near that bank again, but next day I went to New Southgate for the purpose of drawing out the money, and when I got into the bank the man said, "We cannot keep that "count." I thought to myself "A good job too, I want it out." I fever had a cheque book. I signed a cheque as a voucher that I had received the money. I had two £50 notes which I gave to Redgrave, lend on Monday redgrove and McQueen went to the Bank of England and cashed them. I believe that the endorsement "Nicholson, 53, Pembridge Road, Balham," on one of the £50 notes is in the handwriting of Redgrave. When McQueen and Redgrave came back from the bank McQueen said, "Now, my boy, you must go to Rickmanaworth and open an account down there, instead of the one at fourthfate, at Barclay's Bank." I did not like to do it, as I had had enough of it, but next day I went to Riosnnansworth with Redgrave and opened the account in the name of T. H. Day, and went home that night. I paid in £80 in gold, which they give me for the purpose, and I also had £1 for expenses. The address I gave was, "Hobart Villa, Nightingale Road," and I gave as reference the name of Davenport and signed the book, "T. H. Day, photographer." The same day I taw Mr. Hatfieid with a view to taking a room, and I gave as references McQueen and Davenport. In this instance I get a cheque book. I afterwards went home with Redgrave. We got out at Oakleigh Park Station and walked to New Barnet. As a result of what I heard I ran away from New Barnet and went to London. I saw two men on the bridge whom I thought to be detectives. I went to King's Cross and wrote a letter to Redgrave telling him. I then went and took lodgings in West Kensington and stayed there on the night of August 20, and next day in consequence of what I had seen I went down to Rickmansworth and closed the

account, signing a cheque for it. I handed back the cheque bock. I received the money in gold. I came back to London and kept an appointment at five o'clock at Baker Street Station with Redgrave and McQueen, to whom I related all that I had done. McQueen said I was a fool and had had a nervous fit again. I said I had not, and would not go back to New Barnet any more. McQueen then said that I must go to the Scottish Hotel, Blythe Road, Kensington, W., and stay there till the morning. Next day, August 22, McQueen called at the hotel for me and told me that I must go into the country at once and be outside Bournemouth Station on Sunday morning (August 25), when he would come down. He did so and brought me two shirts, some collars, and a second-hand suit which he had had altered to fit me. We spent the day on the beach talking about these forgeries and these firms. He said he had a son who was very friendly with the cashier at Attree, Johnson and Ward's. The son had stolen a lot of stationery and he was going to get him to steal some blank cheques from the firm's cheque book, and he would get Butt to forge Attree, Johnson, and Ward's signature for £1,000. He talked also about Maude and Tunnicliffe, and said that he wanted me to go to London that night as I was to go into the country on the Monday and open an account at Barclay' Bank at Kelvedon, which he would smaller, and forge a cheque on Hampton's for £4,000. I went up with him that night to London and slept in London that night. Going up I told McQueen straight and plain I would not have any more to do with these things; they were worrying me to death, and I wished myself well out of it. He said, "You cannot go back to New Barnet now after what you have seen. What are you going to do?" I said I do not know. He said, "Well, there is the Chatlet; you will have a home at the Chalet while I have one if you do what I tell you and be sensible." So ultimately I went to Kelvedon. I heard at Bournemouth about the incidents of August 6. McQueen said that he and Campbell had had practically all the money from the Roxby cheque, as they had made old Coleman very drunk away got his money away from him at Rathbone Place, and a man named Tapplin had £20 out of what he got from coleman. He said also he had practically started the whole of this affair, as he had lent Campbell some order forms for cheque books in July. When I was very frightened he argued with me and said, "I have lived by fraud for 20 years and have never been found out yet." Upon the scrap of paper (produced) McQueen wrote the times of the trains to Kelvedon and back. Before starting for Kelvedon McQueen said, "If you write 'Send breeches at once' when the account is opened I shall know the account is opened and I shall come down and see you that evening. That will be our code." I went to Kelvedon on Monday, August 26, and took a lodging at Mrs. Shemeld's. McQueen told me to go by the name of Day both a my lodgings and at the bank, and that if I was asked any questions I could say I had an account at Rickmansworth and had closed it, and that would save both time and references. On the 27th I

went to the bank, gave my name and references, and opened an account with £35, and then tent the telegram as arranged, only I made a mistake and wrote, "Send braces at once" instead of "Send branches at once." I signed the telegram in the name of "Williams." I got a cheque book and the paying-in book too. In the evening McQueen came down. He asked for the post office; I took him to it, and he sent a telegram to 32, Rathbone Place, as he wanted his son to know how he had got on. He said he wanted me to come to London that night, and I bad better go to Mrs. Shemeld's and get my things. He said he wanted me to take an office and engage a clerk and tend him to the bank with a forged order for a cheque book on a firm called Maude and Tunnicliffe. I said, "I am not going to London, McQueen, because I have had strict orders not to go to London from Redgrave, and, another thing is, I have done with it all." He said I should have to come to London; we had a bit of a row over it, and at last I went to London with him. I gave him the cheque book and the paying-in book at Kelyedon before we got into the train. In the train he told me he was going to do this Maude and Tunnicliffe forgery for £500, and if Redgrave did not like it he could lump it, as we were by no means tied to Redgrave, and he said further, "You have no need to be in a blue funk, because it it all right, my boy. I should not be bringing you into this if there was any danger at all. If you should be arrested it is all right. I am a Freemason and they are a powerful organisation, and if you should be arrested you make this statement." He then dictated to me a statement which I wm to be sure to make verbally and strictly and add nothing io and say nothing less, and he added, "Then I will get you off. If you do not make that statement I cannot get you off." So I said, "All right," and he said, "You wont be caught; this is only in the event of such an unlikely thing happening." I wont up with him to King's Cross and slept at Lockhart's Cocoa Rooms Next morning, August 28, he came as he had arranged to see me and wrote a note and said, "Take this note and tell the landlord that it is from me." The address I think was Portland Road Station, somewhere near Albany Street. It was a tall house—a private house, and I cannot at this moment remember the name. I was allowed to remain there in compliance with the request on the note until he sent for me. I should say I remained there about 20 minutes. The occupier was a tailor, and I sat in his work room while he ironed the clothes and that sort of thing. He said he was making a frock coat for McQueen. At the end of the 20 minutes McQueen sent his ion for me and we went to a public house near to Portland Road Station. McQueen was there, and Redgrave joined him after I got in. Redgrave was very surprised to see me and also very angry with me for coming to London. I said it was not my fault, that McQueen had made me come to London to do a forgery on Maude and Tunnicliffe and engage an office. Redgrave was then furious and turned on McQueen and "jawed" at him. He said I should do nothing of the sort and I was to go back at once to Kelvedon and

stay there. I left McQueen rowing with him and went with McQueen's son to 32, Rathbone Place, where I was to wait until night, when I could get back into the country. Outside 32, Rathbone Place I was arrested. I made the statement just as McQueen had told me to do. (The Clerk of the Court read the statement.) I added to that statement at the police station that I knew the cheques were forged. McQueen said afterward that, owing to my having made that statement about knowing the cheques to be forged, he could not get me off at the Mansion House. That conversation took place when he visited me at Brixton as a solicitor's clerk, and he said that he would get me off later on. Before he came in I was asked on the prison form if I wished to be visited by a solicitor. The name given was Stollery, but when he came in I found it was McQueen. I said, "I thought it was a solicitor I had got to see." He said, "Shut up. I am Mr. Stollery—Mr. Stollery't son." I said, "You hit son?" He said, "There is nothing funny about that; he is over 80." And he said he could get in or out just when he liked, because a man named Tumbull, who was a solicitor or a solicitor's clerk, would do anything for him. When he got in he said "I have seen Redgrave and I have got all the money. He showed me two cheques—one for £25 and the other for £45, but he said, "I can only get £25 directly," and he explained to me that the other cheque was post-dated. He also said, It is a good thing to get it before the police get their nose on it." He then asked me about the Gibson cheque book, and I told him I did not know where it was. I had my reasons for saying so. The signature "T. H. Day" on the cheque produced on the Kelvedon branch is very like my writing. I never drew a cheque at all upon the Kelvedon branch. I think the endorsement "Alfred Rhodes" is McQueen's handwriting. I had only one visit from McQueen that I have spoken of. I received a letter from McQueen while I was in prison. The two cheques that McQueen showed to me were in Redgrave's handwriting. I saw McQueen after he was in custody. While we were at exercise in the prison yard he walked round behind me and said, "What do you think of Redgrave now?" I said, "I do not know." He said, "Well, he has given us all away, old boy." He hat treated at all something shocking by Turning King's evidence against us, but he has treated you a thousand times worse than anybody, because I was just getting you off nicely through the statement, and now he has got you in here and you will very likely have to stay in here; in fact, I do not sec how you are going to get out. I can feel enough for myself, but I feel doubly bad for you, old boy." Then he said, "There it a road out of it, and only one road, and it will make Redgrave smart for turning King's evidence against up, and we can do it through you. I want you to make a false statement on oath, and swear that Redgrave did the forgeries, and if you do this they will believe it in the Court, and I am going to bring all my family up, who will carborate you in the box and we shall be believed, and I will go into the box myself and say the same. My family are going to say that Redgrave

told them to commit forgeries. I will give you £50 and new clothes when you come oat of prison, and you will have a home to go to and no need to go back to New Barnet. I will write out the statement which I want you to make." I said I would make it. We walked round, and he showed me the window of his cell, and two or three time he halloed out to me, "I will let you have it in the morning." Then orders came that we were to be separated, and I was put in the B wing, so that we did not exercise together. One morning McQueen turned up in the B wing and walked round behind me and said, "I have got the statement here," and I waited in the passage expecting to get it from him. But one of the officers of the prison, Mr. Bell, tame up and caught us. I saw him coming and ran off to my cell. Mr. Bell followed me and asked me what I was doing with McQueen; later on I was taken before the Governor.

(Saturday, November 23.)

I sent a letter to McQueen from Brixton Prison, stating that I considered be had treated me very badly, and that he had lied to me when he said that he would get me off, knowing very well all the time he was not going to get me off. I asked him to send me a suit of clothes which he bad belonging to me, and said if he refused to send them to me I should not remain his friend any longer, and I said, "Of course, you know what that means." On August 27 I sent telegram (produced) to McQueen: "All O.K., sonny.—Williams."

Cross-examined by Mr. Hatton. My real name is Herbert Arthur Childs I have gone under the name of Watson. I worked for three years as a plasterer and labourer up till August, 1907. I knew Redgrave in 1901 and 1902, and have known him by sight previously. I lived close to him, and hive seen him frequently since July. I first met Greenbaum when Redgrave introduced me in Gloucester Road on August 7. Three or four days alter he introduced Butt to me. I first met Davenport when Redgrave and I went to pay him the money. Greenbaum first explained the forgery to me at the Iaternational Bureau while Redgrave was shaving, before I went with Butt to New Southgate to open the account. McQueen arranged with me that, if I were asked any awkward questions to where I got the £100 from he would go into the box and say he lent it me to open a photographer's shop. The only time I saw Campbell was when he was with Mcyueen and Coleman in a cab near Charing Cross. At that time I did not know McQueen, or Campbell or Coleman. I am certain McQueen was in the cab. On August 8 was the first part I took in the transactions—with regard to the cheque for £153 11s. Greenbaum told me to go to the Hotel Cecil and put down the cheque. I understood I was to have a third after expenses had been paid. There were deductions: £21 for Davenport, £15 for Butt, and £5 for another man. Altogether, I had £59 out of the forgeries. Redgrave minded my share for me, and we used it as

part of the £100 to open the account at New Southgate. On August 15 I was introduced to McQueen by Redgrave in hit office, and he gave me a parcel which he tail had the cheque book in. Redgrave left me at Lyons's tea shop while he went round to hit office to see that all was clear. We then drove round and McQueen was in the office. I do not think I was introduced at Watson, a photographer. I had worked for two years up to 1903 for Elliott and Sons, Barnet, as a messenger, but I took no part in the priced of photography. Redgrave gave me the £100 to open the account; my £59 was included in it. McQueen suggested the account, and I think Redgrave instructed me what to do. I saw McQueen in the cab near Charing Crott Station and St. Martin's Church. I just had a momentary glimpse of him at they passed our cab. I swear he was there. The account at New Southgate was to be opened to that it could be transferred to another—the Pall Mall—branch of Barclay's Bank, so that he could forge a cheque for £4,000 on Hampton's. I opened the account in the name of Wateon, a photographer. I thought they would put the signature of Hampton on one of my cheques, and the purpose of transferring the account wat so that McQueen's name should not be given at the reference to the bank on which the forgery was made. McQueen suggested I should go to Bournemouth. On June 16 I went to Redgrave's office by appointment, McQueen came in with tracing paper like that (produced), and said he wanted forgeriet done at once. He brought half a done letters with signaturet on. On that day I went with Redgrave and McQueen to New Southgate at about noon. I ran away across the fields and made my way to 32, Rathbone Place, and waited for McQueen till he came in. On June 17 I went to the bank at New Southgate, intending to say that I had decided not to take a shop there, and that I wanted my money out. When I got in the manager said, "We do not care to keep your account." I said, "But the references are satisfactory, are not they?" He said, "I cannot give you any explanation about that—I just say that we do not care to keep your account," I drew two £50 notes, which I handed to Redgrave. On June 20 I went to Rickmansworth with Redgrave. I took a room at Mr. Hatfield's, Hogarth Villa, Nightingale Road, Rickmantworih, for an address, and opened the account on McQueen and Redgrave's instructions with the £100, giving a reference to Davenport. The next day I drew the money out for reasons I had. I gave it to Redgrave. There were no other discussions about forgeries, but when we brought Davenport his money he said, "Tell Greenbaum not to do any more on Dutaey's account, but try another firm." McQueen wanted an account opened at one of Barclay's banks in Essex. Redgrave said he had lived at Kelvedon some years ago, and there was a Barclay's Bank there. McQueen told me to go and open an account there in the name of Day. Redgrave handed me the money and £5 over for expenses. I took a room from a Mrs. Scemmell for an address, opened the account, and sent the "send the braces" telegram at arranged. On the day I ran away from Southgete to McQueen's

office, he and Redgrave came in together, and McQueen said, "If it is not a fit of the jumps, of course the boy must be prepared if anything should happen what to do." He then told me to make the statement which I have given, that I got the cheques from Gibson. McQueen said it was the only thing to get me off. Redgrave assented, and laughed when McQueen was cross-examining me on it to see if I could remember things properly. I came back from Kelvedon against Redgrave's orders because McQueen commanded me to come back. I said, "I do not want to come to London." He said, "But you must come to London. I want to do a forgery on Ward and Tunnicliffe, and you have got to take an office, engage a clerk, and send into the bank a forged order for a cheque book. It is ail right—nothing to be afraid of." The forgery of £4,000 was mentioned at, two or three places—at Bournemouth. McQueen told me at Redgrave's office that he and Campbell meant to raise in the course of the year over £20,000. I am not positive that McQueen wrote the "send braces" telegram. We were sitting on Bournemouth Pier; McQueen and Redgrave were both writing, and McQueen gave me the telegram together with list of trains to Kelvedon ((produced). When I was at Brixton three or four persons came to see me to see how I was getting on, and give me money for food. McQueen came, he said he had had to "grease" Sparling (pay him), and that he got in at Sparling's son. I had money from friends—not from Redgrave—he did not come to see me. After Redgrave was arrested I have seen him in prison 100 times, but only spoken be him about twice; the conversations were very short, because Redgrave and I were strictly watched, not allowed to walk together. My brother has told me he is paying the expenses of my defence. I turned King's evidence absolutely on my own, because Redgrave turned King's evidence. Stollery came six or seven times to see me. I have known him nearly all my life; he was clerk to my solicitor, Mr. Walton. Stollery saw Redgrave a number of times also—he did not bring me messages from Redgrave that I recollect.

ARTHUR GLASEBY , district manager, Barclay's Bank. I am in charge of the Cavendish Square branch and five branches in Hertfordshire and Middlesex. On August 15 I received references from H. J. Watson for opening an account, to Davenport and Co., 14, Coventry Street, and A. E. McQueen, Esq., 17, Deodar Road, Putney. I called on Davenport, his answers were unsatisfactory, and I directed the account should not be opened. If an account were opened at, say, New Southgate, our practice would be to transfer it to another branch without Irish references.

CHARLES ALDERSEY DAVENPORT . (The witness was cautioned.) I carry on business at 14, Coventry Street, as an estate agent, and live at 6, Byfield Gardens, Barnes. I have known Preston about six years, McQueen and Greenbaum since August. I do not know Butt or Coleman. In July or August Preston came to my office alone—afterwards he came with McQueen and with Preston repeatedly. Order form for a cheque book (produced) is taken from my cheque

book of the London City and Midland Bank, Cambridge Circus. I have not operated on the account for some time, and kept the cheque book in an unlocked drawer in my office. I do not know how the order form or blank cheques (produced) came out of my cheque book. Typed letter from Davenport and Co. to Gray, Money and Fuller is not signed by me, nor is it copied in my letter-book. I have not a typewriter. Letter of July 24, 1907, from Gibson to my firm I found in my office opened, and handed it to Willis. I have no knowledge of the letter from me to which it purports to be reply. On the evening of September 5 I wat at home at 6, Byfield Gardens, with my wife and brother-in-law, Ormanby. A person called there more than once, but I did not see him.

Cross-examined by Mr. Slater. I have been an, estate agent for six or seven years at 217, Piccadilly, and 14, Coventry Street. Before that I was a matter in Holland. A complaint was made against me, asking for seven days' imprisonment, for carrying on the practice of masseur without being qualified, but no order wat made. I then came to England to go into business with an American, but the business was a failure. Having the offices on my hands and understanding a little of estate agency, I commenced as an estate agent and took a managing clerk to teach me my business. Preston was a friend of my managing clerk and called to see him about raising money on leases, and I arranged two mortgages for him through Messrs. Pitman, solicitors, receiving my commission from Preston. I also arranged for him a bill of sale on Dr. Weldon's furniture. I took Weldon to a solicitor in the Strand, and he swore an affidavit that the whole of the furniture belonged to him. The furniture was afterwards removed; part Weldon was allowed to keep and the remainder was sold. I advanced £10 and Redgrave £40 on that. I personally never had any money from Dr. Weldon, and I lost my £10. I divided my commission on the mortgages with Smith, of Regent Street. I now know the leases were forgeries and that Preston was convicted. I wrote to him alter his sentence. When he came out in July, 1907, he came to see me. He was very down and I invited him to dinner. I have never handed him cheques or my cheque book. The last cheque I used was two years ago—given to a money lender, who has now a warrant out against me on a judgment that I cannot pay of 6s. a month. The cheque book was left in an unlocked drawer in my desk, and I never thought of it. I never heard of Gibson orliad any transaction with him and never saw the letter from him (produced) this I handed it to Willis. Letters were sent to me purporting to be in reply to letters from me (which I had not written) in reference to Redgrave's bankruptcy, which I handed to Preston or to my clerk, Pyke. I never knew Preston went in the name of James. I have known Greenbaum three or four years. I never handed Gibson's letter to him. I knew him as a commercial traveller and thought him respectable. I introduced him to Preston because Preston wanted a furnished office, which I did not feel Justified in finding for him. He looked out some addresses in the "Telegraph"

and made an appointment to take one at 14s. a week, and as he did not keep the appointment he offered me £2 if I would take it for him. I refused, but Greeabaum coming by at the time, I introduced him to Preston. Bernard Newark visited my office and brought me business. He asked me some question about some French bonds he had, which I could not answer, and I asked Redgrave, he being a fluent French scholar, if he would explain it. I never knew that Newark was a forger or that the bonds were forged. I believe he is in Vienna, having been extradited over some jewellery business that occurred some years ago. I never introduced him to Greenbaum.

(Monday, November 25.)

CHARLES DAVENPORT , recalled. Cross-examination continued. I thought Greenbaum was a very respectable man, and I thought Newrok was really in the Secret Service of the Russian Embassy. He came to my office to sell the furniture of a flat, which he was very anxious to do. I do not think these people visited my office at the same time. I know a man named Graham. I said at the Mansion House that I discovered the loss of my cheques and order form through Graham asking for a loan. He did not realty ask for a loan; it was only in fun. I daresay it was £15 he asked for. I had not anything in my bank for two years. He knew I had no money and did not come for the purpose of a loan. I had seen my cheque book at different times in looking through the drawer. The reason I kept the cheque book was that I was in hopes of continuing the account at the bank. I had an account in another bank before that—the London and South-Western, which I was asked to close. I had given cheques to Redgrave signed with my name. I had full confidence in him, and, on going to the Continent, I had given him blank cheques, which I have never seen since. I told the bank manager and he asked me to close my account. That would be about 1901 or 1902. I have known Graham perhaps 12 months. He was introduced to me by a solicitor to let his flat at Buckingham Gate, which I did. I know he has been convicted once. I do not know what for—something lo do with furs, I believe, and that was not in this country, I believe. I know so little about it that I cannot tell you what the conviction was. I believe the date that Graham asked for the loan was after Redgrave was arrested. I know a Captain Symmons Lynn. I let him a bungalow belonging to a colonel in the country, but I did not arrange an insurance policy on that. I had no difficulty in regard to the bungalow taking fire, and there was no fire that I am aware of. I heard from Dr. Dickson that there was some trouble about this bungalow. Dr. Dickson told me that it would be set on fire; that was after I had arranged the letting. I did not believe such a thing; I thought Captain Lynn was a gentleman. I know Dr. Weldon. I sold Dr. Dickson's practice for him. I have known him for some time, and thought he was a gentleman. There was no threat of criminal proceedings

against me with regard to the sale of that practice—certainly not. I know a Mr. Brown, an ex-solicitor. I believe I told Preston he was a solicitor—that was a trivial mailer. I did not know Brown had been struck off the Rolls and taut to penal servitude for forgery. I did not know very much about him; nor did I tell Preaton stoat it, because I did not know. I thought Brown had been suspended because he was in Mr. Wildey Wrights office and acting as sort of clerk there—Mr. Wildey Wright, a solicitor. Brown woe in Craven Street then, I believe. I did send Preston to Leigh and Co. I do not know exactly what business Leigh and Co. carry on, and did not tell Preston that Leigh and Co. was a business run by Brown, and most decidedly did not tell him to go there and get a room, so that he could wife letters from there. I know Preston went to see them. Mr. Brown came to see me in reference to see matter and said he was opening offices for himself for the purpose of doing anything he could, and Preston asked me something about his bankruptcy. I said I knew nothing of bankruptcy in any way whatever, but if he would take a letter down to Leigh and Co. they would no doubt help him. That is as far as I had any communications with Leigh and Co. as regards Preston. Brown had a partner who bad the money; Brown hid no money. I do not know his partner. I do not know anything about it being impossible for Preston to arrange to have a room there on account of the fee. Preston did not go to Leigh and Co. to get offices. After he had been to Leigh and Co. I gave him a letter to them. There was no question of any letters being written by Preston to solicitors from my office and I did not speak to him about it. I think if Redgrave had asked me to have written those letters I might haws done so. I did not tell him he must sign Daven port and Co. because it would not do for me to be mixed up in it. There is no truth in that suggestion. I cannot remember Thursday morning, Judy 25. I do not know the firm of Gray, Mounsey and Fuller, or Boulton, Sons and Sandemen. I should like to know if in any of the three letters referred to the name of Davenport and Co. is written in copying ink, because I never used anything but copying ink in my office, and I do not think it is. I cannot remember how many letters I had on July 25. I have a letter-book. I generally put the letters I receive on the desk; they are put away by a man named Hemming. I have not put them away myself. I will take it that I received three letters on July 25—one from Mr. Gibson, one from Gray, Mounsey and Fuller, and another from Boulton, Sons and Sandsman. I may have read them. Mr. Pyke is still in my employ. I will take it that on that day these three letters were opened by me in the presence of Preston and Pyke; there were some letters opened. I believe these were the three letters. I read one of the three, but the other two I did not read through. The one I read was that in which some solicitors said they would oppose Redgrave's bankruptcy. I asked Redgrave about the matter. The other letters referred to his bankruptcy, and I did not read them carefully because this one was conclusive in my mind that he could

not flat his bankruptcy annulled. They were very emphatic about it Very likely Pyke said at the Mansion House that I opened and read all these three letters—I would take his word against mine. His memory is somewhat, abnormal. I do not think I have handed a letter to Greenbaum in my life, and he has never seen any letters in my office. I never advised Preston to take an office at all, nor give him instructions to give my name as a reference. The landlord did apply to me, but I did not reply to him. I handed the letter over to Detective-inspector Willis. I denied to Preston that I ever received a letter from the landlord; that was a lie. I did not want Preston to know about the letter because I would not give him the reference for an office. I have never seen Coleman to my knowledge in my life till I hare seen him in the dock. Greenbaum and Preston have not been in my office together. I introduced Greenbaum to Preston at the corner of the passage leading into my office. When Preaton wanted me to take an office for him I refused, and he said, "It is nothing of any consequence; I should have taken it before but I did not like to go back because I have not kept my appointment. Greenbaum happened to be passing; I called him and asked him if he would do it. He could earn a sovereign if he liked. I told him who Redgrave was, and the matter, as far as I was concerned, commenced and ended there. The passage leads from the side of my office to the street. It is inside the outer door of a house. I only occupied one room, the rent of which is 22s. a week. I pay £1 2s. 6d. a week and I have to have electric lights all day long. Greenbaum, Preston, and myself have never been in the passage together nor in my room together. It was outside in the street really where I suggested that Greenbaum should take the office for Preston. Mr. Greenbaum has never bad a letter from me nor handed one back to me. I was never told that Butt had taken a photograph of the latter, nor knew of a man named Butt. I have never seen Exhibit 4 until I believe the police showed it me to the Mansion House. My office is on the ground floor. I cannot tell you how much really of the £100 I borrowed from Preston has been paid; perhaps more than £100. When I went to Holland, Redgrave was looking after the financial pirt of my office and warned me of two clerks. He had all the money paid to him that had been paid into the office, and there were other moneys paid. I believe the £100 has been more than paid buck. There was money to my account in the London and SouthWestern Bank when I went to Holland. Redgrave did not draw upon it—he bolted. None of the cheques I passed with him have been passed through the bank. I have had money from Redgrave since July. He came in once and said, "I have got a little present for you—£5 "; that was in the passage. I had two or three people in the office at the time. I cannot tell you the date; it would be about August Some little time afterwards he gave me £3. The reason he gave me to he £5 was that he wanted me to go away; said I was looking ill and I should go to the seaside. I said M No. I would rather pay my debts." I was in great straits at that time. I received the £5, but

nut off that day. I did not tell him that I wanted some carpets, but be knew I wanted them. When he was at my house he saw I did not have any. I certainly did buy a carpet the very same evening that I received the £5. I did not receive £21 from Preston; I have never had that sum in my possession from August to the present day; not altogether. The £5 was for nothing. Childs was not present when £21 was handed to me, because I never received £21, and I have never seen Childs in my life till I saw him in the dock. I have never told Preeton that I felt so nervous if Greenbaum was caught that he would tell the police I had lent him Gibson's letter, and never knew Greenbaum had done anything wrong. Preston did not say, "Well, you have had your share." I only paid 22s. for the elicit. I owe my landlord to-day, I suppose, about £21—perhape £22. In the middle of July I owed him, I believe, £17. I have paid the rent since then out of my office, and a little tune ago I sold some shooting for £100, of which I got £10. As regards my personal expenses, I generally have a cup of tea and my railway fare, otherwise I do not spend any money. I have a wife and child. I never keep books, but you can see my letters. I can easily prove that I carry on a legitimate bufinest. I never received £12 from Preeton on August 12. I know nothing about the cheque for £12 13s. in any way. Redgrave called in frequently (I Cannot tell you a particular date) until I commenced to come Very late to the office and went away on purpose to avoid meeting him. I asked him to keep away because he made me nervous. He was a changed man in a very short space of time; in the beginning he was a very nice man to talk to, but afterwards he became some what unpleaeant. I never said to Preston that it was unsafe to have anything more to do with Gibson's name. I have only received one £5 from Preston—that was a gift. Preeton told me if he had anything to do with my office he would not have certain people in it; he objected to Pyke being there and asked what I wanted him for, and he did not like Mr. Chinner coming in my often. I first heard the name of childs from the manager of a bank, who called and asked me if I knew anyone of that name or Wateon. I said M No," but then said, "One moment. I had man named Watson in my employment, but he was not in a position to open a banking account and his character was an indifferent one." I aid not receive a letter from Barclay's Bank in reference to Childs. I received one from Rickmansworth, which I handed to Inspector Willis. I did know a man named Day, but did not know that was the alias of childs. The Day I knew was an estate agent The letter produced is the ordinary bank letter asking for a reference. I never replied to that because I did not like the bank's coming to me for a reference. I write to the police and asked them to see me to give advice whether I should answer the letter. I was crossing Shafteabury Avenue when I saw Redgrave, and he spoke about the letter. He asked me to give him a reference for a bank. Why I wrote to the police was because the inquiries were in different names—Childs and Day. Redgrave

till in a hansom with somebody else and asked me if I had received a letter from the bank at Rickmansworth. I told him I had not had the letter, and he said, "You are a liar; someone else has had a reply from the bank." At that time I had not the letter in my posstation. I afterwards told Redgrave I had replied to the letter. That was a lie. I asked Mr. Hedley also to say he had posted it. I expected a letter to come, therefore I gave the key of my office to someone next door to take all letters and keep them till I asked for them. I cannot tell you when I gave Gibson's letter to Willis. He asked me whether I had any letters, and I did not know that I had, but I looked for them and found one or two; I am not quite lure how many. I gave him all the letters I could find. I wrote to Willis to come up, and he seemed to know a great deal with which I was not cognisant. I think I received the letter on August 21, and I wrote to Willis the same evening. I did not keep the letter in my possession; it remained in the tobacconist shop till late in the afternoon, and then I put it into the letter-box, and the Rev. Mr. Lloyd handed it to me about four or five o'clock. There is a letter-box in the outer door in the passage. I did not want to have the letter in my office for fear Redgrave would come there. The letter-box is used by Harris and Reed, tailors, who have the upper part of the premises. I was nervous about the matter and did not like my name being mentioned to banks. I had not heard that my office was going to be searched by the police; I had no idea that it would be. I did not hide Gibson's letter amongst some old papers on the floor and sprinkle them over with dust. About that time I did expect the police to come because I had written to Mr. Willis to come. I saw Redgrave alter Willis had been. He asked me were the detectives in my office, and I said "Yes." He said, "Did they ask you anything about the bank at Rickmansworth? I know you will not tell an untruth, but it is a very serious matter to me." I said "No," following the instructions of Inspector Willis. I saw Redgrave in Scott's Restaurant. There was nothing said about Gibson's letter then. Mr. Smith was my managing clerk at a salary of £3 a week and commission. Redgrave came to me through him, and there were some mortgages obtained from a Mr. Pitman, in regard to which I sent Redgrave a nasty letter, because he went behind my back; but he afterwards came up and put it all right. We then became somewhat friendly. He was a very nice man to talk to. I gave Smith notice because he drank too much. He was with me about six weeks; I never knew he had been in prison. Mr. Hedley is an auctioneer, who sometimes came to my office—when I asked him. He was auctioneer for another person, who paid his license. I know he was living at Hammersmith; he has no business address. (To the Jury.) It was on my own initiative that I wrote to Willis on receipt of the letter from the bank. I knew Willis years ago.

Cross-examined by Mr. Hawkin. I made a mistake when I said a man called Watson was in my employ; it should have been Watkins. I also made a mistake in telling the him manager I knew a Mr.

Watson. Redgrave was the only person who asked me to give a reference for a bank. I do not know much about McQueen; I was only introduced to him by Redgrave when I cannot fix. It might have been the end of August. I have had no business transactions with him. I knew Redgrave six years ago, before ha went to penal servitude. (The Common Serjeant thought Mr. Hawtin had better not go into details with witness about Redgrave's past.) Redgrave was in the habit of obtaining moneys on mortgages. He was charming man to talk to—an accomplished man—to all intents and purposes a gentleman. When I went to Holland in 1891, after doing business for a few days, I was ordered by the sergeant of gendarmes to go with him to Breds to see the Officer of Justice, Which I did, and he asked me for a passport and 1,000 guilder, or he would send me out of the country as a rogue and vagabond. I produced £1,000, and eventually got a passport from Lord Salisbury. I gave up my house in 1901, and have bean continually going backwards and forwards to Holland until the week before last. I bad something to do with Sequa arid am not ashamed to own it.

Mrs. MARY DAVENPORT , 6, Byneld Gardens, Berhem. I remember on September 5 leaving the house between eight and nine in the evening, leaving my husband (the previous witness) wish his brother-in-law, Mr. Ormandy. As I went out of the door I saw someone speaking to the latter. There were also two or three man a few yards away. After doing some shopping I came back, passing through Lowther Parade, where I saw Redgrave, who said, "Is Mr. Davenport at home?" I said, "No, he has not come in yet". He said, "I want to see him very particular to-night, as I have got some money to give him, as I know ha will be very glad of the money, as the landlord at his office has bean worrying him for the rent." He said, "A lot of money" and that he was leaving the country before 10 in the morning. He said that he had batter not come back that night, but would be sure to be at our house before eight in the morning. I do not recognise the oilier men.

To Campbell. I do not know you.

JOHN ORMANDY , Portobello, Scotland, commercial traveller. In September I was staying with Mr. Davenport On the 5th I answered a Knock at the door about seven at night, where I saw McQueen, who asked it Mr. Davenport was in. I said he was not, on instructions from Mr. Davenport. He said he would return in a quarter of an hour, as it was very important he should see him. At this time I saw Redgrave and McQueen's son outside, a few yards away. McQueen was very anxious and almost agitated. I recognised all these persons at the Mansion House. I asked McQueen his business; he said, "Well, I have got between £80 and £70 in cane to give him, also a letter (or message); which of the two is the most sacred I cannot say, but I must get rid of them both." He coiled again about nine, and I still said Davenport was not in; he then came back for the last time about 10—three or four times altogether. He said he

would come in the morning, and 9.30 was appointed; but nobody called.

To Campbell. I do not think I have seen you before.

Cross-examined by Mr. Hawtin. The message by McQueen was not particularly from Redgrave. I think he said something about Redgrave having to leave town. I am sure McQueen said £60 or £70. He produced no money.

FRANK FREDERICK HOLLAMBY , Accountant General's Department. C.P.O., produced telegram (Exhibit 56) from M. A. Campbell to Rose Campbell at Littleton Road, Earlsfield, on August 6, handed in at Oxford Street at 12.40 p.m.: "Sending £4 by telegraph. Meet me at six o'clock, 32, Rathbone Place." Witness produced another telegram, handed in at Kdvedon at 1042, August 27, sent to McQueen: "Send braces at once.—Williams."

THOMAS MULANEY , 1, Kemble Street, financial agent. I have known Coleman for about 10 years as Major coleman. On the Friday before last. Bank Holiday I was in Peele's Hotel with him, soon after three, when he asked me to change a cheque at the bank. I said, "Is the cheque all right?" He said, "Yes." Cheque produced is the one he gave me. I took it to Ludgate Hill and received the money from the London City and Midland Bank. I then took it to the "King Lud," where Coleman was to meet me, and I handed him the bag of money intact. He gave me 6s., two of which he owed me. Pitoton came into the "King Lud" and was introduced as Mr. Lowe. There was nobody else there.

Cross-examined by Mr. Slater. I am not carrying on business at present; I have locomotor ataxy. In July and August last I was at 10, Red Lion Court, Fleet Street. I have sold Hastings Harbour Bonds—£200,000—in regard to which there have been criminal proceedings against someone. I have also sold a brewery to Mr. Harry Foster. About August last I was dealing with aluminium solder. I fiequently go to "Peele's Hotel." Coleman, when he asked me to go to the bank, said he had another appointment to keep. I have changed cheques like that for people for the last 35 years in both hemispheres. I do not think it is at all dangerous; it is part of my business. The cheque (£12 13s.) was payable to Broughton, signed in the name of Gibson. It was endorsed It is not unusual for a man in the City to say, "I have got son appointment, will you go to the bank and meet me at such and such a place" Coleman walked with me a short distance when I left "Peele's." He did not promise me anything before I went. I have known Coleman as a tailor—at least he said so.

To Campbell. I do not know you.

CHARLES JAMES FARLEY , cashier, London City and Midland Bank, Ludgate Hill, produced order form which had been presented by Coleman in the name of Robinson, he receiving book of 100 cheques. (Witness compared cheque-book with register of chequebooks, and also identified the forged cheques as having come nut of the book.) Coleman when he signed the form wrote, "A. Robinson, p.p. Joseph

Gibson" in the wrong place. The cheque £153 11s. (produced), August 7, 1907, was cashed by me, £100 and £50 notes, the rest in cash. It was paid to the man called into court—Commissionaire Garon.

Cross-examined by Mr. Slater. It is not our custom when an order form is presented by a different person from the customer to write informing the latter. I do not know the general custom. (Witness explained the signature on the order form to the Jury.)

To the Common Serjeant. Mr. Gibson has had an account with us for the last 24 years. If you walked in and asked for a cheque-book we should not give you one unless we knew you.

CHARLES ALGERNON HALLIWELL , cashier at the Ludgtte Hill branch of the London City and Midland Bank, deposed to cashing a cheque for £12 13s., payable to Charles Broughton, and dated August 2, but been three and half past on that date. The certified extract from the books at the bank showed that £12 was paid in gold and 3s. in silver.

HENRY THOMAS WILKINS , cashier, as above, proved cashing the cheque for £153 17s., dated August 2, payable to Roxby on August 6. The certified extract of the books of the bank showed first the money was paid in three £50 notes, and the remainder in gold. The numbers of the notes mere 10723,-10724, and 10725. One of the notes appeared to have been cleared through one of Cook's tourist branches and had on it the words, "Please exchange for silver and gold." That was not on it at the time of issues, as the bank issues nothing but new notes. He knew ill the prisoners by sight, but could not say whether it was inside the bank or outside that he had seen them.

WILLIAM CONOLLY , Commissionaire No. 2,229. I am employed at 71, Leadenhall Street at the London and Provincial Homes Invetment Company, where Campbell was employed during the month off August. He was clerk in the accounts department and had been there since I have been there, that is 12 months. I also know "the "Major" (Coleman) who used to come very often to visit Campbell. The last time I saw Coleman there was before the August Bank Holiday. Campbell used to sit on the right-hand side of the office facing Mitre-street on the ground floor, and anybody that went by could see him from the street. I keep a register of the arrival and departure of the employees of the firm, but only slight; it does not include the time they leave at night On August 6, the day after" Bank Holiday, Campbell arrived at 9.30 in the morning. He left alway 9.50 and returned somewhere before noon, but I could not exactly state the time. (To prisoner Campbell. I am positive as to the time you arrived in the morning. If you pay you did not leave Earlsfield until the 9.10 train, arriving in the City at five minutes to ten, that would be untrue. I do not put down in the book times previous to the actual arrival. I say that what is in this book is correct. It was not always my cotton to go out to breakfast about 20 minutes past nine. If some of you were not there by half-past nine, I should not on all occasions go upstairs. Upon that particular

occasion I did not go upstairs. There was nothing unusual in your going out for half an hour. I do not know that you have sometimes to go out to search the records at Somerset House. On this particular morning you would be out about an hour and a half as near as I ran guess.

Detective-sergeant CHARLES HAWKINS , Metropolitan Police. I knew prisoners Coleman and Campbell at this time, but I did not know McQueen. I saw him on August 6. I was going down Ludgate Hill on the left-hand side between 11 and 11.15 a.m., coming from this Court, and was close under the railway bridge. Prisoner Coleman had his back towards me; Campbell was facing Coleman and McQueen was facing me. They were standing on the edge of the pavement. I was in plain clothes. Coleman waved his hand and said something. I do not know what it was. I waved my hand in reply. He had frequently spoken to me before. I did not see Redgrave that I know of until I saw him at the Mansion House.

Cross-examined by Campbell. I am satisfied that it was not on the Saturday that I saw you, but on the Tuesday. I was not in the City on the Saturday. The nearest I got to the City on that day was Lambeth Police Court, where I was in attendance.

GEORGE FITZPATRICK , cashier at Messrs. Cook and Son's office in Piccadilly, recognised two notes numbered 10723 and 10725 as having been changed by him on August 6 before midday. The notes were changed for French money, the amount for each note being 1,250 fr. par, plus the exchange. He could not swear by whom the notes were changed, but had a strong idea that it was the prisoner Coleman.

ERNEST THEODORE GODDARD , cashier at Messrs. Thomas Cook and Son'n Gracechurch Street branch, deposed to changing the note No. 10724 into French money on August 6 at about five in the evening.

ROSE CAMPBELL , spinsier, 61, Littleton Street, Earlsfield. I was there on August Bank Holiday. Mr. and Mrs. Taplin and Mr. Coleman came to the house on that day. Campbell, who live at No. 61, am Coleman went away together in the morning and Campbell came back alone at two o'clock. They went out for a ride to Wimbledon together. Coleman came back about three o'clock. Afterwards we all went out together for a walk—Mr. and Mrs. Taplin, Campbell, Coleman, and myself. Colenran stayed with us the night of August Bank Holiday and went away the next morning from Earlsfield Station at near as I can remember after 10 o'clock. On the morning of the 6th Campbell went to business as usual. He used to leave at a quarter to nine in the morning. On that day I received a telegram. I was expecting some money from Coleman, but I did not know how much. The amount I received was £4, and I signed the receipt produced. In the evening I came up to London with Coleman and Campbell and we spent the evening together at a music-hall. Up to that time I had seen prisoner McQueen twice in all. After the August Bank Holiday I saw him several times. I had a shop at

39, Rathbone Place and McQueen had a shop at No. 32, and McQueen used to pass every morning. I went to Margate for a holiday on August 11 with Campbell and Coleman, and when we returned on the Thursday following I went with Coleman to McQueen's in Ratbbone Place. Colemen went in to see McQueen, and I waited for him in the cab outside. A fortnight or three weeks after I returned from Margate I was with Coleman at Willesden Station. It was a long time after Redgrave's arrest." I think he had been to the Mansion House two or three times. I had only seen Redgrave twice. The first time I saw him was in the company of McQueen and Campbell outside a public-house in Rathbone Place. The other time was at my piece at Earltfield, when he same with McQueen for Coleman's clothes. I have known Coleman for three years. From Willesden Station Coleman and I came to London and I saw him off to Manchester from Eueton Station. I saw McQueen after that and told him that Coleman had gone away.

Cross-examined by Mr. Skier. I went to visit Preeton in Brixton Prison.

Cross-examined by prisoner Campbell. There, was nothing unusual in Coleman spending a week-end at Eariafield. He used to come for the week-end when we lived in Brixton, and he lived with us for tome time. I know von. had trouble in collecting rents; I have been with you to collect them. The man Stolley did visit us at Earlsfield two days therefore your arrest; he came on Thursday, October 5. You was arrested at Manchester. I knew that through the police. On the occasion of Stollery's visit we had dinner together. He said he wanted you to go to Manchester with him to recognise coleman, as he wanted him to go further up the country. He wanted you to write a letter to Coleman asking him to meet you at the station and to send him the money that you received every week for him from Redgrave. You were to enclose 2s. and give him the rest when you saw him. You wrote the letter and Stollery took it away.

Prisoner Campbell. It was a trap to lead to my arrest.

Witness. When I visited Redgrave in prison he asked me to tell you to send him a solicitor. You asked me to go to Mr. Appleyard, and, fasiling to see Mr. Appleytard, I was introduced to Mr. Walton.

WALTER GARNHAM , commissionaire No. 575. I was sent for to go to the Hotel Cecil in the beginning of August and was taken by the porter into the reading room, where I saw prisoner Childs. He gave me a closed envelope and told me to take it to the London City and Midland Bank in ludgate Hill and get notes. I received the money from the cashier and took it back to Childs, who gave flst 2s. The money was in notes and coin and put into a bag.

GEORGE ARTHUR DAVIS , commissionaire No. 15. I am employed at the First Avenue Hotel, and on August 12 was called to the smoking-room, where I saw prisoner Childs. He asked me if I would go to the London City and Midland Bank in Ludgate Hill and cash a cheque, which he placed in my hand. It was not in an envelope, so that I saw what I was carrying. The cheque was dated August 10

and wu payable to Ryder, the amount being £94 2s. I asked him what kind of money he wanted, and he said he did not mind what it was. I asked him if he wanted gold or notes, and he said notes would do. At the bank I received a £50 note, four £10 notes, £4, and 2s. I took the money back to the smoking-room and handed it to Childs. This would be about half past 10 or 11. I saw nobody but Childs.

WILLIAM JAMES LAGDON , assistant to Mr. Slater, tailor, 18, Featherstone Buildings. On August 12, about noon, prisoner Childs called to know if we had an office to let. I showed him an office and he took it at a rent of 7s. 6d. a week. He gave the name of Gray and paid four weeks in advance. I saw him once or twice pass by the office door, and I saw two messengers pass my office door. After that date I did not see him again until I saw him at the Mansion House.

ALFRED EDWARD PALMER , Post Office messenger, 41 W.C., stationed at the High Holborn office. I remember seeing prisoner Childs at the office in High Holborn on August 12. In the afternoon I was called out to go with an express letter, and I left the office with Childs and went away with him to 18, Feathmtone Buildings. I was told to go to the London City and Midland Bank in Ludgate Hill and cash the cheque (produced) payable to Arthur Ellis, for £37 4s., dated August 12. That would be about 3.30. I received the money in gold with some silver. When I took the money back to 18, Featherstone Buildings, there was nobody there. I waited three minutes; then Childs came and I gave him the money, and he signed his name to the docket in the name of Gray.

CHARLES HENRY SCHOFIELD , cashier of the Ludgate Hill branch of the London City and Midland Bank, deposed to cashing the cheque payable to Ryder on August 10, and stated that the extract of the books of the bank showed the notes paid out to be as follows: A £50 note, No. 18328; four £10 notes, Not. 34687, 34688, 34689, 34690. and cash £4 2s. He identified Davis to the commissionaire who brought the cheque. He also cashed the cheque payable to Arthur Ellis dated August 12, the money paid being 30 sovereigns, seven halves, and nine shillings. The money was paid to a messenger boy whom he could not identify.

HENRY MONTAGUE BURROUGHES , Post Office messenger, employed at the Regent Street Post Office, spoke to meeting Childs on August 14 in Mill Street. Childs said he wanted the nearest District Messenger Office, and witness told him the nearest was in Piccadilly. Prisoner accompanied him to the office and spoke to the clerk. Miss Melsom. Later in the day witness gave a description of the man who had spoken to him to two police officers, with whom he afterwards went to Lanometer Road, New Barnet. He did not see any of the other prisoners before he saw them at the police court.

EDITH LOUISE MELSOM , clerk at Regent Street Post Office. On August 14 prisoner Childs cane into the office with a cheque' in his hand, and said be wanted an express messenger to go to the London City and Midland Bank in Ludgate Hill. I asked him to put it in a

cover, and gave him the envelope (produced). I gave the envelope and enclosure to messenger Richardson, and told him he was to take a cab and bring the reply to an address in Mill Street. He carried the reply to Mill Street, but Childs was not to be found.

CHARLES TAPLIN , solicitor's clerk, 131, Vassall Road, Brixton. I know prisoner Petition by the name of Redgrave. At the time in question I was acting clerk to Mr. Walton, solicitor, of Woolwich. I saw Preston on July 12 in the "Rainbow," Fleet Street, and he gave me instructions to prepare some documents. I carried out his instructions, and, on July 14, again saw him in the "Rainbow," after I had received a reply regarding the instructions he had given. He that asked me whether I could obtain blank forms of cheques upon certain banks which he specified, including the Bank of England, the Union Bank of London, Princes Street and Chancery Lane branches; Hoare's Child's and the London City and Midland, Ludgate Hill brunch. He may have mentioned others. I told him I had no earthly balance of obtaining bank forms of cheques and said, "What do you want them for?" He replied, "I have various letters from eminent firms and I shall, if I can only get one. of the cheque forms, fill it up for a large amount, about £1,500, and cash it." He said that if I could obtain such a form he would give me a "corner "out of it, that is to say, a. portion or share. I told him I could not do such a thing and I absolutely declined. He also asked me whether in my position as a solicitor's clerk I would write an evasive letter to a gentleman or firm he would name so as to get a reply to that evasive letter bearing the signature of the gentleman or firm to whom it was addressed. I told him I could not do so in my capacity as a solicitor's clerk. I have known Campbell eight or ten years. During the conversation to the 14th, or it might have been the 16th, Coleman came into the "Rainbow" and Redgrave asked, "Who is this min?" I said, "Oh! that is 'Major.'" I explained that that was his nickname and that his real name was Arthur Coleman. Redgrave then said, "Well, you will not help me; he may be or assistance." Having declined to enter in any way into the obtaining of the blank cheques I left them together. I had nothing to do with introducing Campbell to Redgrave, and did not know they were acquainted until I saw Coleman a few days afterwards in the "Mitre" in Chancery Lane. I asked him, "What are you doing with Redgrave?" He said, "We are negotiating as regards obtaining some blank cheques." I asked him whether he had done anything and he said, "No, not at present." I never saw Redgrave after the 16th, but I saw Coleman repeatedly. He was evasive. He said he was endeavouring to obtain blank cheques and he was going to do some business with Redgrave. He did not say where he was endeavouring to get them. He did not mention any names in connection with blank cheques. Campbell's name was not mentioned in connection with the matter by Coleman. I repeatedly Saw Campbell. He said "Major" was endeavouring to carry out some instructions from Redgrave in respect of the cheques of various banks. I spent Bank Holiday with my wife at Earfield

at Campbell's house. When we arrived there was only Rose, known as Mrs. Campbell, in the house, and I went for a walk and met Campbell coming towards the house. We then went into the town and waited at the "Rendezvous Hotel," in the High Street, for Coleman, who Campbell said was also on a visit. After waiting some time we went back to the house, and whilst having some lunch Coleman I arrived, stating that he had been to Wimbledon. After the meal we went to Mitcham and on the way conversation took place between Coleman, Campbell, and myself as regards the cheque watch Coleman I said he had in his pocket for £150 odd. I asked him on which bank it was drawn, bat he declined to tell me. We went to Mitcham Fair and without my obtaining further information from either one or the other my wife and myself left about nine o'clock. Coleman in Campbell's hearing said he was going to put that cheque down to-morrow (Tuesday, August 6). He stated that it was a forged cheque given to him by Redgrave, with whom they had an appointment the next morning at 12 o'clock for the purpose of putting down the cheque, obtaining the proceeds, and dividing them. Campbell said that he had written to Redgrave to make an appointment for 12 o'clock, but they meant to get there earlier in the morning so that they could do Redgrave oat of his proportion. Next morning, I should say about 20 past 11, I was coming from the "Rainbow" in Fleet Street, going eastwards, in company of a solicitor, and before we arrived at Bouverie Street I saw a hansom cab being driven towards Charing Cross, the occupants being Coleman sitting on the near side, McQuees sitting on the off side, and Campbell sitting on Coleman's knees with his back to the window. The next I saw of any of the three was next day, when I saw Campbell in the "Mitre." I asked him what he was doing on the previous day riding in a cab with McQueen and Coleman. He said they were going to McQueen's place, Upper Rathbone Place, as regards the residential flats which he was interested in at Chelsea. He told me afterwards that Coleman had received the proceeds of the cheque, which had been split up, and that the "Major" had "guild" with it, meaning that he bad done the others out of it I have known McQueen about 20 months. Coleman introduced me to him.

Cross-examined by Mr. Slater. I did not give any information to anybody about this cheque, which was floating about. I wanted first to ascertain upon which bank it was drawn, but I could not obtain the information.

Cross-examined by Campbell. There was nothing unusual in coleman being at your flat at Earlsfield. I knew his had spent many weekends with you. You used to invite him because he was hard up. Rose Campbell was your housekeeper. You have repeatedly told me that you had business relations with McQueen. I have seen acceptances by McQueen relating to some property he had at Chelsea. You did not take part in this conversation about the cheque, but you were present. I suppose the reason why I said nothing about this at the police court was that it was not put to me.

Cross-examined by Mr. Hawtin. I have known McQueen about 20 months. I have known him as a tailor carrying on bushings at 32, Rathbone Place. I know that at about thus time he was interested in the equity of redemption of tome flats at Chelsea, olive to Cheney Walk, and that Campbell had assigned his interest in them to McQueen. The glimpse I had of McQueen in the cab was not momentary. I saw the cab coming. I had aben him before repeatedly. I may come time have made mistake in the identifying and remembering people. I have heard that this cheque was the Roxby cheque, but I do not know Anything about that. I absolutely deny that I had £20 or anything oat of it.

JOHN ARTHUR ANDERSON , Messrs. Cook and Son, Ludgate Circus. I remember on August 6 last changing some French money for Bank of England notes. The amount of French money was equivalent to £49 10s. Id. I gave eight £5 notes. I identify four of the notes, Nos. 60413, 60415, 60417, and 60,419. Three are endorsed in the name of Coleman, 34, Cavour Street, and one in the name of Jones.

(Tuesday, November 26.)

EDWARD HOOTTON , ticket collector, Great Northern Railway, New Barnet. I have known Preston as Redgrave for several years. On July 8 he asked me if I could secure him lodgings. I suggested Mrs. Shapcott, Ashley Villa, After that I saw him frequently as he went to and returned from London. I have seen Redgrave at 39, Lancaster Road, where Childs has lived for about 14 years. Childs also used to go up to London, but not very regularly. During July and August Chili travelled to London on several occasions.

RICHARD JOHN PYKE , solicitor's clerk, 24, Trafalgar Road, S.E. I know prisoner Preston as Redgrave. At this time I was totally in the employ of Mr. Davenport, and attended daily si his office in Coventry Street. I saw Redgrave there in July. On August 9 I hail an accident which kept me away, bat up to that date Redgrave used to come there pretty frequently at any time between 10 and 11.30. Generally I used to get there first. On one or two occasions Mr. Redgrave was standing outside waiting for me when I have been a little bit late. He was never actually inside the office before I arrived. Daring July and August he spent a good deal of time there. On one or two occasions when I had to go out I left him there alone. Mr. Davenport would open the letters. Mr. Davenport handed to me the letter written by Mr. Gibson to Messrs. Davenport on July 24. I also identify the letters written by Messrs. Boukon and Sons and Messrs. Gney, Mouneey, and Fuller. Besides myself, Davenport and Redgrave were in the office when they arrived. Davenport opened the letters, and a discussion about them took place in Redgrave's presence. I was asked as to an application for a disease in bankruptcy, and I said, "It is no good; it is not possibly be done here; you will have to consult a lawyer." I explained that certain formalities would have to be gone through. Nothing was said as to who

had written the letters to which these were replies. I never saw Preston writing anything at my office. I know a man named Greenbaum at a frequenter of Mr. Davenport's office, but I do not know him personally. He was frequently there during the latter part of July. I have not seen him there for a considerable time. I returned to the office about six weeks after the accident. Redgrave called on me at Trafalgar Road, and said Mr. Davenport had asked him to call to see how I was getting on. He asked me casually if I had had any visitors, and I said no, with the exception of an old friend. I do not know Childs at all. I have seen McQueen, I think, only on one occasion. He called on me in Trafalgar Road the same day, and soon after the detective came to see me. McQueen came within three-quarters of an hour after I had seen the detective. It was one Saturday afternoon. I do not know what McQueen came for. I thought he had come about my accident. I told him that Redgrave had been arrested, and that I had just had a visit from a detective, and was expecting another one, and with that he took up his hat and ran away. He stayed about five or six minutes. I do not know where Davenport kept his cheque book. Letters arriving for Mr. Davenport would be placed on his desk. We have no letter-box and the letters fall on the floor. After the letters had been opened they were placed in a basket. The desk was an ordinary roll top desk, and the basket would either be on the top of the desk or on a table by the side of it. I do not know Butt—never heard the name.

Cross-examined by Mr. Slater. I am still in the service of Mr. Davenport. I was not in his employment in 1901-02 when his offices were in Piccadilly. I went there on one occasion on behalf of my then principal. I did not at that period know Preston. Before I saw him in Davenport's office I only met him on one occasion, when I was sent by my principal over to Brixton Prison to get instructions. Presion and I were pretty friendly. We used to sit in Davenport's office and chat. On one occasion we went out to lunch together. He then appeared to be badly off, and led me to believe that he had no money to spare. He said, "We will go to a very cheap place," and we went to Snow's. He paid for the luncheon. I believe Davenport was very hard up at the time. I was not working on saltry but on commission, and I am afraid that is in arrear. Business was really being dons by Davenport at that time. It consisted mainly in letting furnished flats, and just about May and June I think there were several going. I cannot tell what were the average earnings of the office in July. Mr. Davenport took the money himself and kept no books, aird I bad no control of the financial part of it. The earnings amounted to more than 5s. or 10s. a week. I know one week we let four flats, and if you let a flit there is two guineas commission. That would be in May or June. In July little or no business was done. I know that Mr. Davenport was very much in arrear with his rent. I think he used to tell everyone that. In July he was £20 in arrases, which was a considerable sum, the rent being 22s. 6d. per week. In June he had an execution in

his house, but that could not have been the case when Redgrave came to see him first of all, because he had taken a new house. I do not know when the execution was paid out, but it would be before the quarter day of June. I do not think the date of the execution could have been July 11, because he had gone to Barnes before that. From July 11 to the end of the month Redgrave came to sea Davenport almost daily at Davenport'e office. There was only one small room, and if Mr. Davenport was engaged ha would interview people in the passage. I knew a parson named New rook as coming to Mr. Davenports office, but I knew nothing of the man personally. I saw something in the paper and spoke to Mr. Davenport.

To prisoner Campbell. I do not know you at all.

SUSAN SHAPCOTT . Ashley Villa, Lancaster Road, New Barnet. I know Preaton as Redgrave. He came to lodge with me on July 8. He left on the day of Childs's arrest (August 28). I have seen Childs and Redgrave sitting together outside my house. That would be two or three weeks before Redgrave left. Young McQueen called upon me on August 28 wish a letter from Redgrave, and I gave him Redgrave's clothes. My sitting-room is in the front of the house and my kitchen at the beck. The front sitting-room was ocoupied by Redgrave. I can seen anybody coming to the front door from the kitchen. Child came one Sunday to see Redgrave.

Croat-examined by Mr. Sater. Redgrave did not appear to be in want of money at the time. He was well-treated. I did not take notice o! what money he had. He did not appear to me to be shout. I would not with for a bettor lodger.

ELIZA COOKSEY . I live with my brother-in-law at 10, Duke Street. Manchester Square. His name is Saunders. We let an office. On July 23 I saw an advertisement in the "Daily Telegraph", to which I replied. Prisoner Redgrave celled in reply to that letter, I think, on July 25. My brother-in-law was not in, and I told Redgrave to call again on Saturday (July 27). The rent was two guineas. He gave the name of Davenport as reference. My brother-in-law wrote to Davenport asking if he considered Redgrave satisfactory in every way and received the following reply: "We are in receipt of your letter of 27th Inst. In reply thereto we beg to inform you that we have known Mr. Redgrave for many years and you need have no hesitation in accepting him as tenant, as he will in all ways prove satisfactory. We regret the delay in replying to yours owing to our Mr. Davenport being out of town. We delayed writing you until his return.—We are, yours faithfully, Davenport and Co.

The Common Serjeant. Of course, this may be from Redgrave himself. Davenport says he wrote no reference.

Witness. I think it was on August 2 that Redgrave actually took possession of the room, and he remained there for three weeks. On August 28 young McQueen brought me the following letter, dated from Ashley Villa. Lancaster Road: "Dear Miss Saunders,—Kindly allow bearer to bring me up a suit of clothes and some boots that are in my room. I slipped last night and slightly sprained my ankle and

am unable to come up to-day to the office—Yours faithfully, R. J. Redgrave." I gave young McQueen the tilings asked for in the letter. He took a box at well. Redgrave did not come again after that date. I found the roll of tracing paper produced in a cupboard in Redgrave's office and handed it over to the police. I have never seen Childs.

To Mr. Hawtin. The rent was paid weekly in advance. I could not say one way or the other whether Redgrave appeared to be finish of money.

ALFRED MORTIMER MARTIN , manager of the London City and Midland Bank, Ludgate Hill. Mr. Joseph Gibson, solicitor, Martin's Lane, Cannon Street, has been a customer of ours since 1883. The telegraph envelope produced was brought to the bank by a messenger on August 14 enclosing the cheque payable to Stanley Marsh and handed to the accountant by the cashier, Schofold. The cashiers do not open closed letters, it was therefore handed to the accountant, as I was engaged at the time, and the accountant opened it and brought it to me, together with the Stanley Marsh cheque dated August 14 for £61 14s., purporting to be signed by Mr. Joseph Gibson, and also several admittedly good "Gibson" cheques in order that I might compare the signature. Ascertaining that the messenger was instructed to take the money to a Bodega somewhere, I telephoned to Mr. Gibson, who, on examining the cheque, said he had not drawn it. I sent for the police and sent the boy off with a bogus letter. The signature to the forged order form appears to be precisely the same as the signature to Mr. Gibson's letter, which he sent to Davenport. As a bank manager, accustomed to examining signatures, I say that it rarely happens that two signatures are exactly alike. In the signatures in the bundle of genuine cheques produced, signed by Mr. Gibson between July 25 and August 13, there are considerable variations in the length and height of the strokes. The copy of Mr. Gibson's account with the bank shows that those cheques which have been forged have been duly debited, and also the forged order for a cheque book of August 7.

JOSEPH GOWAN PEARSON , formerly acting manager at Messrs. Barclay's Bank at New Southgate, and now at New Barnet, gave evidence as to prisoner Childs opening an account in the name of Henry John Watson at the bank at New Southgate, on August 15, with £100, giving McQueen and Davenport as references. On August 17 witness closed the account and gave him his money back, requiring him to sign a cheque as a form of receipt. Prisoner had two £50 notes.

FRANCIS THACKERAY GREEN , cashier in the issue department, Bank of England, proved the cashing of the notes for gold on August 19. The name endorsed on the notes was "H. W. Nicholson, 55, Pembridge Road, Balham." He could not recognise the person by whom they were cashed, and did not know any of the prisoners.

THOMAS REGINALD WARDEN , manager of the London and SouthWestern Bank, West Smithfield. In 1901 I was manager of the Cheapside branch. We had a customer of the name of Lomax, 34,

Regent Street, whom I have known since as Redgrave. I product the paying-in slips which are in the handwriting of prisoner Preston. The letter cards produced are both in the handwriting of Preston. The letter to Gray, Mounsey and Co. and the reference to Saunders are in his handwriting, also the endorsement in the name of Nicholson on one of the £50 notes.

Detective-constable JOHN LOAKES , City Police. In August I made certain observations, under the direction of my chiefs at 10, Duke Street, Manchester Square, where Redgrave had an office, 32, Rathbone Place, McQueen's place of busniess, and 10, Deodar Road, Putney, his private address. McQueen's was at Duke Street on August 24, 26, 27, and 28. On the 27th the brother of the prisoner Childs called there with McQueen and Redgrave. After leaving they walked together to Oxford Circus, where they joined a "but and alighted a little further down Oxford Street going east. Then Redgrave and McQueen got into a hand, cab, and the brother of the prisoner Childs stood on the footway. McQueen said to Childs, "Tell him to bring the money up." On August 28 I saw Redgrave at 10, Duke Street. Later he went to 32, Rathbone Place. In a few minutes he left with McQueen and his son. I followed McQueen and Redgrave to Eueton Road. They went into the "Green Man." The telegraph messenger, Burroughes, was then with me. McQueen came out alone and walked in the direction of Portland Road Station, then came back, and outside the "Green Man" he spoke to his son. They then went into the public-house again. I then saw McQueen's son and Childs together and Burroughes made a communication to me an I we followed them to Percy Street,. Tottenham Court Road, where McQueen's son left Childs. Percy Street it just it the top of Rathbone Place. I went up to Childs and said, "Stanley Marsh." He turned round and faced me and said, "No." I said, "Childs, then." He said, "No." I said, "Do you deny that you are either Stanley Marsh or Child?" and arrested him, and he was brought up before the Mansion House justices on August 29. On August 30 I kept observation on The Chalet, Deodar Road, Putney. I was not engaged in this case, but was making inquiries at Shepherd's Bush. On September 4 I went to Putney with the meteager Burroughes and saw Redgrave and McQueen leave the Chalet. They walked to the Putney footbridge and went into Putney Station and I did not see them any more. On September 15 I saw McQueen, Redgrave, and McQueen's son leave The Chalet together. They went to the City. It was on that day that Childs was brought up the second time at the Mansion House. On August 25 I was at Waterloo Station with Detective Harris. I saw Redgrave, McQueen, and his son in a train at No. 1 platform for Bournemouth.

JOHN HEWITT HARFIELD , dentist, Hogarth Villa, Nightingale Road, Rickmansworth. I remember in the month of August last meeting Redgrave and Childs outside my house. Childs was saying he had been obliged to make a deposit of 10s., and Redgwave said, "You should not have done it." I next saw Childs inside my house. He

wanted a room. I told him I would not take him without a reference. He told me they were about to take a piece of land for a photographic business, and he gave as references Davenport, of 14, Coventry Street, and Redgrave, of The Chalet, Putney. Redgrave was waiting outside. Next morning I went to Coventry Street, and on the 20th I returned Childs his deposit of 10s. I did not believe what he had said. I did not go to the address at Putney.

HENRY JOHN BEDFORD , manager, Barclay and Co.'s bank, at Rickmansworth, spoke to prisoner Childs opening an account on August 20 with a deposit of 80 sovereigns in the name of Thomas Henry Day. Photographer, with a reference to Davenport and Co., Coventry Street. Next day, between 11 and 12, he came in and closed the account and relumed the cheque book. Witness wrote to the reference given but had no reply.

WILLIAM JOHN CROUCH , fruit merchant, Rickmansworth, identified a bag found in possession of prisoner Childs as having come from his shop.

Detective-constable WILLIAM HARRIS, City Police. On August 17 I started to keep observation on Ashley Villas, Lancaster Road, New Barnet Redgrave left the house at 8.30 a.m. and I did not see him again that day. On August 19 I saw him at New Barnet Railway Station, where he was joined by Childs, and they went up to town together. They returned in the evening, and walked together to 39, Lancaster Road, where they parted. On August 20 I saw Redgrave arrive at New Barnet about eight o'clock at night by him self. He wam towards Ashley Villa. I did not follow him. I did not see Childs after the 19th. On August 23 Redgrave went up to town by train. On August 25 I was in company with lakes on the platform at Waterloo Station, and saw depart by the Bournemouth train Redgrave, McQueen, and a young man I believe to be McQueen's son.

ROBERT LEONARD HARRINGTON , motor-car driver, No. 896. I remember receiving a telephone call when on the rank at Hyde Park Comer, asking me to go to Wandsworth Town Hall. As I was going in to inquire who had telephoned for me, Preston said, "You are for me" After waiting 10 minutes or quarter of an hour McQueen came up. They got into the car, and told me to turn to the left and go on till I was told to step. Young McQueen followed on a bicycle. I was stopped after going not very far. One of them got out. I could not say which one it was. He came back, and got into the car and told me to drive down a turning. I was then stopped again and an elderly man got in. We stopped again at the "Leather Bottle Hotel,' on the Kingston Road, and had a drink. Redgrave and McQueen returned to the car, and they next stopped me just outside Kingston Railway Station. McQueen walked away and Preston stopped and paid me. I then went back to Hyde Park alone.

WILLIAM SPINDLER , cabinet maker, Nightingale Road, Willesdon Junction. I recognise prisoner Coleman, whom I first saw on August 31 about five o'clock He engaged a room and stayed until September

5. He had a leather bag when he come, and took it away with him when he left. He came back on the 11th and took away his things. He left behind two collars and the following note for a Mr. Fox: "Dear Joe,—Will you please pay my landlord the enclosed 7s., and have my box sent off so as I can receive before morning.—Yours ever," without signature. No Mr. Fox called, and the note up opened when the police came. There was no enclosure of 7s. coleman gave the name of Umphleby. A gentleman called to see him on Sunday, September 1: When Coleman left on September 11 he was joined in the street by a female, I think named Rote Campbell. I have never been paid the 7s.

FRANCES SHEMELD , the wife of George Shemeld, living at Kelvedon. We hare three rooms to let, and on August 26 let a room to Childs in the name of T. H. Day. He stayed there on the evening of the 26th and part of the 27th. When I took him in his breakfaat he was counting gold coins, I should think £40 or £50. After dinner I did not see him any more. After he had left a man I recognise as McQueen inquired for him, and he said the young man had left some things, and asked if I would send them on if he gave me the address. I laid I would if he would send me the money for the carriage, and I agreed to do so. A postal order for 1s. 6d. was afterwards sent to me in a letter signed by Stoilery.

AUBREY JOHN GILLING , clerk in Barclay's Bank, Witham, Essex, spoke to the opening by Childs of the account at Kelvedon with £35 on August 27. The account remained open six days, and was then closed to a cheque being drawn for the amount that had been paid in in favour of Alfred Rhodes. The cheque book was not given up by Mr. Day, but by the person who cashed the cheque, and 2s. 6d. was paid in respect of it.

GEIRGE VICTOR GOLDING , clerk in Barclay's Bank, Witham, Essex, stated that cheques drawn on the Kelvedon branch could be cashed at Witham, and the same cheque was used for either branch. Witness identified the cheque spoken to by last witness.

JOHN WILLIAM KNIGHT , cloak room attendant, St. Pancras Station, produced a book showing entries of cloak room tickets issued, one being in the name of Williams, August 15, a parcel being left, which was afterwards handed to the police. The person who left it called twice. In consequence of those calls I opened the parcel, finding a cheque book. I could not say it was the one produced.

Cross-examined by Mr. Hawtin. I do not recognise the man who called.

Defective-sergeant JOHN DIGBY . Towards the end of July I saw Redgrave in Fleet Street twice, once outside "The Rainbow." On August 7 I saw him coming along Farringdon Street with another man; they went to the wine bar at Ludgate Circus—the Bodega, I think. I watched' for about 10 minutes; then Redgrave and the other man came out and walked slowly up the hill as far as the London City and Midland Bank, staying outside some minutes in conversation. Then they turned down again, entered the Bodega.

and came out at the back in Pilgrim Street. They went to Ludgate Hill station, then returned to New Bridge Street, and from there to Fleet Street, where I left them. On August 6 I went to a room on the first floor at 10, Duke Street, the day after Redgrave's arrest. The room was pointed out by Mrs. Cooksey, and I made a search, finding a fruiterers bag, "Crouch Brothers, Rickmansworth," in a writing cabinet. The piece of tracing paper produced was handed to me by Mrs. Cooksey. It had on it, "Herbert John Watson, photographer, 32, Rath Sone Place." I went to 61, Littleton Street, Earlsfield, after Campbell's arrest on October 5, and I found at that address the bundle of cheques produced (Exhibit 65), all signed M. A. Campbell." The cheque (Exhibit 52) was also found, endorsed by Maude and Tunnicliffe. I had received a telegram that Campbell had been arrested. I waited at 61. Littleton Street till Rose Campbell came home—about midnight. It was in her presence that I searched. I also found counterfoil paying in book, with various amounts entered.

Cross-examined by Campbell. The cheques were in a bundle in the front room. I have not myself inquired at the National Provincial Bank to see if the account was a straightforward one.

Re-examined. The first cheque in the bundle is April 9, 1907. Payable to and endorsed, "Arthur Coleman." The second is in the same name; May 16.

To Campbell. As far as I know, these cheques were given long before the present charges of forgery.

ROBERT TURNBULL , managing clerk to J. S. Sparling, solicitor. The letter produced, September 7, is written by me and signed by Mr. Sparling. It is addressed to the Governor of Brixton Prison: "I have received instructions to defend Guy Richard Preston, now in your custody on remand Would you allow my representative to interview him to take his instructions for the defence." Since I wrote it it has been altered to, "instructions to defend Guy Richard Preston and H. A. Childs "; I cannot say by whom. It looks like McQueen's writing. Mr. Sparling hat been acting for McQueen for about two years, and the latter called on September 7 at Mr. Sparling's private house. Afterwards McQueen saw me and asked for authority to go to Brixton and see Preston. I said if Mr. Sparling would agree I supposed he could go, but I would not give any personal authority.

Mr. Sparling was seen and gave permission. The form is drawn up as "allow my representative." I could not say whether before this anything had been said about Mr. Sparling defending Childs; after McQueen had been to the prison he said that Mr. Sparling was instructed to defend Childs. McQueen was not a solicitor or solicitor's clerk. The document produced is in McQueen's writing," Richd. Cutting, clerk to J. A. Sparling," etc. I do not know any Cutting, Herk to a solicitor. The other form (Exhibit 75) of the same date. "I, John Sparling," etc., is in McQueen's handwriting. Exhibit 61 is a similar form written from Mr. Sparling to the Governor of Brixton Prison, September 9. The body is in my handwriting, and it is

signed by Mr. Sparling. I gave that letter to McQueen. It is asking the Governor to again admit Mr. Sparling's representative. McQueen had said that Pretton desired to see him again personally. Exhibit 62, beginning "I, John A. Sparling," is, I think, in McQueen's handwriting. I have known hit writing for about 18 months, and seen a good deal of it. In regard to cheque (Exhibit 50)—the Rhodes cheque—I could not swear that it is McQueen's endorsement; it is nearing his signature.

Croat-examined by Mr. Hawin. Mr. Sparling got instructions from McQueen on September 7; Mr. Sparling was ill then. Something wat said, I think, on that day, as to defending Childs as well. I attended on the Governor of Brixton Prison and explained how the letters of authority came to be written. I found that McQueen had instructions from Preston.

Re-examined. I never got any explanation of the words, "Richd. Cutting, clerk to J. A. Sparling." We never knew anything about Richard Cutting, or that the words had been written. I bad not seen the prison forms handed in by McQueen, until I was examined it the Mansion House. I think it was before then that I explained to the Governor. The latter said someone, had been in saying he was Mr. Sparling's son. I knew no one could come as his son except myself—I am hit son-in-law.

WILLIAM ANSLON warder at Brixton Prison. I was on duty at the gate on September 7 and 9. When a solicitor comet to see a prisoner he fills up a form (Noe. 62, 75, and 76). If he was a clerk he would have to nave an authority. The forms are sent to the officer in charge, and then to the prisoner, who says whether he wishes to see the person or not. The form produced was presented to me; it is signed J. A. Sparling. I cannot recognise the man who signed that. It must have been written in my presence. I did not see the form with "Cutting" on it No. 75 was the one I saw. I recognize McQueen as coming to the prison on professional business, but I could not say when.

Cross-examined by Mr. Hawtin. Form 75 is dated September 7. It was perfectly regular in form. If the solicitor mentioned in the authority is in the Law List we act upon it. I remember drawing the persons attention to the two names being alike—John A. Sparling and J. A. Sparling. I was not asked about Sparling's ton at the police court. It am sure it wat Sparling's ton that wat mentioned, not son-in-law.

CHARLES ADAMS , warder, Brixton Prison. I was on duty on September 7 and received the two forms produced, which were presented by McQueen, and he saw Childs and Preston in the solicitors' room. There it a glass door to that room and the warder can tee what pastes but cannot hear.

Cross-examined. (Witness described the solicitors' room.) McQueen filled up and signed form 75 in my presence. He had a letter from Mr. Sparling authorising him to ask for admission. I

directed him how to fill it up. I signed my own name on it at the time.

Re-examined. I told McQueen that he had no authority to see Childs; then he put Childs' name on the authority. I did not know that his name was McQueen. I saw form 76, with the name "Cutting, clerk to J. A. Sparling," on it. I was the officer on the other side of the glass partition. They were already in the solicitors' box when I came on duty; I believe Mr. Knight handed me the form.

WILLIAM ANSLOW recalled. (To Mr. Hawtin.) I did not tell the person who signed the paper referred to to sign in the same name as that of the authority. I told him to fill up the form according to his authority. Some clerks who come forget to sign the principal's name. The officer inside looks of the Law List.

JAMES NASH , warder at Brixton, deposed to admitting McQueen to the prison on receipt of form 62 and alter reference to the Law List, witness thinking he was a solicitor's clerk. I do not think I have seen Exhibit 76 before, headed "Richard Cutting, clerk to J. A. Sparling." I had no occasion to ask McQueen if he was a solicitor's clerk. I only saw McQueen at the prison on that occasion.

REGINALD ARTHUR CUTTING , clerk to Attree, Johnson, and Ward, solicitors. Mr. Ward has an account with the London and County Bank, Holborn, where I do my work in the same office as the cashier, who sometimes fills up the bodies of cheques for Mr. Ward. I know Leonard Archibald McQueen, son of prisoner McQueen, and identified him at the Mansion House. We were at school together. He knew where I was employed, but I have not seen him there. I know his father, and I think he knew my name and that I was a solicitor's clerk. I know nothing about Exhibit 75, with the name "Richard Cutting."

Cross-examined by Mr. Hawtin. I have known young McQueen between eight and ten years, and have been on friendly terms with him.

WALTER JOSEPH HARMAN , 50, Oxford Street. I have been at No. 59 until about a fortnight ago. I know McQueen perfectly well; have done for seven or eight years. I recognise Preston, who was introduced to me by McQueen on August 19 as Davenport. I am an estate agent. (Mr. Muir asked what business he was introduced upon, when Mr. Hawtin objected to that as leading. The Common Serjeant thought it was in order.) Witness. The object of the call was that some offices were required by Davenport (Preston) in St. James's district, with a rent of about £150 to £200. We sought the offices, and then McQueen called with Davenport two or three days after, saying the offices seemed to be suitable and would probably be taken We had not shown them the offices', but they had probably gone to see them themselves. "In the meantime," McQueen said, "would you mind making these inquiries for us?"—as to the stability of two firms, one Childs, of Petersfield, Hampshire, whether they were good enough, for £300; also with regard to Burgess, Taylor. and Tryon, a firm of solicitors, whether they were good for £1.000. I

asked the reason for this and was told they had some business relations with these people. I made inquiries through my bankers, and reported verbally to the two men that the two firms were quite good enough for the amount named. I hare the paper with the notes of the names and addresses: "M A. W. Childs, 21 and 23, High Street, Petersfield. Hampshire," etc. I think I met McQueen one day afterwards in the street and asked when he was coming along with his friend, Davenport. I have not seen him since till to-day. They never took any office through my agenoy.

Cross-examined by Mr. Hawtin. I knew McQueen for seven or eight years as a tailor. I had not seen Preston before McQueen introduced him. McQueen was a frequent visitor, to our office. Preston took part in the conversation we had; perhaps said more than McQueen. I cannot remember what was said by either person. I have not teen the prisoner Childs.

Dr. ERNEST WARDLAW MILNER , New Barnet, said he had been attending Edward Btollery, who was not in a safe condition to travel—as far as other people were concerned—as he was suffering from scarlet fever.

Detective-inspector FRANK HALLAM said he was present when Edward Stollery gave his evidence at the Mansion House on October 8 and 14, all the prisoners being present except Redgrave, and had an opportunity of cross-examining him. He was, in fact, cross-examined for Campbell and McQueen. I heard Stollery's evidence read over to and signed by him.

Cross-examined by Mr. Hawtin. I know Stollery was cross-examined.

Mr. Hawtin objected that there was no cross-examination of Stollery, and that hit depositions could not now be used. The Common Serjeant said that the Statute did not require that a prisoner should examine, but that he should have the opportunity of cross-examining.

Mr. Hawtin. If these depositions are admitted you only get the exparte statement of Stollery without any opportunity of cross-examining as to its truth.

The Common Serjeant. The Statute does not say that no depositions shall be used against a prisoner if he hears the evidence and makes no remark. There is no discretion; the whole thing is the Statute.

Mr. Hawtin. The reason of my objection is that there has been no cross-examination.

The Common Serjeant. It does not matter whether there was or not; it can be read.

Prisoner Campbell said that Stollery bad visited the prisoners as solicitor's clerk time after time—in fact, almost daily, as could be the proved by the prison records.

The Common Serjeant. That may be a objection; that is another thing.

Campbell. My contention is that it is collusion all through.

The Common Serjeant. What do you say. Mr. Muir? If Mr. Stollery went in as the solicitor of the prisoners to take instructions for their defence then there is an objection to Stollery giving evidence of what they said to him in confidence.

Mr. Muir. Certainly. So far as I know there is absolutely nothing upon this of that nature. He certainly never went, so far as know, on behalf of Campbell. He went on behalf of Childs, 'who was an acquaintance of his; also on behalf of Redgrave, and it was on Redgrave's information that Stollery was communicated with by the police and went to Manchester with Redgrave's consent Those are the only two prisoners with whom Stollery was brought into contact.

The Common Serjeant Of course, whether he was solicitor or anything else, nothing that Childs or Redgrave said to him would be evidence in itself against anybody else. I must have a look at the deposition to see what it is.

JOHN WALTON , solicitor, Woolwich, and 124, Chancery Lane. I employed Stollery at my clerk when I was acting for Preston and Childs. I was not acting for the other prisoner! then. I act for Coleman now—have done so since just before this Session. At that time Stollery was down with scarlet fever. During the whole time Stollery was employed by me I was acting only for Redgrave and Childs. I was in court during the hearing against the other three; Preston knew Stollery was giving evidence and raised no objection. Except the short time when Sparling acted for Preston, I have done so all the way through.

Cross-examined by Mr. Hawtin. I cannot remember when Stollery came to see me; he was not my clerk at the time of the arrear of Preston and Childs. I had no reference from Stollery—do not know whether he was a solicitor's clerk before. I knew he had been connected with photography, and was told he was a respectable man. (The Common Serjeant said this evidence was not for the Jury, but merely went to the admissibility of Stollery's evidence.) Witness. It was not through Stollery that the prisoners came to me. I believe that all the instructions I have had from the prisoners was after Stollery came to me.

Cross-examined by Campbell. I do not remember seeing Stollery at your address in Rathbone Place; I remember seeing you.

(Wednesday, November 27.)

The Judge. (To prisoner Childs.) There is a witness, Stollery, who gave evidence before the Alderman whose evidence it is proposed to give now; but it is said that at one time fee acted as solicitor's clerk in regard to your business for you. As you have pleaded guilty to this indictment, and given your own story, have you any objection to Stollery's evidence being given and our hearing it, as far as you are concerned?.

Childs. Not at all, my lord.

JOHN WALTON , recalled. (To Mr. Hawtin.) I knew some of the pi if one before Stollery came to me as a clerk. I was called upon last night to give evidence quite unexpectedly; and when I got home I looked up my books and found that I did see some of them. I was instructed by Preston on September 9. I did not see Stollery until the 16th or 19th. The instructions from Childs was after Stollery came; and Coleman was quite recently—I should not think more than a month ago. (The depositions of Edward Stollery and the exhibits therein referred to were read.)

ROBERT TURNBULL , recalled. (To Mr. Hawtin.) I went to see the prisoner Preston in Brixion Gaol after the second letter, on the 9th. When I went I had a blank cheque with me which McQueen had given me; I do not remember the bank it was on. As far as I can

remember Preston asked me for it and I handed it back to him. He did not say anything about at, or what he was going to do with it. I should not recognise it again if I saw it, as regards the number. I do not know what he did with it.

Detective DIGBY, recalled.

Cross-examined by Campbell. The people living in the same house as you have spoken of yourself and Rose Campbell as being quiet and respectable daring the tune you were there. I did not know that Rose Campoell wia keeping a fried fish shop and looking after it. (To tine Jury.) The cheques which I found were in a locked box in the front room at 61, Littleton Street, Earlsteld—Campbell's house. Those were National Provincial Bank cheques.

Detective-inspector FRANK HALLAM , recalled. (To Mr. Holden.) I was present at the Bridewell Police Station when' Childs was charged. On September 5 I was in the Deodar Road, Putney, with other officers. I there saw the prisoner Redgrave at about 11.30 at night. I also saw McQueen. Redgrave entered the side door of McQueen's house; McQueen remained at the garden gate. I went past McQueen, and just as Redgrave was closing the side, door I' pushed it open and said to him, "I am a police officer; I believe your name is Redgrave, and I wish to speak to you outside." He said, "All right." McQueen was still at the garden "gate; I think he must have heard it. I said to Redgrave, "Let us walk down the street, we may see Davenport." Redgrave said, "I don't want to speak to Davenport—who is Davenport?—I do not know him." He closed the garden gate and held it. We were both inside. A uniformed officer was passing by and he came to my assistance. I said to Redgrave, "Now I am going to arrest you." I took him further down the street, where I saw Detective Loakes and Detective Betteridge. I said to Loakes, "Is this Redgrave?" He said, "Yes." I said to the prisoner, "Shall I tell you the charges now or will you wait until we get into the train." He said, "In the train." I then took him to the train and there I told him the charges—that be would be charged with being concerned with a man named Herbert Arthur Childs, then in custody, with forging and uttering an order form for a cheque book. I referred to the other charges and took him to Bridewell Police Station, where he was detained. When I saw Childs at the Bridewell Police Station in September, I did not see any of the prisoners near or about the station. Detective Harris saw McQueen. At two p.m. on Saturday, October 5, I was at the London Road Terminus Railway Station, Manchester—the London and North-Western line. I was on the arrival platform. I saw the prisoner Coleman, who was standing as if he was apparently waiting for someone. At 2.15 I saw a train arrive from London—the 10.30. I saw Campbell alight from the train and speak to Coleman. Stollery was with Campbell. I spoke to them and said, "I am a police officer, and you will both be arrested for forgeries in London. I will tell you the charges when you arrive at the police offices at the Town Hall." I conveyed them there. I told both Coleman and Campbell what they would be charged with.

Coleman said, "Who is Redgrave?" Campbell said, "It seems strange that I should be called an a witness at a police court and then be arrested." I then said, "Things have developed since then." He said he could prove that he went away on his holidays on August 11. He said he went to Margate and stayed a few days, and then went on his bicycle to Rye, and afterwards to Brighton. Having charged them, I conveyed them to London, and there they were charged with the charges already mentioned at the Bridewell Police Station. McQueen was with me; he was already there under arrest. They both said, "I know nothing about the case." As a matter of fact, Campbell was never called as a witness at the police court; be had been subpoeaned. He had been warned to attend for a certain I purpose. I found a pocket-book on him (produced). On the page opposite—March 16—I see there is this, "6163 Gerrard, McQueen." I do not know what that is, but I presume it is a telephone number. I do not know whose number it is. On the next page there is another entry, "McQueen, 1663 Gerrard." Opposite May 21 there it" McQueen, 39, Rath bone Place, Oxford Street." On the page opposite May 28 there are the initials "L. and C. B., Lombard Street," which probably means London and County Bank; then "Nat. Prov," which means the National and Provincial. Under that the word "Thread" is written, which probably means "Threadneedle Street," and under that "Baker Street." At the top there is "Union of London and Smiths, Lothbury and Chancery Lane branches," and at the bottom of the page, "L. C. and M, Cornhill and Ludgate Hill." At the page opposite June 11 there is an entry, "A. C, 34, Cavour Street, Penton Place, Walworth." The other entries, except this, appear to be in Campbell's handwriting. The writing, "A. C., 34, Cavour Street, Penton Place, Walworth," is, I think, in Coleman's writing. Under date July 4 there is "E. Stollery, Farringford, Chapel Road, New Barnet." Also on August 23. That is the address of the witness Stollery. On October 28 there is a reference to "King, 65, Poland Street." Then there is "Mac." (To the Judge.) When I got it all these leaves at the end were gone. (To Mr. Holden.) I also found a little book on Coleman. (Exhibit 74.) There is an entry on the fifth page, "Mrs. Spinier, 47, Nightingale Road, Harles" in Coleman's handwriting, in my opinion. There are no dates in this; if is simply a pocket book. I see an address. "61, Lyttletion Street"; I think it is in ink. It is on the bottom of the page. I see Several entries on this page with regard to Earlsfield, but not see to 61. Lyttleton Street. I see an entry there "Campbell, 61, Lyttleton Street." I cannot say whose writing that is. I think that is the handwriting of Campbell. I cannot swear. Speaking generally, most of the entries are in the handwriting of Coleman. I have examined the book. The entries on the page I am looking at are Campbell's writing, not Coleman's. I see in very small writing, opposite the page for February 17 to February 23 the name of "Major." Of course, I cannot say what they are. There is the name of "Major" on the opposite side. I found Exhibit No. 64 on Campbell. It is

a reference in favour of McQueen. I say it it McQueen's writing. It is dated from Ashleigh Villa, Deodar Road, Futney, October 4: "I beg to certify that I have known Mr. M. A. Campbell for some years and can vouch for his respectability.—Fathfullv yours, L.E. McQueen." I found that on October 5, the day after this letter Appears to have been written—on the day of the arrer.—when I searched the prisoner. I say it is in McQueen's handwriting. I found also on Coleman that envelope which has been exhibited addressed to "Coleman, Manchester. Exhibit 48 is the envelope I despatched on the previous day to Coleman. I received an envelope from Stollery; I placed a postal order with 2s. in it and despatched the letter. I recognizes the envelope found on coleman as being the one I posted the day before. The letter that was in that envelope when I received it from Stollery was in the same terms as the copy of the letter that has been put in.

Cross-examined by the prisoner Campbell. You asked me before what that letter had reference to that was written to McQueen. I do not remember your saying that you did not wish to trouble your employer for a reference for a temporary berth. You may have said so. I know your bunkers are the National Provincial. Inquires have been made to see if your account was a straightforward one, and the replies are now in the hands of the protection. Connolly is, I think, prepared to answer the question with regard to the contenis of the safe in the office where you were employed. There is a safe in the basement which contains the books, and there is also another safe there, and the cashier, is the only person who has the key of it. Stollery was under instructions from the police to induce you to go to Manchester. It was ruse to find Coleman. We did not know where he was; you did know, and we thought probably you would so to him. (To the Judge.) Childs was arrested on August 28, Redgrave on September 5, and Cleman, Campbell, and McQueen on October 5. There was a (preliminary hearing against Childs and Redgrave. They were both committed for trial. Chi and was taken before the Alderman on the next day, the 29th. Evidence of arrest was taken, and also the statement which he made with Redgrave that day.

Mr. WILKINS , recalled. I was the cashier who cashed the Roxby cheque on the Tuesday after August Bank Holiday. As far as I can remember it was between 10 and half-past 10 in the morning. I fix that time by the fact that it was about the sixth cheque I paid that morning. On the day after Bank Holiday people are net so energetic in coming to business as they are on other days, and was started a little-bit later, although the bank opened at the usual hour—nine 'o'clock.

Inspector JOHN WILLIS , recalled. (To Mr. Hoi den.) I received the communication from Mr. Davenport that has been referred to on the morning of August 22. I went and saw him, and he made a statement to me on August 23. I also received from him certain documents—letters signed by solicitors, Messrs. Burton, Sons and

Co., Messrs. Gray and Co., and Mr. Saunders; also Exhibit No. 3. the letter signed by Mr. Gibson. There was also a letter from Barcley's to Davenport, and the envelope attached to it. I remember Saturday, October 5. I saw the prisoner McQueen in the Deodar Road Putney, about eight o'clock that night. Detective Harris was with me. I said to McQueen, "I am a police officer and take you into custody for being concerned with others in forging and uttering cheoues to the Ludgate Hill branch of the London City and Midland Bank." He replied, "I know nothing about it; I am innocent of it." I took him back to hit address—"The Chalet"—and he there produced from his pocket some papers, among which was a cheque book on the Northamptonshire Union Bank, Bedford (Exhibit 68). There are three cheques missing out of it, and the rest are all blank cheques. I also found a rough memorandum book (Exhibit 69). There is an entry in it "Sheffield, In worth Kel." There is a Mrs. Shemeld at Kelvedon, who has been called as a witness. That if the address at which the prisoner Childs was at one time living. There are not any other entries in the book, I think, relating to this matter. I found other documents on him, which I take to be Coleman's accounts. I also found some letters from the firm of Batten, Proffit, and Scott (Exhibit 102). They are all apparently signed by the same person. As far as I know, the original signatures of that firm. I did not find anything else of importance. When I was at Davenport's on August 23 the prisoner McQueen came to the door of Davenport's office. That was the first time I had ever seen him to my recollection. He spoke to Davenport and handed him a brown paper parcel, saying, "These are from Redgrave." I subsequently saw what the parcel contained. (To the Judge.) When he handed this parcel to Davenport he must have seen I was there. He did not at that time, know who I was; he made my acquaintance later. The brown paper parcel was tied up very roughly with string. I found it contained a number of letters which were replies to an advertisement. The entry in the rough memorandum book, "Mrs. Shemeld, Inworth, Kel," is in the handwriting of McQueen, in my opinion. On October 23 I went to the St. Pancras Station cloak room, accompanied by Inpector Hallam. After inquiry I was handed a narcel which had been left in the name of "Williams" on August 16 this year. I opened it and found it contained a cheque book (Exhibit 70), which is the cheque book which was obtained on the forged order form Looking at the forged cheques, they appear by their numbers to have been taken from this cheque book. There is one cheque filled up, but not signed, still left in the book: "Pay Mr. George Oathcnrt £35 10s." In my opinion that is in the prisoner Coleman's handwriting. In my opinion, the Roxtoy cheque is in the same handwriting. I found these two loose cheques—blank cheques on the London City and Midland Bank, Cambridge Circus, Shaftsbury Avenue (Exhibits 71 and 72). I have caused inquiries to be made with reference to eight £5 notes, given in exchange for 1.250 fr at Messrs. Cook's on August 5. The only notes produced are

four—Nos. 60413, 60415, 60417, and 60419. They are all £5 Bank of England notes, dated October, 1906. They are Exhibits 81 The first note bears an endorsement on the back in ink: "A. Coleman, Aug. 8, 1907." That is in Coleman's writing. I know from inquiries I have made at the Bank of England where that note came from. I traced the notes and found oat how they were paid. The endorsement on note 60415 is Coleman's: "August 10th, 1907." There is the address, bat below there is "4"—it should be really "34" (the "3" has been cut off by the signature being torn off): "Oarour Street, Penton Place." I say undoubtedly it is Coleman's. There is an endorsement on Note No. 60417—"A Coleman." I say that is the prisoner's handwriting. That has the address" of 34. Carour Street. Note No. 60419 also bears the endorsement, but I should think an attempt has been made to disguise it—it is "H. Jones, 24, Lloyd's Square, W.C." That is a false address. I think the endorsement is in Coleman's writing. I have made inquiries at 34, Cavour Street, Penton Place, and have ascertained that a man named "A. Coleman" occupied a room there for about two months.

Cross-examined by Mr. Hawtin. I found these'papers and letters in McQueen's safe and writing desk. There is no doubt they are genuine letters. Some drawers in the writing desk were looked, and I borrowed the keys from McQueen. I cannot say whether any particular drawer was locked. There is a officer here (Inspector Hallam) who has made inquiries about McQueen.

Mrs. ANNIE HODKISSON . I am the wife of William Hodkiseon, of 11. Lothian Road, Brizton, who is a publican. I know the prisoners Coleman and Campbell. The letter (Eshifoit No. 63) was written by Coleman in our smoke room at Lothian Road. At that time Coleman owed my husband money. Coleman had given him a cheque to change of McQueen's, but we never had the money for it.

Cross-examined by Mr. Hawtin. I do not believe the cheque is here—it was returned—it was misdated.

Cross-examined by the prisoner Campbell. I only knew you as a customer; I have nothing to say against you; you always behaved as a gentleman.

CHARLES JOHN WILLIAMS . I am in the Accountant's Department of the Bank Note Library at the Bank of England. I produce bundles of bank notes stated to be in exchange for the following exhibits: No. 6; 42; 8 and 13. I also produce four notes dated October 11, 1906, Nos. 60413. 60415. 60417, and 60419. I can give the dates of payment and return if necessary. There are four £5 notes and seven £50 notes. When they are not endorsed they come through a bank to us, but they are very often endorsed when they are paid in by people.

THOMAS HENRY GURRIN . I am an expert in handwriting, carrying on business at Bath House, Holborn Viaduct. I have had about 22 years' experience. I have had submitted to me exhibits No. 65, a bundle of cheques drawn on the National Provincial Bank of England, purporting to be signed by "M. A. Campbell," payable to various

person. They are paid cheques. I have also had submitted to me a brown covered memorandum book, exhibit No. 73. Those cheques are, in my opinion in Campbell's handwriting, and also this little book. Exhibit 59 is a letter purporting to be written by Campbell to Redgrave in prison, and is in the handwriting of Campbell, in my opinion. The writing on the envelope is in the same handwriting. The writing on exorcist 57a—instructions for a telegraph money order—is, I should say, Campbell's. Looking at exhibits 63 and 74, in my opinion exhibit No. 4 (the order form for a cheque book dated August 2) is in Coleman's handwriting with the exception of the I signature. There is nothing particular about the figures "1" and "00." I do not speak to those; I do not say they are not the same. The handwriting on the Broughton cheque (exhibit No. 5), to the best of my belief is Coleman's—all the body of the cheque with the exception of the signature and the endorsement, which I do not recognise. Exit bit No. 6, the Roxby cheque (the subject matter of the present indictment) is in my opinion, in the handwriting of Coleman, but I cannot speak as to the endorsement. Exhibit 70 is, in my opinion, in Coleman't handwriting; also the telegram to Red grave, Ashleigh Villa, Lancaster Road, New Narnet—"Too late. 'King Lud,' Tuesday, 12, Coleman." Looking at Bank of England notes. Not. 60413, 60415, 60417, they are, in my opinion, in the handwriting of Coleman. The signature, "A. Robinson," in the cheque book register, is, in my opinion, in Coleman's handwriting against the entry August 2, 1907. The entry on the page opposite June 15 in exhibit 73—"A. C, 34, Cavour Street, Penton Place, Walworth"—is, in my opinion, in Coleman's handwriting. Exhibit 79 is in McQueen's handlwriting. Exhibit 62—the prison form signed "J. A. Sparling"—is in the same handwriting as exhibit 79, with the exception of the writing on the last two lines. Exhibits Not. 75 and 76 are both filled in by McQueen, with the exception at the foot, in one came it is filled in by Childs and the other by Preston. The interlineations in exhibit 77—"and H. A. Child's"—is in McQueen's handwriting. The endorsement on the Rhodes cheque is in McQueen's writing. The endorsement on the cheque, exhibit 31, is in McQueen's handwriting. I cannot speak to the writing on exhibit 78 and 78 continued. The word "Kelvedon" was admitted by Childs to be his handwriting and also the envelope addressed to "L. E. McQueen." There is another one with "1959 Mayfair." which is in the? me handwriting as the envelop, but I cannot fix the writing of the figures above. I cannot speak to the writing on the long envelope, "Charles R., International Letter Bureau. 3. Duke Street, Adelphi." I believe the four lines, the name and the addreta, to be in the handwriting of Redgrave. I cannot speak as to the endorsement on the other.

Cross-examined by Mr. Hawtin. The only writings which are in McQueen's writing of which I sreak are the cheque for £35, the Rhodes cheque and exhibits 62. 77, 75, and 76.

GEORGE PATTEN . I am messenger at Barclay Bank, New Barnet and Southgate I was in the Southgate branch On

August 16 last. I recognise Redgrave and McQueen. I saw them on August 16 in Friern Barnet Road, standing looking at a board that was put up on a piece of waste ground about 150 yards from the bank about one and two o'clock. McQueen appeared as if he had a pocket book or piece of paper in his hand and looked as if I was writing something. I saw Childs just before I came to these others. He was looking in a shop. As soon as he saw me he turned round and went to the corner and ran sway. I have known him for some four or five years.

Cross-examined by Mr. Hawtin. It appeared to me is if McQueen was writing something. He was standing opposite the piece of ground where there is a bound put up, "This piece of land to be Let or Sold." I cannot say what he was writing about.


Prisoner Campbell elected not to go into the witness box.

LEONARD ELSTON MCQUEEN . I for some years carried on business as a tailor; at 32, Rathbone Place, since Christmas last; before than for twenty years at Dean Street and Berwick Street. I saw Redgrave first on August 3, but did not speak to him. That would be the occasion when he said I declined a cheque. Some little time before that I had obtained an equity of redemption from Campbell and received a telephone message from Rim that morning to see him. I was going to Thorp and Saunders in London Wall, solicitors, on this buttered when I met Camphen on Ludgate Hill. He came up and shook hands with me, and we chatted a minute or two. He said: "Could you oblige me with a cheque—by doing a cheque for me." I understood he wanted me to give him a couple of pounds as accommodation on a cheque. I told him I could not, but would see if I could do it later on in the day if he came to my business place. Redgrave came up at the time, but did not speak to me. I think I had known Campbell about two and a half years. I have known Coleman about five yean, having made his acquaintance when I had a tailoring business. He is a woollen jobber, and I bought woollen from him and made clothes for him and his friends. When I say "When I had a tailoring business" I mean I was in business on my own account. The next time I saw Redgrave was on August 13 Campbell called at my place on that day—I think he came up from Margate—and I walked to Oxford Street with him, and at the corner of Oxford Street and Rathbone Place I met Redgrave, end Oainpbell introduced him to me. I did not know him then. Campbell said: "This is Redgrave; he might be some use to you in your property business." I gave him a few outlines about the business, mentioning the situation of the property and the interests that were involved, and that it was a very troublesome matter, and he gathered the threads of the whole thing up in three or four minutes, and told me the beet thing to do. It was apparent to me at that time that he was a very sophisticated man on property. He told me he could easily get the mortgage required on the property. At that interview he spoke about a coat

I was wearing and I told him I was a tailor. He then said he wanted same clothes, and I gave him my address. He said he would call up and see me in the morning, which he did at Rathbone Place on August 14. (Mr. Muir objected to the witness referring to a note.) When Redgrave came he drove up in a cab about 10 in the morning, staying only a minute, and asked me to go to his office I went to 10, Duke Street, Manchester Square. When I got there there were two people sitting in his office—a front room on the first floor. They were perfect strangers to me; one was introduced to me as Mr. Green. I have seen him three times since but do not know that I should be able to recognise him. The other man was Watson, now known to me as Childs He said to Watson, "This is a friend of mine who lives down my way; he is a photographer, and I am helping him into business—financing him." Watson said he was a photographer and had been working for Elliott and Fry: he was what they call a developer for the trade. I am a bit of a photographer myself, and so had a few minutes' conversation with him. He told me he was going into business of that nature, developing, mounting, and framing negatives. He also said he wanted some clothes, and I said I would get some patterns, which he would call next day to make a selection from. On the next day, the 15th, I went to Southgate with Redgrave. He called at my place to look at the patterns I had spoken about. I should think he called a little before 10. He then said he had made an arrangement to run down to New Southgate to see some premises for Watson; would I go with him? I said I would go to King's Cross with him. When we got there we were still talking about the property, and he said, "New Southgate is not very far down the line; will you come with us?" I may tell you that in the beginning of August we are not very busy, so I went down with him. When we got to New Southgate station we walked about a bit there and went in to have a glass of bitter. Watson did not come in. He said to Redgrave, "Well, I will get on down there and see you presently; you will be coming along." We stopped in the public house about five minutes and then walked out about a quarter of a mile, but did not see Watson any more. While we were walking up and down the road Preston kept saying, I wonder where he has got to"; then I said, "Well it is very peculiar." Then he said, "He is coming to live down here and has got an address here; we will go and see if he has gone home." Then he pulled out a paper and said, "He lives at such and such an address," and asked me to enquire for him. I went there and asked for him. The landlady said she had not seen him that day. Ultimately, after looking about over the place and remarking on two or three empty shops, we went back. On arriving at 32. Rathbone Place, we found Wataon was in my room,—the only time he was ever on my premises. Directly we entered he jumped up and whispeted something to Redgrave, who then said I had better take Watson's measure, which I did. Redgrave said he would pay the clothes and I executed them for him. His name is entered

in our books as Herbert John Watson. I do not think I saw Watson any more for several days. I fancy Redgrave called the next morning to see tome patterns of a fancy waistcoat. He asked me if I could go with him to the city; I agreed, and we went to the Twopenny Tube Tottenham Court Road station and got out at the Bank. I then went with him into the Bank of England. He took two £50 notes out of bis pocket and endorsed them and handed them to the man behind the counter, who cashed the two notes, and I passed a joke with the cashier about not counting the money. I had not the remotest idea where the notes came from; they came out of his pocket; that if all I know. I went then with him to a woollen warehouse, and he selected the material for Watson's suit. He called the next day, I think; he came to try on a coat I was making for him; but he did not stop more than a minute or two; he was always in a great hurry. I saw Davenport on the 21st, I think; I had never seen him before. Redgrave called at my place in a cab that morning, and asked me to go with him to an office in New Coventry Street. I went with him, and as she cab was driving across Shaftsbury Avenue he put his hand up, and the cab stopped in the middle of the road, and a gentleman, whom I know now as Davenport, spoke to him in the street. I did not hear what he said. After that the cab drove round to his office in New Coventry Street, by Salmon and Gluekstein'e; we went into an office at the back of that; that is Davenport's office. There was a stout man there waiting to see Redgrave. As soon as we entered the passage Redgrave said, "There he is waiting for me." I may say mere is a passages as long as from me to the end of the Court. Redgrave went inside, and I stood waiting for him at the top of the passage. Watson was not there. We afterwards got in a cab and drove to 10, Duke Street. It was on the 22nd that we went to Shepherd's Bush, Redgrave called on me in the morning, and said be wanted to go to a place about two miles from Shepherd's Bash—the Scotch Hotel. We went to Shepherd's Bush, and first called at the (Bush Hotel, asking where the Scotch Hotel was. They did not know, and we went to a brewery next. We eventually found the place, and Redgrave got me to go to the hotel and ask if a Mr. Williams was in; he was not. I was to ask Mr. Williams to come across and have lunch with us. Redgrave then said he would make a call, or rather a couple of calls. He called on Oswald, Hanson and Co., solicitors, in Vincent Street, and at another solicitors' to tee a clerk there named Simmonds. Simmonds came out and we had a drink together. We then went back to inquire if William had returned. Ten minutes later we met Watson in the road, and Redgrave said to him, "Hullo, William" how are you? How did you sleep last night?" That is the first time I knew who Williams was. I then said, "What is this? Is this I kind of joke you are playing?" Redgrave then said he had got into some trouble at Barnet and had left there; he told me what it was, but it has nothing to do with this charge. The next day was Friday; I then saw Redgrave and tried some clothes on

him. He called at Hath bone Place and stopped and had a long chat with me, and I think we went to a public house and had a drink That was very unusual—for him to have a drink, or for me either. with a customer like that. He then said he was going to Bourne mouth to-morrow by an excursion train, and atked me if I would go and he would nay my expenses. I agreed, and saw him later in the afternoon at 32, Rathbone Place. I did not know Watson was going to Bournemouth. I asked Redgrave, as he had not time to catch the train in the morning from Barnet if he would stop at my place. He accepted, and went and fetched his bag from Barnet. I met him at the District Station, Putney, at 10 or half-pact, and we came home and slept at my house. My son was not there. We went to Bourne mouth next morning and Watson was on the platform. He had an old white linen hat on, no collar or tie, and trousers turned up, and looked like a native who had lived there all his life. I hardly know the man. After lunch I left the two of them. I had no conversation about Kelvedon on that occasion—never knew there was such a place on the map. The letter exhibit 78 I did not write at all; I have never seen it. It is Redgrave's writing without a doubt. When we returned from Bournemouth we came to Wimbledon and did not go to Waterloo. As it was getting late I thought it was nearer for Putney, and I said, "You cannot go to Barnet to-night; you had better come back to The Chalet"; so we broke our journey at Wimbledon. Watson came back with us. The letter you have shown me I infer was written at Wimbledon. When we were waiting for the train Redgrave handed some written instructions to Wagon. I saw Redgrave on the Monday at breakfast, and he then told he he was leaving Barnet and wanted to live in the country, as it was a great trouble to Kept up and down. He said he would look for some lodgings at Putney as it was a nice residential neighbourhood. We walked to Fulham, and called at 10, Oxbery Avenue, where he engaged a bed and sitting-room from a Mrs. Davenport, giving his name as Redgrave, Duke Street, and he paid the lady 10s. I do not think I saw Redgrave again that day, but I saw him on the next Tuesday. I fancy he called and said he was going down into the country—to Chelmsford. He asked me if I had time to go down with him. I was not doing anything that day, as work was very quiet, and I went with him. He paid the expenses. When we got to Chelmsford he laid he had arranged to meet Watson on the station. I said, "He must have made haste down here," and he said, "Yet, he has gone to the place I used to live at; I sent him there to see if he could gat my old lodgings; that is at Kelvedon, a little further down the line." He waited on the platform, and said he could not understand how Watson was not there, as he had promised faithfully. A telegram I had given to me in the morning referred to that; it had come to my place and I had opened it and read that it was from Kelvedon. He said. "Oh, that is for me," and I did not read the contents. I saw it wan Williams, and that it had nothing to do with me. I did not

understand it. We waited about a quarter of an hoar at Chelmsford, then he says, "I shall not go back to Barnet to-night if I wait any longer, but I wanted to see him very particularly. It if only couple of stations down the line; if you are not pressed for time would you go down and sew if you can see him." I want to Kelvedon and met Watson just outside the station. I said, "I have come down from Redgrave; I understand from him you were to have met him at Chelmsford station." He said, "Oh, he must be balmy; he must have forgotten." "Well." I said, "I was to deliver a message that he wanted to see you." He said, "All right; come and have a cup of tea." I went to his house, but did not have any tea. I stood on the doorstep while be went inside and fetched his bag. I then sent a telegram to Redgrave, who had armored that he would wait at Rathbone Place for me, to know if I had seen Watson. I telegraphed to my son "All O.K., Sonny." I thought I wrote the telegram myself, but it could not have been so; it was not my writing; it must have been dictated to Watson. At that time I knew nothing; about an account, or what Watson was at Kelvadon for. We went back to London that night, and I think I left him in Bishopagates Street. At any rate I went home to Putney. Next morning Redgrave called at my shop and I told him about Watson. Later on we went to a coat maker who had made coats for me for some years, and I instructed my son to bring along a coat which was to be ready. We walked up Portland Street to this coat maker's, and went into the Green Man publichouse, Redgrave saying he would rather wait for Watson there than go to the coat maker's. We stayed there about five minutes. My son then came and said the coat would not be finished for at least three-quarters of an hour, and I said. "You had better go to the coat maker and fetch Watson down to us." Watson did come and had some conversation with Redgrave that I did not hear; they went across to the comer of the bar. I was at the counter having something to drink and they had a talk together. After a time they joined me. Walton went and joined my son, I suppose, and walked down Portland Street towards Rathbone Place, Redgrave and I following. I afterwards heard that Watson was arrested. My son told me that someone had stopped Watson in the street and took him away. I did not know then what it was for. When Redgrave heard it be got awfully excited, and bottled down the street, saying, "Come here; I want to my something to you quick." He then said something about solicitor—that he must get a solicitor to defend him, and see what it was about. Did I know one I could introduce him to. I took him to Messrs. Coleman Evans, in Gerrard Street. He spent the best part of the afternoon with Mr. Evans trying to locate Wastson. I was not there. I left them there. They eventually found Watson at Bridewell. When they came back they had tea together, my sob being also there. We went to the Swiss Cafe in Berwick Street, Redgrave told me he wanted to come to my place to stop as he was only residing in London for a short time; he was going down to Bedford

to set himself up permanently in business—a financial business, I understood, a money-lending business. He had plenty of money, and I put a bag of gold, £70 or £80, in my safe for him once or twice. That was while he was staying in my house. While he was staying with me he was to pay 4s. for bed and breakfast, and as a matter of fact he never did pay anything. While he was staying with me I wanted some explanation over Watson. I wanted to know if he could tell me anything about it; in fact, I was beginning to get a bit uneasy just about that time. He then told me that he had a past, that. he was out on license. I told him I was very uncomfortable about it, and asked him, "Do the police know your change of address?" He said, "No," and I said, "Well, I should prefer for them to know, because it might make it very awkward for me if you were found on my promises and they did no: know that." He then told me he had to report to them; that he must not leave his place of residence without doing so. I told him he mutt report, but, of course, I could not order the man out of my house. He said he would tee about it in the morning. The next day after breakfast I still pressed him to report, and went with him to Putney police station somewhat against hit will. At the station I gave my address and said he was staying with me, and he gave his name and address and other particulars. He gave hit name as Redgrave. That is a fact that and be proved on the telephone in five minutes I should think. We walked from the station along the Upper Richmond Road to Wandsworth. Redgrave said he would go and find Coleman, who he knew was living at Campbell's. We took a taximeter cab and went to Wandsworth. Redgrtave said he must send Childs some money. He was called childs then because, of course, be had been charged at Childs. I did not know hit name was Childs until he was arrested. On the Earlsfield Road, I suppose it was, we saw Coleman; he was walking along the road and Redgrave invited him into the cab. We had a general conversation with Coleman in the cab—nothing to do with this charge. We went to Richmond or Kingston, I am not sure. While there I went and sat on a seat with my son, who had come down on his bicycle. It was nothing unusual for my son to spend hit Saturday on the wheel. The other two walked on 500 yards or so. We then returned to Hartatden, and afterwards home. We left Coleman just outside Har leaden. Redgrave stayed with me on Saturday, September 1 On the Monday I went to Keivedon again with him to get some money out of the bank there. He told me a sum of money was there land that he knew the bank when he lived at Kedveckm himself, and he had tome trouble the with the bank, to he asked me if I would go down with him, take the cheque, and get the money out. He told me the money had beep put there by Watson, but it was his money. Watson was arrested at this time. We went down and I went to the bank, he standing just outside. He told me that he had once got £11 off the postmistress on a cheque and the cheque was not honoured, so there had been a

bi: of bother about it. This was not at Kelvedon, it was at Witham. We had walked on to Kelvedon and I had called on Mrs. Shemeldsi to ask if there was anything owing by Watson; there were some clothes that had been left there. Mrs. Shemeld said there was a suit and some things there, but he did not owe her anything. I used the name "Day," as Redgrave told me that Watson was Day down there. Redgrave waited in a little public-house opposite the lady's door, which gave a view of it We then went to the bank. Redgrave told me it was a fictitious name when he explained that Day had put the money there, and that the money was his. I saw the cheque was made out to Alfred Rhodes. He said, "you can endorse it yourself, it will be all right." In the bank they paid me the full sum—£35. Some little discussion took place with the clerk to the debtor and creditor of the cheque book. I do not know how many cheques were out, but for the cheques that were taken I gave him the coppers and returned the cheque book which Redgrave had given me, to close of the account with. We returned to London and I saw Redgrave on September 3 £the Tuesday. He was still living at my house, and generally came up with me in the morning. On the 5th I came up with him and went to Coleman Evans and from there to the Mansion House, being in court "during the hearing of the proceedings against it Child. The Inspector gave an excellent description of what took place when Childs was arrested. I went to see Redgrave in prison. He had previously, in the Justices' Room, asked permission of Mr. Douglas, the magistrate's clerk, for me to go downstairs to see him, which I did, and gave him a sovereign. He said he would want some money and asked me if I would kindly come and see him next day. He said, "There are a lot of things I want you to do, and I do not think you are the sort of man to desert me in my trouble. Will You come and see me and hear what I can tell you £you can please yourself what you do." I asked him whether I should send Coleman Evans to him. He said no I had better not. I went and discussed the matter with Mr. Sparling the next morning, and told him I should like, if it was proper and in order, to go and see Redgrave personally, as I thought he was in a very disturbed state of mind and wanted to tell me something; and I was agreeable to be of what service I could. Mr. Sparling said he thought there was nothing unusual in it; I could go as his representative. Mr. Sparling has been my solicitor for a number of years. I went to Brixton on the Saturday, taking a parcel of things, shirt, etc., which had been asked for. I took a boy with the parcel and went to the prison with this afutfeority. I went inside the gate and saw the officer who gave evidence here, and presented the authority to him, who said that I must fill up a form. I did so, and asked how I should do it. He said, "You must make it out according to your authority." I thought I was acting in a proper and ordinary way in filling in the name I represented £that of Mr. Sparling. I handed the form to the officer and said, "I have got here also a parcel and some things that I want the boy to deliver to him." He said, "Well, you had better put it on the form," which he handed me

back, and I put on it, "R. Cutting, clerk to Mr. Sparling," meaning he was clerk to me. I entered the boy's name on the top of the sheet, thirking it would be necessary for him to personally deliver the things. The warder came down and said it was not necessary for the buy to come in. Redgrave wanted me to take him in a cheque, and had told me at the Mansion House where I should find his cheque book in his bedroom at my house. I took him in two blank cheques. (Counterfoils of cheques produced.) He filled up a cheque in my pretence and gave it to me, and I got the money. I had not got any definite instructions from Preston at the time I got the cheque, but when I came back in the evening I instructed Turnbull that both Redgrave and Childs should be represented. I was authorised to do that, and I had the cheque to pay for that from Preston. I paid Turnbull or Sparling £18 5s.; the receipt is signed by Sparling, but I paid the money to Turnbull. I invariably paid him the accounts. I sent down to Bedford and drew the money out of the Bedford Bank. The bill of costs represents, as far as I know, the work Turnbull or Sparling did as solicitor for Redgrave and Childs. Mr. Turnbull appeared At the police court and I had an interview with counsel. I attended the conference of counsel when he was briefed, and told him certain things that Redgrave had instructed me to tell his counsel. I have paid one or two pounds—I am not quite sure—to Stollery. He came to me at Rathbone Place and said he was instructed by Childs to request me to pay him £1 for services he had rendered to him and Preston. This would be during the time he was acting as clerk for the other side. I did not know he was hit clerk. He must have been acting as Walton's clerk at this time. I paid various sums to Preston and Childs during the time they were in prison. I paid them £1 each time they were at the Mantion House. Redgrave told me it cost 28s. to live in the prison, and I was to provide it out of the £25, which I have expended. Preston also instructed me to pay for Coleman's railway ticket ticket and his expenses. I saw Redgrave again on the Monday, when an infamous suggestion was made, the result of which was that I did not see him again. I did not give Stollery the cheque on the North Hampshire Bank for £45. (Witness compared the alleged cheque with the book.) I took the blank cheque out of the book and gave it to Turnbull on September 11. What Mr. Stollery says is untrue. That is the identical cheque referred to. The message was brought to me by Rose Campbell that be had been discovered with one of the cheques on his persons by the prison officials. I received no communication from Redgrave about the cheque afterwards, and it was impossible for me to have given it to Stollery. I asked Turnbull for the cheque. He said Preston said it was his property and he was going to keep it. Turnbull ceased to act for him two days afterwards, and he never returned the cheque to me. I believe it was on the Saturday, September 7, that I saw Childs.

(Witnesses for Campbell.)

DAVID THOMAS , 71, Leadenhall Street, clerk to an insurance company. (To Campbell.) It would be somewhere between nine and tea

o'clock when you came to the office on August 6. I do not know the exact time. You were not there at nine o'clock on that day. It might have been half-part nine or something like that; but you were there that day. I would not definitely say you were there at eleven. It may have been ten or a little more. I Know you were not there very long that morning. I know you were in charge of the accounts department—I could not say for how long.

Cross-examined. He name is D. Rydal Thomas. Mr. Conolly is the commissionaire. He keeps the time at which arrive. On August 6 I arrived About nine o'clock. I am always there about nine. I could not give you the time the other gentlemen arrived. We are generally there about the same time; it might be before or a few minutes afterwards. I cannot tall you when Mr. Buscombe arrived, nor Miss Bishop, nor whether she was there at all, and I cannot tell you when Mr. Campbell arrived exactly. I could not contradict Mr. Conolly if he says he arrived at 9.30. (To Campbell.) Mr. Conolly might go up to breakfast if we had not arrived by about 9.20. I do not know whether he did on that day.

ALBERT JOHN HEATH 71, Leadenhall Street, clerk to the same insurance office. On August 6 I know Campbell came into the office soon after nine. He went out, but I do not know when he returned.

(Thursday, November 28.)

McQUEEN (Continued). I wish to correct my evidence given last evening—I went with Coleman Evans when he went to the Bridewell to a interview Watson, and joined Redgrave later in the West End. On August 19 I. went wife Redgrave to Redgrave said he wanted an office in the Week End. I said to Harnan, "I have brought my friend here. I did not introduce him as Davenport. Harman gave him particulars of a number of offices in Sackville Street. Redgrave asked Harman if he had a banking account, and said that he wanted Harman to make an enquiry about Burgess, Taylor, and Tryon and about a Aim of Childs We went a day or two afterwards, and he gave us other addresses of offices. Redgrave said he did not care about sackville Street. On September 5 I was at the Mansion House when Childi was brought up—it was the day Redgrave was arrested. I had been in Court, and heard it stated that the order form had come from Davenport's cheque book. I joined Redgrave, who was waiting in the "Bay Tree" with Childs's solicitor's clerk, and told him. He said it was very necessary to see Davenport. We then went to Coleman Evans, who sent his clerk, Jones, to Davenport with me I introduced him to Davenport and Jones spoke to him and then told us that Davenport would come round to see us. He did not came, and Redgrave asked me if I would go to see Davenport at Barnes. On Davenport's request I called two or three times and asked for Davenport. I said I had a message to give him from Redgrave and a sum of money. Davenport was said to be out, and I asked for him to come round and see Redgrave at the Red Lion,

but he did not come. On August 23rd I called at Redgrave's office. He brought out a parcel with about 100 letters in, and we drove to Davenport's. He asked me to take them in to Davenport and ask Davenport to come out and see Redgrave. When I got in Willis and Allen were there. I spoke to Davenport and asked him to come round to Scott's. I joined Redgrave at Scott's and Davenport came. On August 6 I was not in Ludgate Hill all day and not in a hansom cab near Charing Cross. I was at my work room, 32, Rathbone Place, only going out for lunch. I lunched with Coleman and Campbell. I never suggested to Watson (childs) that an account should be opened at Barclay's or that my name should be used as a reference. I never saw Waston on August 15. I never saw the cheque book or the forged cheques. I have never been in the London City and Midland Bank, Ludgate Hill. I have never seen tracing paper produced and never stated I wanted forgeries to be done. On August 16 Redgrave called at my place and we went in a cab to King's Cross, where Childs was waiting, and we went down to Southgate, where I took particulars of a plot of land to be let. I had nothing to do with opening a bank account there. I have never been to Rickmansworth and I never suggested to Childs that he should open an account there. I never told Childs to go to West Kensington in the name of Williams. It is absolutely untrue that I told Childs to go to Bournemouth. I went down there as I have stated. I never told Childs that he was to come back from Kelvedon and open an account at Barclay's so that I could get cheques forged on Hampton's. It is ridiculous. I never mentioned the name to him of Ward and Tunnicliffe, or of Attree, Johnson, and Ward, or Hampton's, or any other firm to defraud by forged cheques. I never gave an order form to Campbell. I deny Childs's evidence with regard to Norman and Taplin. I have not had the slightest thing to do with either forging or writing any of the cheques, the subject of these proceedings, nor had a farthing piece out of them. I never told Childs to go to Kelvedon I did not know there was such a place. I received telegram produced from Williams on the 27th at 32, Rathbone Place, "McQuroti. Send braces at once." I received it when Redgrave was at my office. He said, "That is the telegram I expect. Is it from Williams?" I said, "Yes, it does not seem to be my business," and I gave it to him. I know nothing of the long statement as to what Childs should say if arrested. The day he came up on the 27th I gave him a scrap of paper with an address is Albany Street where I arranged to meet him at 10 o'clock next morning I went to see Childs in prison. I never offered him £50 if he would make a false statement. I never had the cheque of £45 in my possession. I never told Childs that I and Campbell meant to forge to the amount of £20.000. There is not a shadow of truth in it. I saw Stollery about September 14. I never called Campbell a "swine" to him. The solicitor called on me at Rathbone Place on September 14 to know what action I was going to take for the defence of Redgrave and Childs. I told him that I had made all

arrangements and that counsel were briefed. I referred him to Campbell. I distinctly told him he was not to look to me for hit charges. I saw Stollery on the same day on the same matter. I said nothing to Stollery about a forged cheque, nor did I ask him to go to Bedford, nor give him a cheque for £45. I received no money from him on any occasion. I gave him a pound because Childs asked me to do so for the trouble he had had in messages and so on. Stollery one day told me, in Rote Campbell's presence, that he had been to Bedford on his bicycle with a friend and cashed a £45 cheque and the money was being minded by a young lady friend of his at Barnet. Document produced it the assignment of the Chelsea Flats from Campbell to myself. Invoices produced are for materials bought for Redgrave to make, clothes for himself and child. Childs wrote me a letter from prison, asking me to send his clothes—there was no threat to expose me. I did not know Redgrave before August 13, 1907. I associated myself with him because hit knowledge of property was useful to me, and he was a very pleasant companion.

Cross-examined. I have known Coleman for about four years and have bought material from him and made clothes for him. He took 4, High Street. Bloomsbury, off me. I carried on business at 128, Jermyn Street for a little time at Stewart and McQueen. I had two rooms there coating £40 a year. I was doing no business, and I let Coleman one of the rooms. I moved my good away. It is not within my knowledge that he carried on business as Morfit and Son, woollen merchants, and that goods were obtained from woollen merchants in England, Scotland, and Ireland, brought to that address, and not paid for. Such good were never taken to my address at, 72, Dean Street. I had a workroom there. I had bought woollen goods from him. I have never passed as "A" or "Arthur Coleman," or signed that name. I know Holmes, estate agent. I do not think I signed "A. Coleman" to a document in his presence. (Document produced.) I signed that "A. Coleman." Holmes knew I was McQueen. (Letter produced.) "32, Rathbone Place. I am letting the shop this day with payment in advance, and can settle all rent at about five o'clock. Money first thing Monday sure.—A. Coleman" is all in my handwriting. Holmes knew I was manager for Arthur Coleman. All my evidence is absolutely true. I still say that I never passed at Arthur Coleman. Holmes knew the circumstances. I knew Schoolsinger. I think I gave him a reference to Holmes and Co., stating I had known him for five years had had many dealings with him, and he took the assignment of the tail end of the lease of 32, Rathbone Place. It was afterwards transferred to Arthur Coleman. Letters produced in coleman's hand-writing gives reference A. Major, 48, St. Agnea Place, Kennington Park and to T. Woodhead. I have heard Coleman referred to as "Major." I do not know that he lived at 48"St. Agnet Place. I lived at 9, Coverdale Read, Shepherd's Bush. I traded in the name of Woodhead, and gave reference produced in that name, stating that I had known Arthur Coleman, of 10, Oakland Grove, for about

ten years, and that he was a tenant of mine for six years. That is untrue. I was myself really taking the premises in his name. For the asked of securing the premises I told a lie in writing. (Letter produced.) "St. Agnes Place, December 22, 1906 A. W. James, Esq. Sir,—In answer to your letter respecting Mr. Arthur Coleman, I have known him some twelve or thirteen years, etc.—A Major" is, I believe, in Coleman's writing. By those references I got the assignment of the lease in Coleman's name. Letter pro duced to James, of January 8, 1907, signed "Arthur Coleman" is my writing. I first saw preston on August 3, in Ludgate Hill. when I passed him with Campbell. Campbell stopped and spoke to him, but he did not speak to me. Campbell then asked me if I would oblige him by cashing a cheque for £2 I saw Coleman that day on Ludgate Hill at 3 p.m., He said nothing about cheque of £153 17s. We went to Gold's public house, and I asked the manager if he could oblige me by cashing Campbell's cheque for £2 Gold said he was only manager and could not do it. Campbell and Coleman did not appoint to meet me on Ludgute Hill on the Tuesday after Bank Holiday, nor did I meet them then. Sergeant Hawkins is mistaken. That is untrue, as nearly the whole of his evidence is. I next saw Redgrave on August 13. Campbell called at 32. Rathbone Place, and we walked out together and met Redgrave, whom he introduced to me by the name of Redgrave. Redgrave's name was not familiar to me. I saw Redgrave on the 14th, 16th, and 17th. About the 21st I saw his name plate put up at 10, Duke Street. He said, "Have you heard the name before?" I said, "Yet, I think I have." He said, "I suppose you remember it in connection with some property," and then I recollected his name as connected with a perjury case in which Lomax was sentenced. On August 30, when Redgrave was with me at The Chalet he told me that he had a "past," that he was on license, and that he had to report himself to the police. I did not know that he had been convicted for forgery until after he was arrested. All I had to do with his banking account was to cash one cheque on the Bedford Batik after he was arrested. I never gave Child authority to mention my name to any bank as a reference. I knew Childs as Watson. I introduced Redgrave to the solicitors, Coleman Evans and Co., on August 28, and he paid them £10 that afternoon in my presence. I went with Coleman Evans to the Bridewell and waited outside while he went in to see Childs Any police-officer could have seen me there. I had not the slightest idea that the police were watching me from August 7, or I should not have run on to their doorstep. When I went to 6, Byfield Gardens with Redgrave I was getting suspicious from what I had heard at the Mansion House that day. Redgrave preferred to see Davenport at the Red Lion. Barnes, and he asked me to call and nee if he was in. I told Ormandy that Redgrave was leaving town the next day at 10a.m. and that he would call to see Davenport before that time. I may have said he had £16 or £17 to give him—not £60 or £70. He said,

Mind you do not lose it—you can leave it if you like." I said, "No, I cannot do that." When I returned to 32 Rathbone Place from New Southgate with Redgrave Watson was there. Redgrave said, "Here he is; it is all right." I asked for no excuses, but I said to Childs, "As you are here I may as well measure you for your clothes," which I did. On September 10 and 14 I made at 32, Rethbone Place statements produced. (Stament read.) They Are substantilly the same as what I have stated to-day, excepting the date. Exhibit 76 it the prison form with "Richard Cutting, clerk to J.A. Sparling," at the top in my handwriting. "Richard Cutting" was a boy who carried the parcel up there for me. That "Richard Cutting" is my son. I have only one. His name is "Richard Elston McQueen." I put the name "Richard Cutting" in there as I did not wish to put my son's name. I thought I might represent' myself in the name of the principal, Mr. Sparling. I put a fake name because I did not want my son's name on the paper. I had signed the form as "Sparling"; I went in with Sparling's authority. That is the only explanation I have to offer. I know a house 41, Cloncurry Street, Fulham. I lived there in 1905—I think I lived there in September, I know a person named John Doncaster. He was my land lord at 72, Dean Street. He did not live at 41, Cloncurry Street while I was living there. I do not know in whose handwriting the words "Richard Doncaster are on Exhibit 113. I cannot identify it 1905. as my handwriting. I think I will swear I did not write those words. That is all I can say. I do not know what premises that refers to. It says, "Mr. L. E. McQueen has rented premises, 72, Dean Street, from me, at £80 p.a., since 1900." That is correct. That is signed "John Doncaster," who was my landlord at 72, Dean Street. I do not know that he never lived at 41, Cloncurry Street, Fulham. I do not think I lived at 41, Cloncurry Street until a year after September, 1905. I did live at 41, Cloncurry Street, Fulham, for about six months; I cannot recollect the exact date. Mr. Doncaster was my landlord for some years at 72, Dean Street, where I paid him £80 a year. I have lived with him five years. I always paid Doncaster his rent. I do not owe him a farthing. There is no reason why Doncaster should not be asked to give me a genuine reference. The reference was sent with my consent to Carwithea and Allen, but I cannot say in respect of what premises. I cannot say that I know the signature of John Doncaster; in all his receipts for my rent he generally put "J. D." I swear that John Doncaeter on Exhibit 133 is not my handwriting. I do not owe him a farthing, and I feel sure he would give me any reference I asked him for. I cannot account for the address at the head of that letter. I do not know where Doncaster lives. I paid him his rent at 72, Dean Street, where he carries on business or used to do. I took a shop and premises at 349, Fulham Road, from about September, 1906, from Car withen and Allen, 34, Regent Street. They were the agents. I never entered into possession of the premises. The thing went off and I do not know whether that is the house referred to or not. I

have known Mr. Harman, the estate agent, as a clerk in Messrs. Holmes's for about six yean. He was a clerk in that firm and I visited him there many times. He knew me perfectly well. On August 19 I went to his premises with Redgrave. I did not introduce Redgrave in the name of Davenport. I do not think Redgrave in my hearing gave the name of Davenport. I do not think he was addressed at all by name by Mr. Harman. I do not think the name "Davenport" was mentioned at all in connection with Redgrave while we were at Mr. Harman's premises. I did not ask Mr. Harman to pass through two inquiries with reference to a gentleman named Childs or a firm named Childs, of Peterfield. Redgrave, in my presence, made that request. Redgrave said he had been there before and Mr. Harman admitted it very likely was so, but he had not seen him. It may be that Mr. Harman had never seen Redgrave at all before that date, as he said in his evidence. Mr. Harman is wrong in saying that I asked him to pass through that inquiry about Burgess and Co. and Childs and Co. He took the words down from Redgrave's own dictation. I could not give him those addresses because I did not know them. I was there and told Harman that Redgrave was a friend of mine and he might do it for him. Redgrave asked me to ask him this. He had not told me for what purpose this was going to be done, and I had not the slightest idea, notwithstanding the statement I made to the police that the second time I saw Red grave he told me he had been convicted in connection with forged leases. He did not tell me so the second time; the date there Is wrong. (To the Judge.) I knew very little about him at the time I said these inquiries might be properly made. What really happened was this—Redgrave called with me on Stubbs would not at Hanover Street one morning, but Stubs would not do it as Redgrave was not a member. I went with Redgrave to make the inquiry about the flat of Harman. He said, "Yes, have you a banking account?" He (Redgrave) said, "Yet, I want the inquiry passed through." I really did not know much about Redgrave at the time. I knew he had a very well-furnished office at 10, Duke Street, and I knew he was a man with money—I had seen money in his possession very frequently at this time—I mean he was on the telephone and living at a very swell office; I knew nothing against the man at that time, and I had known Mr. Harman for five or six years I said I thought, as Redgrave was a friend, he might make the inquiry for him. It was all done openly.

Re-examined I say I have never patted at Coleman. I had signed a letter for Coleman. (To the Judge.) Exhibit 105 related to the premises 32, Rathbone Place. These premises were taken by a man named Schoolsinger from Messrs. Holmes and Co., at £90 a year Schoolsinger was in occupation of them from April to the Christmas. He was then desirous of vacating the premises and offered them to me for the residue of 2 1/4 years, I took the premises by an assignment to Coleman, whom Schoolsinger knew. I suggested to Schoolsinger that I would occupy the premises, pay rent, put them in repair, and keep, them all properly if he would assign them to Mr. Coleman,

which he did. (To Mr. Hawkin.) Schoolsinger knew who I was; he had known me for years. I knew him at one time as owning 13 public-houses and worth £100,000. He knew me at McQueen. I do not owe a farthing rent for the premises and I spent £40 in doing the premises up on a nine months' tenancy. Both letters relate to the same time and the same period. I made this statement to the police. That was on the next day after the memorable interview with Preeton in Brixton Prison. Two police officers knocked at my work-room door. It was what solicitors call a "Two to one interview"—one writes and one suggests. I sat at a table, and one police officer dictated and the other wrote. (To the Judge.) I think it was Harris who put questions to me and I answered their interrogations. Those answers are correct. It was as it occurred to me then. The interview was totally unprepared. I should think the interview lasted as hour or an hour and a half. The parcel that was taken into the gaol contained clothing, etc., for Preeton's comfort. At the time of this visit to Herman's with Redgrave it was a day before I knew Davenport. The first time I ever saw him was on August 20 or 21 I had not heard of him. The first time I ever saw Davenport was when he stopped the cab in Bhafteebury Avenue.

ROBERT CHARLES HILLS . I live at 65, Poland Street, Oxford Street. I am a tobacconist. I have known McQueen for about 16 years, and have had business dealings with him. I have always considered him to be a thoroughly straightforward and upright man.

Cross-examined. My dealings with McQueen have been as a customer, I selling tobacco and he buying it over the counter. That is the limit of business I have done with him.

Re-examined. I have known him as a neighbour 16 years. He was a member of the Old St. James's Vestry some ten years ago.

JAMES BARTON . I live at 31, Berwick Street, Oxford Street. I am in McQueen's service as trousers' prepare. I remember the day after Bank Holiday, August 6. At eight o'clock in the morning I was at 32, Rathbone Place. No one was there at that time besides myself. Later on, Mr. McQueen and his wife came at 9.30. McQueen was there until 11 o'clock. He then went out. I do not know of my own knowledge where he went. He was out about 20 minutes. When he came back he did some work. He was there till one o'clock, when I went away to dinner. I next saw him about 10 minutes past two. He was there all the afternoon.

Cross-examined. He was there till four o'clock. He came at 9.30 am. He was working; either fitting up the work or pressing. What makes me say he was there until exactly 11 o'clock, when he went out, is, because he had some work that was wanted particularly by 11. It was to be at a shop down the Strand at 11. Our shop girl took it down the Strand, but not at that time, because we were late with the work. It was finished about a quarter to twelve. I was pressing these clothes off. McQueen was not working on that work. Eleven o'clock is the time he went out. That was not work that he had to work on. (To the Judge.) What helps me to say he was there till

11, and went out at 11, if, that the job came up on my board to dress off We had a lot of work in there. McQueen was working on the other work. It wan about 11. We had a clock in the workroom When McQueen went out we went on working just the tame. (To the Judge.) He went out before this work was finished. He was not going out on anything connected with the work I was doing for 11 o'clock. He went out independently of that. Why, the fact that I had something to do by 11 helps me to fix the time when McQueen went out (who was not working on that job), is, because it had to be all finished, and it was put on my board to press it. (To Mr. Holden) It has never been suggested to me that he went out at 11. I have not been asked at all a to this time. Nobody has asked me to make this statement. I swear he left that shop at 11. How I remember that he was out exactly 20 minutes, is, because he was not out long. There was not anything to remind me that he was only out 20 minutes. I do not know where he went. He did not speak to me when he came in. I was still diligently working at the work which had to be ready at 11. I was just finishing it. He was not out as long as till 12. The door by which McQueen would leave the office it in the front part of the premises. There are two rooms, the back leading into the front. He went in the back room and out on the side from the back. There are two doors out. I was sitting in the front looking towards the window, so as to get plenty of light for my work. Though I have nothing to remind me, I swear he went out at 11 and came back in 20 minute.

Re-examined. Before McQueen went out he was fitting up some work—a pair of breeches. He was about four yards away, I suppose. Before he went out he gave them over to the missus—to the machine to Mrs. McQueen. I saw him do that After he had given them to Mrs. McQueen it was about then that he went out. What makes me say eleven o'clock or about eleven is because after he had fitted up the work he put on his hat and went out. He is not in the habit of going out at that time—he is always going in and out. I have no doubt at all that it was about that time. I have been waiting to give my evidence in this court since last Thursday. I remember you speaking to me one day last week and my telling you what my recollection of it warn. (To the Judge.) I only know Coleman, not Campbell. I did not see them about our place about that time. About August 6 Coleman came up in the afternoon. I could not tell you the Mart time. It was the same day—somewhere near four 0'clock I should say. I cannot fix the exact time Campbell did not come with him. I did not know Campbell. I have not seen Redgrave there at all at any time.

ETHEL MCQUEEN . I was in the employ of my father at 32, Rathbone Place. I remember the day after last August Bank Holiday I was at work in the morning. I do not live at Rathbone Place, I live at The Chalet. Putney. Besides myself there were at Rathbone Place my mother, my father, and Birton. There were other girls employed there, but they did not come in the morning, because it

is not usual for us to work after Bank Holiday. We got to work at ten o'clock. I arrived there at ten o'clock. When I got there my mother, my father, and the prepare ware there. My father was not there all the morning because he went out in the morning. I do not know from my own knowledge where he went. He was out perhaps a quarter of an hour or twenty minutes. He was at the workshop up till about six o'clock at night. Before six o'clock he went out for his dinner—between one and two o'clock; he was there when I went out to my dinner. I nest saw him when I came back at twenty minutes part two. I was there the whole of the afternoon. He was fitting up down breeches in the morning. I saw him doing that. He was fitting them up at ten o'clock when I got there. They required his attention nearly all the time until they were finished. He finished them, at far at I pan remember, at a quarter to twelve. Then we had some more trousers come in. They ware in the shop, but they wars for that night—Syria. He fitted them up. It took him up till dinner time to do that. I said a little time ago he went out for about twenty minutes. That was about eleven. What makes me say about eleven it, because those breeched were special for twelve and it was necessary that he should out out the holes and buttons. (To the Judge.) I know it was eleven, because the breeches was special for twelve, and we were waiting for the holes and buttons to be marked, and we did not proceed with them until he came back. (To Mr. Hawtin) I mean we could not proceed with them until he came back from going out for that twenty minutes. we were waiting for him.

Cross-examined. He started on the breeches at ten o'clock. He was at work when I got there on these breeches. When he went out he left them. Hit attention was not on them all the time tills quarter to twelve. I have not heard what the last witness said about these breeches. It was a special order for twelve o'clock. There were two special orders for that day—one the breeches for twelve and the other for five o'clock. There ware only two special orders—one for twelve o'clock and one for five o'clock—none for eleven o'clock. I was at the office on August 3, the Saturday before Bank Holiday. My father was at the shop that day. I do not remember when he went out on that day. Nobody has spoken to me before about it to-day. I have never been asked by anybody before to-day what time my father left the office on the 6th. I now state that he left office office on the 6th at eleven o'clock. I remember that; I fixed that because the trousers were to be ready at twelve. I am quite sure of that.

Re-examined. Somebody asked me where my father was on the Tuesday morning before I was asked in this court; it was your self (Mr. Hawtin). It was about two days ago. (To the Judge.) Nobody has asked me whether I remembered August 6 and what happened until I was spoken to by Mr. Hawtin about being a witness—that was before I came to the Courts. Counsel did not come down to 32, Rathbone Place to see me. I was first asked

about remembering August 6 at Middle Temple Lane. We bad to go there one night. (To Mr. Hawtin.) I have been waiting at this Court to give evidence since Monday last. On Monday night I think we went to 3, Middle Temple Lane.

BARNETT CHOEN . I carry on business at 48, Howland Street, Tottenham Court Road. I have known McQueen 15 or 16 years. I am a master tailor. I have been working for McQueen. I never found anything wrong with him. As far as I know he has a good character. I know nothing against him.

Cross-examined. I do work for him. I do not run an account with him; he always paid me cash. I work on his goods. I have always found him quite straight.

0 BARNETT SCHEINMANN . I live at Carlton Villas, Hackney. I am a master builder. I have known McQueen three or four years. So long as I have known him his character has been all right. I have had dealings with him. He has been my tailor and mended trousers for me. As far as I know he has a good character, because I had a fish shop at the corner of Dean Street and he had his workshop over that. I saw a good deal of him.

Cross-examined. I do not know whether he went out at eleven o'clock on August 6.

MALCOLM CAMPBELL . (Prisoner not on oath.) There is only one thing I should like: to explain to the Jury, and that is the way those letters came into my note book. Of course, I could tell them a yarn about it, but I prefer to tell them the truth. Of course, I could say the letters belonged to anything but what they do. What I desire to say is, plainly, they are initial letters of banks. I want to explain how they came there. In the early part of July a certain man came to me at the office and asked me to come and have a drink. I had a long conversation in much the same way as Taplin is said to have had a conversation. At the finish of the conversation a request was made to me by this man whether I could obtain a blank cheque on any of the following banks. I had been basins a long conversation with the man, and he asked me where I thought I should get them from. I said, "I do not think I can get anything like that; perhaps you can tell me." He said, "I will make it worth your while; you had better make a note of them in case you forget them." I put them down, and from that date to this I forgot all about it. I ask you, gentlemen, if I had been actively engaged in this conspiracy, when Childs and Redgrave were arrested, whether it would not have occurred to me immediately it happened that that was the first thing I should have ripped out of the book? That is all. That is the truth. I forgot about the whole thing from that date to this and never thought any more about it.

(Friday, November 29.)

Verdict, each prisoner, Guilty.

Evidence was given to show that Preston, convicted in 1902 for forging leases and sentenced to six years penal servitude, was on

ticket of leave and his sentence would not expire till October next. There was also a previous sentence of four years penal servitude for forgery. Previous convictions were also proved against Coleman and Campbell. The latter was a well-educated man and a good accountant, but had obtained situations by false references. He was employed at one time at a West End jeweller's, where he stole £2,000 worth of jewellery. McQueen had been concerned with Coleman in obtaining possession of houses and goods by false pretences. In regard to Childs, who pleaded guilty to the charge of conspiracy, he had been birched for an offence when he was 13 years old, but had since been getting an honest living. He had been in the infirmary since his arrest.

The Common Serjeant said That the evidence pointed to the existence of a wide conspiracy to defraud other banks. McQueen's case was aggravated by his representing himself at Brixton prison as a solicitor's clerk.

Sentences, Preston and Coleman, ten years penal servitude; Campbell, seven years penal servitude; McQueen, five years penal servitude; Childs, nine months hard labour.

The Common Serjeant said that the police officers engaged in the case deserved to be highly commended.


(Thursday, November 21.)

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-30
VerdictsGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentencesImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

ADAMS, Samuel (49, baker), pleaded guilty of breaking and entering the shop of Horatio Saqui and another and steeling therein three chains and other articles, their foods, and feloniously receiving same; maliciously damaging a plate-glass window, the property of Horatio Sequa and another, to an amount exceeding £5.

Sentence, Five months' hard labour, prisoner having been in custody a month.

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-31
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty; Guilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment; Imprisonment > hard labour; Imprisonment

Related Material

QUIRK, Michael (56, carter), LEWIS, James (53, shoemaker), COLLINS, Thomas (39, coster), and ROWE, Alexander (33, leather dresser) ; all breaking and entering the warehouse of John Beach and Sons, Limited, and stealing therein 31 dozen split skins, their goods.

Rowe pleaded guilty.

Mr. Walter Stewart prosecuted. Mr. Eustace Fulton and Mr. Huntly Jenkins defended Quirk.

ALFRED HENRY BRISTOW , manager to Messrs. John Beach and Sons, leather sellers, 53, Bermondsey Street. I closed the warehouse on saturday, November 2, and it was safely locked up. In the ware-house there was a quantity of skins. On the following Monday morning when I got to the premises I found that the bar to which the padlock was attached had been cut away. Seeing a policeman standing outside I called his attention to it. When I got inside I found a

lower window had been broken out. The only sign that the place had been entered was that a pair of shears had been knocked off a table. Three bundles of leather wrapped up in brown paper were missing, I identify the property produced. The value of the property lots. is about £34. Six skins are missing.

SERGEANT THOMAS GALE, M Division. On November 4 I, with other officers, was watching Quirk, Lewis, and James in Trinity Square. They were pushing a barrow with something wrapped up in a cloth. Quirk was actually pushing the barrow They stopped at the "Albion" public-house. I examined what was inside the bundle nnd found it to contain leather. Presently Quirk came out. I told him I was a police officer and should take him into custody for unlawful possession of leather. He said, "I do not f—g well know anything about it" I said, I "shall take you into custody." He then bemine very violent and kicked me several times in the legs and threw me to the ground. When I got him a little way down the street he became violent again. We bed a struggle and he struck my face. Then Police-constable Cronk handed prisoner Lewis over to a uniformed officer and came to my assistance, and with difficulty we got him to the station. I went back to the public-house and again saw Collins and told him I should arrest him for being concerned with two other men in the unlawful possession of some leather. He said, "I do not know anything about it, sir. I have just come from Stratford." The barrow had been hired in the vicinity of Snow's Fields, Borough. Afterwards he said, "I met the other two men in the New Kent Road and they asked me to give them a lift up." He was taken to the police station by Detective Knight, while I made a search for the other prisoner (Rowe). When prisoners were charged they made no reply.

Cross-examined. I have heard of a man named Butler as being also concerned in this. I had the men under observation for about 50 yards before they went into the public-house. When Quirk came out of the public-house the other men remained in. The other prisoners were assisting Quirk with the barrow. Quirk has been convicted several times for drunkenness, but for no crime involving his honesty. I was in plain clothes, and he may not have known I was a police officer.

Detective-sergeant MARSHALL KNOTT , M DIVISION. I am the officer to whom Collins was handed on November 5. On the way to the station he said, "I did not help to steal it. If you had not been so quick you would have had the buyer. He was at the public-house where we were." Collins might have been in such a position in the public-house that he did not know what was happening with regard to Quirk.

VALTER CEONK, M DIVISION . At two o'clock on November called the prisoner Lewis out of the "Albion" public-house and told him I should arrest him in connection with this matter He said. "I know nothing at all about it." At that time Quirk was in custody, and on the way to the station Lewis also said, "I met them in the Old Kent Road and gave them a push up. We were all having a drink

together." I was obliged to hand Lewis over to mother officer as Quirk was to violent and had thrown Gale to the ground.

Cross-examined. Rowe has not, to my knowledge, been convicted before, and, as far as I know, is a perfectly respectable man. When the three men went into the "Albion" Sergeant Gale looked at what was on the barrow. Collins was arrested after we returned from taking Quirk and Lewis to the station. He was dodging behind a van outside the public-house. The station is about 60 yards distant.

In re-examination witness stated that he heard prisoner Rowe, in giving evidence at the police court, say that the skin had been under his bed the night previous to the arrest, and that when he went home his daughter told him that prisoner Quirk had been there with another man and taken them away in a blanket or a quilt.

To Mr. Eustace Fulton. I did not hear Rowe also say, "Quirk was going to hide them for me till night time, so that I might take them back to the warehouse from which they had been stolen"

Sergeant PHILIP WILLIS, M Division. I received the prisoners in charge at the station. I told them them they would be charged wish breaking into the warehouse of Messrs. Beach and Co. Neither of them made any reply. At the police court prisoner Rowe was called by prisoner Lewis and made a statement.

Mr. Eustace Fulton objected to the evidence.

Jedgs Lomley Smith. I do not think that is evidence against anybody.

Witness. He made a statement to the effect that Quirk bad taken the properly away, and that he was going to take it back to the firm the following night.

Judge Lumley Smith. What somebody says that somebody told him is incidence.


MICHAEL QUIRE (prisoner, on oath). I know a man named Butler. I know Rowe, but not so well. As farm I know he is a perfectly respectable man and has four children. I remember meeting Rowe in the "Ship" public-house one Sunday evening, November 3, with Butler. Rowe said to Butler, "I am very sorry that that happened what we done the other night. We must have been fair mad in drink," and they spoke about giving back the things the beet way that they could. Rowe told me the things were under his bed. On the following night, November 4, I thought I would call at Rowe's house, which is not very far away. I saw him and his girl. He seemed very much upset. He said, "I cannot stand this any longer." I said, "No, it lookes very bad." He said, "I do not care so much, only for the children. They seem to know that there is something wrong. If I could only get the stuff out of this house to-morrow before I go away from the works I should see the owner of the stuff and tell him how things stand with me, and he might withdraw the charge." Then I said, "That might save your home, too." I then suggested that I should take the things away the next day, take them anywhere, so long as they were not on hit premises, and I said, "I will do this for your children's sake." I have not a barrow of my own, but I can always get one. I went

round the next day with a barrow and took the things, asking a man who was passing to give me a lift up with them. I said to the girl, "Tell your father that I have taken the things," and the young girl seemed pleased when she saw the back of them. I walked about with the things on the barrow for four hours. I had a couple of half pints. When I came out of the house Gale deliberately struck me in the face, and there was a struggle between us. I have been convicted several times of drunkenness, but never of any crime involving dishonesty.

Cross-examined. This was the first time I had been in Rowe's house. My intention was to keep the things until I saw Rowe at night. He was supposed to leave his work at seven, and if he did not relieve me at a quarter past seven I was to bring them back to his house. I bad not such a thing as finding a buyer in my head. Rowe was to have them back again. What I did was for the sake of Rowe's family. I was not looking for a buyer in the "Albion."

To Judge Lumley Smith. I was not to have anything for this, but Rowe said he would not forget me after this was over. Of course, being a father myself, I had a feeling. The man who helped me put the skins on the barrow I had never seen before. Butler is a man I saw last year, when I was in the infirmary. I was for four hours in possession of goods that I knew had been stolen, but there was no felonious intention on my part.

The prisoners Lewis and Collins declined to give evidence on oath. Lewis said he had never seen either of the prisoners in his life, and worked in Covent Garden Market three days a week and as a waterside labourer. Collins denied all knowledge of the affair.

Verdict, Quirk, Lewis, Rowe, and Collins Guilty.

Police evidence was given to the effect that Quirk was honest, but an habitual drunkard, and his employer, Mr. William Collins, a contracting plumber, gave him a good character. Lewis has undergone numerous sentences, including penal servitude twice, and declined to give any account of himself to the police. Collins has also been frequently convicted, but there has been no conviction for 11 Years.

Sentences, Quirk, Six months' imprisonment in the second division; Lewis and Collins, twelve months' hard labour; Rowe, six months' in the second division.

Judge Lumley Smith characterised Quirks defence as the thinnest he had ever known.

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-32
VerdictsGuilty > unknown; Guilty > unknown; Guilty > unknown; Guilty > lesser offence
SentencesImprisonment; Imprisonment; Imprisonment; Imprisonment; Imprisonment; Imprisonment

Related Material

FRANCIS, Arthur (19, shunter), CHURCHWOOD William (19, coster), HUNTER, Henry (19. paperhanger), STREETIN Thomas (19, coster), KEEFE, Edward (17, vanguard), LOWE Edward (19, coster), FRANCIS, Thomas, (17, brass finisher), DYSON, Frederick James (17, vanguard), were indicted as follows:—Arthur Francis, Churchwood, Hunter, Streetin, Keefe, Lowe, and Thomas Francis, feloniously shooting at divers persons with intent to maim and disable them and to do them some grievous bodily harm; Dyson and Streetin maliciously wounding George Mitchell Hunt . The majority of the prisoners were also charged with rioting and going about armed on a public highway to the terror and affright of His Majesty's lieges.

Mr. A. H. Bodkin and Mr. Symmons prosecuted on behalf of the Commissioners of Police.

(The case against HENRY HUNTER.)

Mr. Bodkin stated that the indictment was laid under an Act passed in 1329 (2 Edward III., cap. 3).

Judge Lumtley Smith. They did not have revolvers in those days.

Mr. Bodkin said the Act prohibited the carrying of "any weapon" by any person not on the business of the Crown, and was not less applicable now than when it was passed. There was a recent case under the Statute heard at Bangor Assizes on June 5, 1903, before Mr. Jost Joe Wills (Rex V Meade, 19 "Times" Law Reports, (p. 640),

The King's Croat neighbourhood was infested by three gangs of young lads known as the Bemerton Street gang, the White Lion street gang, and the Clerkenwell gang, and the operations of these gangs against each other had become such a nuisance and complaints were so frequent that Mr. Bros, the magistrate at Clerkenwell, had decided to commit the present defendants in order that they might be severely dealt with.

Police-constable SAMUEL JORDAN , YR 34. I was on duty in the neighbourhood of King's Cross on the night of Saturday, October 17. I know Copenhagen Street, which runs from Caledonian Road to York Road. York Road, which runs by the side of the railway, is on Saturday night practically in darkness at this time of year after six o'clock. As a police officer I know' that the district is frequented, by a number of lads on Saturday night, and the police have great trouble with them. Lade from Bemerton Street and White Lion Street go about in parties. About midnight on October 19 I heard whistling and shouting, and directly afterwards the report of firearms in Copenhagen Street. Running into Carlsbad Street, I saw about 40 or 50 lads. About a dozen shots were fired. Hunter passed me chasing about a dozen more. There were other lade on the pavement going in the same direction, but whether they were with him, I could not say. I followed Hunter, and saw him discharge a firearm at the corner of Bemerton Street. Thirty yards in Bemerton Street he stood in the middle of the road and fired again. He then stepped on to the pavement. He fired in the direction of the lads who were running in front. I did not see any shot fired from the retreating party. After the second shot Hunter placed the revolver in his right hand pocket. I said to him, "Give me that shooter." He said, "It is not mine, governor. It is those lads running up there, "I took the revolver out of his pocket. It was warm. I then took him to the station. On the way he said, "I did not fire it. I picked it up in the roadway." I said, "I saw you fire." He replied, "Oh, no; you did not." I examined the revolver at the station. It had six chambers, and was loaded in three chambers with bullet cardridges. In the other three chambers were the cases of cartridges

that bad been fired. He was brought up before Mr. Bros and committed for trial.

Sergeant RICHARD RICKETTS , Y division. I was in the Caledonian Road police station when prisoner was brought in. It is part of the procedure to ask a person charged and write down what his occupation is and what it found upon his person. I wrote down that he was a paperhanger, and that there was found upon him one revolver loaded with six cartridges, one mouth-organ, one belt, and one knife. The belt would not be used in paperhanging. There have been numerous charges of rioting in the neighbourhood of York Road, Caledonian Road, Bemerton Street, and Copenhagen Street. Belts are frequently produced in such cases.


HENRY HUNTER (prisoner, on oath). I wish to state that on the night of this affair I did not fire a revolver. I picked up the revolver halfway up Bemerton Street. I turned the corner of Copenhagen Street with the revolver in my pocket holding it in my hand, and that it how it became warm. Firearms had been discharged by both sides.

Cross-examined by Mr. Bodkin. I had just come from the Sadlert Wells Theatre. I am working at present for my father as my own trade is slack. I belong to the Clerkenwell gang. We are not friendly with the Bernerton Street gang at all, but we are friendly with the White Lion Street gang, and sometimes work together with them. On this night Clerkenwell were by themselves. I should say 30 of the Clerkenwell force were out that night. Two or three of them were armed with derringer. They armed themselves became some of the opposing fellows had fire aims The Clerkenwell forces assembled themselves at Sadlers Wells. We straggled down to the York Road, where there is a "slosh" (coffee) stall. I could not say who dropped the revolver that was found on me. I swear I found it I cannot say whether any of my side fired Nobody directs the forces of Clerkenwell; they act of their own accord. I did not know any of those I was pursuing. This was my first night of going to Bemerton Street. It is not true that I fired twice. The belt produced is mine. I always wear a belt. Many of the gang do the same. I also wear braces. I did not hear that anyone was injured that night.

Verdict, Guilty on all four counts of indictment; (1 and 2) attempting to unlawfully wound and inflict grievous bodily harm; (3) that on a public highway he did go armed; and (4) and being in possession of a revolver on a highway he fired it to the common nuisance and danger of the public.


Police-constable EDWARD FLINTON 524 Y. At midnight on Saturday, October 19. I was on duty near the Great Northern Goods Yard, and heard the report of firearms in the direction of Copenhagen

Street. A few minutes afterwards I saw a stream of lads issue from various side streets into York Road—I should say 40 or 50. They were hurrying as though being pursued. Some were shouting, "Come on, lads." Lowe and Arthur Francis and Thomas Francis ware amongst them. Arthur Francis was apparently the leader. He had in his hand a derringer pistol, which he brandished, saying, "Come on, lads; there they go, over the hill." The lads were apparently following some others who had gone over the bridge. Seeing the pistol in this man's hands I ran to arrest him, concluding that ha was the leader of the gang. He ran into the crowd as though searching for somebody. The pistol fell from his hand when he collided with the crowd, and as he stooped to pick it up I arrested him. He said he had taken it away from another lad. I heard Thomas Francis say, "We must defend ourselves. I took Arthur Francis to the station. The pistol contained one undischarged cartridge.

Police-constable JOHN WRIGHT , 190 Y. On Saturday, October 19, I wh in company with last witness, and heard the sound of firearms from the direction of Copenhagen Street. Soon afterwards a mob of lads, numbering about 50, came rushing over the. canal bridge, York Road. They wire followed by Arthur Francis with another lot behind him, amongst them Lowe and Keele. Flinton arrested Francis and I ran into the crowd and arrested a man named Baylor, whom the magistrate discharged. I heard Arthur Francis shout, "Come on, lade; this is the way they have gone."

Police-constable DANIEL ELDER , 675 Y. I was on duty in York Road about midnight on Saturday, October 19, with Constable Smith. I saw Arthur Francis carrying a pistol in his right hand, and heard him say, "Come, boys; it is all clear now." He had about 50 others with him, amongst them Lowe and Keefe, and they were following the lot that had gone over the bridge. I heard Lowe say, "Have another f—g snot at them. Go on; shoot again." I could not distinctly say whom he said that to; there were so many of them. When Lowe said that I heard Keefe say, "I have had a shot." Lowe and Keefe were then three or four yards from Arthur Francis. I arrested Keefe.

Keefe denied having said, "I have had a shot."

Police-constable ALBERT SMITH , 126 Y. On October 19, about midnight, I was in the York Road and heard a policeman's whistle. I went in the direction of Canal Terrace, which is off the York Road. I saw a crowd of 50 persons. I recognise the prisoners Lowe and Keefe as being amongst them. Lowe said, "Let us have another shot at them." Keefe said, "I have had one. I then seized Lowe. He said nothing when I seized him.

Police-constable FREDERICK CADWALLADER , 356 Y. At midnight on October 19 I was in Bemerton Street. I saw Arthur Francis and heard him say, "Come down here. The White Lion Street boys are shorting down Copenhagen Street." I followed him, but lost sight of him when I got to Copenhagen Street. In York Road I saw Arthur Francis as they were bringing him out of the goods yard. He

said, "There it one of them," meaning a man standing by. This man ran off and got over the wall in Canal Terrace. As he did so he dropped the six-chambered revolver produced, which had recently been fired.

Sergeant RICHARD RIXKETTS , Y Division. I was in charge of the Caledonian Road station on the morning of October 20 when the prisoners wore brought in. Arthur Fronds described himself as a shunter, Edward Lowe as a costermonger, Thomas Francis as a brass finisher, and Keefe as a vanguard.


ARTHUR FRANCIS (prisoner, on oath). On Saturday night I finished work at 9.45. I arrived home about eleven o'clock and was going home to have some supper when I met Police-constable Smith in company with another constable. He asked me if I had seen any of the lads who were up the previous week and the week before. I said. "No." I walked down the street, and met a friend of mine who asked me to have a drink. I went and had a drink with two or three other lads. We came out of toe public-house at about quarter to twelve and I stopped in Bemerton Street to get some tobacco. When I got to the bottom of Bemerton Street I wm caught hold of behind. I turned round and was thrown on the ground and kicked. I heard four or five revolver shots while I was on the ground. I ran in the direction from which they came, and seeing the two constables I told them the boys were in Copenhagen Street, and they said they would go down and see what they could do. One of the lads dropped a derringer and I picked it up. Seeing a crowd coming they took to their heels. I was following them and when I got to York Road I was arrested.

Cross-examined. At the time I was just coming home from my work at Paddington. I live at 31, Offord Street, Caledonian Road. York Road is the nearest way. I gave evidence in this court when the man Harmond was tried last Sessions. (" Sessions Paper," Vol. CXLVII., p. 1,043.) It is not true that Church wood, Otley, and I I belong to one of the gangs. Church wood was attacked the week before by the White Lion Gang.

EDWARD KEEFE (prisoner, on oath). On the night of Saturday, October 19, we had been to the theatre, and, seeing a crowd on the York Road Bridge, I stopped and looked at it, when I was seized by a constable who said, "Where do you live?" and I replied, "Holloway." On that he punched me in the head twice And knocked me on the road, when another constable caught hold of me and took me into the Great Northern goods yard. I never saw Lowe that night. I did not know one of this gang. I live nowhere near them.

THOMAS FRANCIS (prisoner, on oath). I was at the Euston Theatre on October 19, and when I came out, after going home, I saw a crowd running. I went a different way, and, on coming into York Road, I saw my brother taken into custody by two private detectives. I goes and asks him what was the matter, and he says, "It is the White

Lion boys, Tom, go away." I crowed the road, and another constable came and took me into custody.

Cross-examined. It if not true that I said, "We must defend ourseives. "I wear a belt because I find it comforting to my stomach.

Verdict, All guilty.

(Friday, November 22.)

(The case against WILLIAM CHURCHWOOD.)

Police-constable RICHARD WOOD , 727 Y. On Saturday, October 19, I was on duty in Twyford Street, near Copenhagen Street, when I saw a man named Streetin running away hatless. Churchwood was following him and I heard Churchwood say, "Stop him; he." shot at me." I stopped Streetin who said, "No, sir; he shot at me." I saw Streetin strike Churchwood on the nose.

WILLIAM WIDDICKS , labourer, Holloway. I was in the Caledonian Road, near Twyford Street, on October 19, and heard the report of firearms fired twice in quick succession. I saw a man running, whose name I afterwards learned was Streetin, from Twyford Street in the direction to the Caledonian Road. Churchwood was following him, calling out, "Stop him, stop him, he hat shot me?" Streetin ran into Richmond Road. I gave chase and caught him in Matilda Street. He said, "All right; it was 'not me who fired. It was all my going out with a girl." Miss Tepper came up five or ten minutes afterwards with her brother. I handed Streetin over to a constable. Churchwood was arrested by another constable, and I went to the station and gave my name.

MAUD TEPPER , 80, Bemerton Street. On Saturday, October 19, I was out with a young man named Thomas Streetin and my brother was with us. I saw a lot of lads in Copenhagen Street, 15 I should say. They halloed and shouted and said, "Here he is, here he is?" and ran after Streetin, who was running away. Me and my brother were about five or six yards away and we see Churchwood fire a revolver. I saw smoke and a lady screamed. I think he was pointing the revolver towards Streetin. After he had fired he threw the revolver over his shoulder. I afterwards saw them both in custody. Streetin had not done anything to Churchwood that I know of.

Churchwood. I never fired no revolver at all.

Judge Lumley Smith. Did you see him fire a revolver?.

Witness. Yes. I saw it in his hand.

HENRY SIDNEY TEPPER gave similar evidence.

Detective THOMAS POWELL , Y Division. On October 19 I was on duty in York Road with Police-oonstable Hubbard. I heard police whittles and four or five shots from revolvers. The noise came from the Canal Bridge. I saw some lady running. Three of them got over the canal bridge. I went to the Caledonian Road Station and saw Streetin and Churchwood. I said to Streetin, "This man accuses you of shooting at him in Twyford Street." He replied, "It is a b——y lie. He shot at me." He said also that he had two

Witnesses to prove that. I asked him their names, and he gave me the names of the two Teppers. Both prisoners made written statements. I told Churchwood he would he charged with shooting with intent at Streetin.

Sergeant RICHARD RICKETTS gave evidence of prisoner being brought into the station. When charged with the shooting he said, "How can you charge me with shooting? I have not got a revolver." He stated that he was a countermonger.

Police constable JAMES SMITH , 189 Y. I was present last Sessions when Harmond was tried. He belonged to the Clerkenwell gang, and was charged with shooting at Churchwood and at Francis, and Churchwood gave evidence. He did not say that he himself belonged to any of these gangs.


WILLIAM CHURCHWOOD (prisoner, on oath). I was on the night in question coming down Bemerton Street with two young ladies. I was in drink. Streetin interfered with me, and I pulled off my coat to fight him. He ran and I ran after him. Streetin had a pistol in his hand which he fired twice. He did not point it at me.

Cross-examined. I live in Bemerton Street. I never heard of the Bemerton Street gang or of the Clerkenwell gang. Streetin is a stranger to me. I do not know what became of the revolver he fired. I said at the station that Streetin fired at me, but that is not true.

(The case against DYSON and STREETIN.)

GEORGE MITCHELL HUNT , potman of the Crown Hotel, Pentonville Road. On October 16, about 11 p.m., I was in the private bar. Streetin, whom I knew, called me out. When I got to the door he struck me on the left eye. I fell to the ground, and at the same time Dyson, whom I did not know, struck me with a penknife in the left shoulder and in the back. Dyson then made off. Besides the two prisoners there were some fifty other lads there. I do not know of any reason why I should have been attacked. My wounds were dressed in hospital and next morning I applied for a warrant.

Police, constable JOHN RICHARDS , G Division. I arrested Dyson on 21st of last month in King's Cross Road. I arrested Streetin outside the Clerkenwell Police-court. When charged, he said, "I was there. Dyson did the stabbing."

CHARLOTTE ALICE KING . At the time of this occurrence I was house surgeon at the Royal Free Hospital and attended George Hunt. He had two small superficial incised wounds, one on the left shoulder and one on the left flank. I did not notice any discolouration of the left eye, which would not have had time to come up.

THOMAS STREETIN (prisoner, on oath). On Wednesday night, October 16, Dyson stopped me and asked me if I could tell him where George Hunt worked. Hunt works two or three doors from

where I live, and I took Dyson back and showed him. I called Hunt to the door and Dyson stabbed him. On my oath I never struck Hunt. I was on friendly term with Hunt and bad no cause to strike him. Dyson and I ran off in different directions.

Cross-examined. I have known Dyson one week. I met him at the Upper Street punching ball saloon, and got into conversation with him there. After the stabbing I went into the house where I live as it was no concern of mine. I called the man out, but I did not know Dyson was going to stab him.

Verdict, Dyson Guilty;

Streetin Guilty of common assault.

Detective Powell, recalled, gave further evidence at the condition to which these gangs had reduced she neighbourhood, and the vicar of St. Michael's, Islington, gave evidence at to his knowledge of the brothers Francis and of churchwood and Lowe.

Judge Lumley Smith regretted to find boys of good character taking part in these riotous proceedings.

Sentences, Hunter, four months; Arthur Francis, two months; Lowe, Keefe, and Thomas Francis, one month each; Churohwood, two months; Dyson, four months; and streetin, two months; all in the second division.


(Friday, November 22.)

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-33
VerdictNot Guilty > no evidence

Related Material

HELPS, Henry Graham , indicted for bigamy.

Mr. Sydney Williams said that the prosecution offered no evidence, and a verdict of Not guilty was returned.

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-34
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

MOODY, Ellen (29) ; feloniously wounding Mary Sullivan, with intent to do her some grievous bodily harm.

Mr. Bohn prosecuted.

MARY SULLIVAN , 11, Commodore Place, Poplar. Prisoner lives at No.5. On November 3 I was going up the court at 11.10 p.m. Prisoner was behind me and called me bad names. I made no answer and went into my house. I went out again five minutes after to see my father at No. 4. Prisoner was standing at her own door with a lighted lamp. She called me bad names again sod jerked the lamp into my face. It burnt me and I went to the hospital.

Cross-examined by Prisoner. I did not knock at your door and ask you to fight. I did not go into your house and pick up your lamp. My brother-in-law was in bed and asleep and got up to save me. You did not have any child in your arms.

ELIZABETH ROUSE , 12, Commodore Court, Poplar. I was with prosecutrix at the time in question. She went into her house and afterwards went across to her father to tell him how her dying brother was. She left me in her kitchen. I heard screams and

went out and saw prisoner with a lamp in her hand throwing the oil about. Some went over Mrs. Sullivan, who was running away. The lamp glass was smashed on the ground. Prisoner set light to her place indoors. I ran away to get a policeman. When I came back prisoner was in her own house.

Cross-examined. Mrs. Sullivan and her brother-in-law did not come into your house. You called Mrs. Sullivan bad names and she did not answer you.

To the Judge. There was a pool of oil alight in the court, and the oil was pouring out of the burner. She was swinging the lamp. She did not let go of it.

Police-constable RICHARD WADDEN . I was called to prisoner's house at the time in question. She was in bed. I told her I should arrest her for causing grievous bodily harm to Mrs. Sullivan by throwing a burning lamp at her. She said Mrs. Sullivan came into her place. The room was wet and the curtains slightly singed. Immediately in front of No. 4 was a portion of this lamp chimney, which had been broken, and a quantity of oil was on the step. I found the lamp in the prisoner's bed room. She made no reply to the charge at the station. The assault was committed soon after eleven and I arrested her soon after twelve.

Cross-examined. I found a piece of brace in your place belonging to Denis Sullivan.

To the Judge. The importance of that is that when at the police court prisoner said. "Did not you say something about a piece of brace?" I said, "No." She did not call my attention to it on that night, but I went to the house from the police court and saw it there. That was after the police court proceedings. Prisoner alleged that a portion of brace would not have been in her bed-room if somebody had not come there.

HAROLD RYDERWOOD , house surgeon, Poplar Hospital. At 11.30 on November 3, prosecutrix was brought in suffering from superficial burns over the left side of the face, with singeing of the hair fringe. It was a burn obviously of the first degree—that is to say, simply red; but there were also two smaller patches of the second degree—one on the ear and one on the side of the nose. They were consistent with a flame having passed over the face. I dressed the wounds. I saw her four days after and there was very little left then—no scarring; but since then she has not attended the hospital and, I think, has been treated elsewhere. There was just a blister when I saw her four days after.

Dr. HENRY JOSEPH O'BRIEN , divisional surgeon, Poplar. I saw prosecutriz at the Poplar Police Station about 12.30 on November 4. When I was first sent for I found her collapsed. I attended to her and got her to and sent her home. Portions of the face, neck, and ear were burnt. I quite agree with Dr. Rydewood that the burns were superficial—that is, a portion of the face; but over the ear, at Dr. Rydewood described, the burning was of the second degree. The eye was swollen and inflamed. The wounds are quite healed, though

a little tender. There are no marks and the woman will get along all right.

DENIS SULLIVAN , coal scaler. I am prosecutrix's brother-in-law. On the night in question I heard screams and ran out to save my sister-in law, when prisoner served me the same, and a neighbour in the kitchen ran out and covered me over. I could not see anything more. I do not know how my brace got in prisoner's room. I did not go into the house to put the fire out.

Cross-examined. It is a lie to say prosecutrix came to you to get you to fight.

(Prisoner's Statement before the Magistrate.)

"All I can say is—I am innocent. Those two people came into ay place. I can't say more. She insulted me. She was always in my place. Because I would not lend her money or go about with her the was everlasting insulting me. A fortnight ago she had a jug to brain me with. I did not throw burning oil in her face."


EMILY THOMPSON , 2, Commodore Court, Poplar. I was sitting indoors on Sunday night and heard some quarrelling up the court, and my sister said, "There is going to be a row." I said, "Never mind." I heard the screaming and went up and looked out of my window and saw fire coming out of Mrs. Sullivan's door. I thought of the children and went up to get the children out. I did not see anything more or a lamp or anything. I heard Mrs. Moody and Mrs. Sullivan quarrelling.

Cross-examined. I saw nobody throw any oil.

THOMAS JOSEPH REED , general dealer, 6, Commodore Court, High Street, Poplar. I was in bed a little after 11 on Sunday night when this happened. I was roused by a noise in the house next door, and, being a very small house, I could hear conversation going on. A young woman was supposed to be next door, and there were one or two others in the house. They were knocking the woman about me I got out of bed and went to the street door and when I went to the door in a few minutes a man came running out all alight. He ran the width of half this court, and then there was a female tried to pot him out, and she got burnt in trying to. About five or seven minutes after she went down the Court and said to a woman in the Court, "Take me to the hospital, I am burning." She was not alight, but she went down the Court and was supposed to be burning, and she hit the prisoner and caught hold of her hair and pulled her down in the Court.

By the Court. It was Mrs. Sullivan who was supposed to be burnt who hit the prisoner. I saw the prisoner come back to the man who ran out alight, and he wanted to give this woman into custody and they would not take her. After we had all gone to bed at night they came and took her. We knew nothing about her being looked up at Arbour Square the next morning.

Cross-examined. I saw all there was to be seen. The man refused to charge the woman. I knew the case was under investigation by the police. I had been up to Arbour Square, but was not called on as I was too late.

HARRY ASHBY , 6, Commodore Court. I was going home on Sunday night and saw somebody by Mrs. Sullivan's door getting hold of prisoner and calling her names. Then I saw her rush in after prisoner, and next I see the chap Sullivan come out of prisoner's house alight. Then I went indoors and Mr. Reed said, "You had better go back and see if the place is all right." Prisoner was just getting out of the window when I got hold of her arm and helped her out. One of the neighbours put Sullivan out when burning. I did not see the start of it.

Cross-examined. My attention was first drawn to it by the chap Sullivan speaking to prisoner. Sullivan rushed into prisoner's house after her and came out alight. I did not attempt to stop him or call out or fetch anybody. It had nothing to do with me.

MARGARET MARTIN , 53, Wells Street, Poplar. I know nothing at all concerning this row. On October 13 Mrs. Moody came to my place and asked me to lend her 2d. to go to her mother. I was in the act of doing it when Mrs. Sullivan came to the door and knocked and told her to come out, and they had a quarrel. That it all I know about it.

Prisoner. I am innocent.

DENIS SULLIVAN , recalled. I did not go into the house. I am speaking the truth. I caught fire in the centre of the Court. It is no use to take notice of this woman. She did not see me coming out of the house.

Verdict, Not guilty.


(Friday, November 22.)

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-35
VerdictsGuilty > pleaded guilty; Not Guilty > unknown; Guilty > unknown
SentencesImprisonment > hard labour; Imprisonment > hard labour; Miscellaneous; Imprisonment > hard labour; Miscellaneous

Related Material

ESSER, Willie (23, engineer), KEAVES, Theodore (32, butcher), MASTURE, August (21, waiter) ; all breaking and entering the dwelling house of Carl Wiese and stealing therein one clock and four pairs of blankets and other articles, his goods, and feloniously receiving same.

Esser pleaded guilty.

Mr. Eustace Fulton prosecuted; Mr. Huntly Jenkins defended Keavas.

CARL WIESE , 3, West Street, restaurant keeper. I am the occupier of 13, Pelham Street, which I let furnished. On October 2 it was securely closed. On information, I visited it on October 4, found it had been broken open, and missed the property produced—clock, four pairs of blankets, inkstand, set of fire brases, two sideboard

covers, tablecloth. I also lost some blankets and an oil painting, which have not been recovered. The oil painting was about 3 ft. by 2 1/2 ft., and was a hunting scene with dogs and a fox. It had been cut out of the frame. It was worth about £10. I know Esser and Keaves as frequenting my restaurant. On October 3 Keaves asked me if I would go with him to the Alhambra. I declined. I sometimes sleep at Pelham Street, but generally at my restaurant at West Street. At about 10.30 I saw Keaves. He said he had come away from the Alhambra because it was very hot.

Cross-examined. I know Keaves very well, am friendly with him, and have constantly played cards and had meals with him. I cannot recollect whether I have been to the theatre with him before or not.

Re-examined. I have not teen Masture in the restaurant.

DANIEL SHEEN , 64, Manor Street, Chelsea, cabdriver. On October 3, at 11 p.m., Masture, with another man, engaged me to drive to 15, Pelham Street, to take up his luggage. When he got there another man (Esser) was in the area gateway. Masture went in and they both got into the cab with two bundles, which they put inside, and Masture told me to drive to Fitrroy Square. I saw Mesture by the light in the hall. We went to Fitrroy Square, they got out, and Masture paid me. I saw his face by a lamp. On October 9 I identified Esser among eleven men at Walton Street police station. I had no difficulty in picking him out. On the Saturday following—October 12—I picked out Masture fron ten men.

MASTURE. I do not know this man at all.

LUCY STRINHART . 15, Pelham Street (next door to 13) is let to me and I live there. On October 3, at 9.30 p.m., I saw Esser standing at the garden gate of No. 13. Masture was standing at the house door. I am quite sure of the men. On October 9 I picked out Esser from a number of men at Walton Street station. I afterwards failed to pick out Masture. I now remember his face. I could not pick him out before because when at the door he had a very red face (The Recorder: This identification is perfectly worthless.)

ANNIE ESHER , 15, Pelham Street, servant to the last witnees. On October 3 I saw two men standing at the door to No. 13. I identified Esser at the police station as one, but failed to identify the other.

EMILY FOSTER , landlady at 10, Southampton Street, Fitrroy Square. About six weeks before October 9 (when he left) Masture came to lodge at my house under the name of Harry Defries. On October 5 I found envelope produced containing the address "13, Pelham Street" in his bedroom. On October 4, between twelve and one, I saw parcel in his room containing apparently a picture in a frame. Masture left on October 9 without giving me notice, and taking the latch key and the key of his room away. He paid me my rent in advance. I live next door to No. 10 and go in every day to see to the rooms.

To Masture: No one but you occupied the room. You brought home a friend the first night, and I forbade it.

JOHN COHEN , assistant to Gill, 89, King's Road, Chelsea, pawnbroker. Two sets of fire brasses and a pair of curtains (produced) were pledged at our shop in Hampstead Road for five shillings in the name of John Schmidt.

PERCY JOHN GRAVOCK , assistant to Jay, 71. Charlotte Street, Fitrroy Square, pawnbroker. On October 4 clock produced was pawned for four shillings by a woman in the name of Annie Silver.

HENRY WILLIAM NEWTON , assistant to Deas, 51, Stanhope Street, pawnbroker. On October 4 inkstand, four covers and pillow case (produced) were pawned by Esser in the name of Annie Silver.

Detective-sergeant EDWARD BARRETT , B Division. On October 8, at 7.30, with Detective Bailey, I arrested Esser at Charing Cross for being concerned in breaking into a dwelling house. I put him in a cab with Detective Bailey, and they waited in Wurdour Street while I searched the neighbouring public houses for Masture. I was away about ten minutes, and as I returned I saw Keaves standing with one foot on the step of the cab talking to Esser. He put hit finger on hit mouth to Esser. When I came up he said in broken English, "I do recognise you. I saw you in the cafe before"—that is the Cafe Bernard kept by the prosecutor—"you have got the wrong man; it is a Frenchman you want, not him (meaning Esser, who was in the cab). He is a respectable German. I know all about the job. I should let him go, you have got the wrong man." I ignored what he said, and took Esser to the station, where he made a statement, in consequence of which I gave instructions to Bailey to keep observations at Brixton Prison, where Ester was confined. On October 12 Bailey had arrested Keaves, and I saw him in custody at Walton Street Station, and said to him, "We have a man in custody charged with being concerned in breaking into 13, Pelham Street. He has made a statement." Keaves said, "Has Esser said anything against me?" I said, "Yes."

Mr. Huntley Jenkins submitted that this statement said by Esser behind Keaves's back was not evidence. Held, prisoner's statement undoubtedly admissible.

I said to Keaves, "He has said that you gave Harry Kisch and him the cab fare to go and do the job, told them the address was 13, Pelham Street, that Wise was the owner of the house, and undertook while they did the job to go to the Cafe Bernard and take Weise to the Alhambra." He replied, "I know nothing about it."

The Recorder. It is quite clear that is not evidence against Keaves. The statement made is evidence, but it is not evidence against him, as he denied the truth of it.

Masture is known by the name of "Kisch." Masture had been identified by the cabman. Masture and Keaves were charged together. In reply Masture said. "Not me." Keaves said, pointing to Mastures, "I have never seen him before."

Police constable CHARLES BAILEY , B Division. On October 12 I arrested Keaves on Brixton Hill, outside Brixton Prison, where he had been to see the prisoner Easer. In reply to me he said, "Take me to Mr. Weise." On October 14 at the police court, he

said, "What do you think I shall get for this?" I said, "I cannot say." On October 8 I was left by Barrett in a cab with Esser in Wardour Street. Keaves came up, and had a conversation with Esser in a foreign language. He Placed his finger to his mouth as Barrett returned, and then said to Barrett, "You have got the wrong man. It is a Frenchman you want. I should let him go."

Keaves's statement. "I do not know why I am arrested. I am absolutely ignorant of the reason why I am in prison. I do not know Masture, but I know Esser. I should like to ask your Worship, Why am I here?"

Mastare. "I do not know Keaves or Esser."

Mr. Huntly Jenkins submitted there was no case against Keaves.

The Recorder. I am clear there is no case against Keaves. No jury in the world ought to convict him—at the utmost it is suspicion.

Masture handed in a statement in English which he said a friend had translated for him, stating that a friend named "Henry Kisch," whom he had known as a waiter at Ostend, had slept with him, had left the parcel in his room, and that he had befriended Kisch. Kisch was slightly taller than himself.

Verdict, Keaves, Not Guilty;

Masture, Guilty.

Esser confessed to having been convicted at Westminster on February 25, 1907, receiving two months for stealing a bicycle and being ordered to be deported. Masture admitted being convicted on March 6, 1905, at this Court, receiving twelve months hard labour for forgery. Other convictions were proved. Both prisoners were stated to belong to a gang of West End prostitutes' bullies.

Sentences, Masture, 20 months' hard labour; Esser, 10 months' hard labour. Both prisoners were ordered to be deported.

Keaves was then tried for having been entrusted with certain furniture for and on account of Samuel Creswell and another in order that he might retain the same in safe custody, did fraudulently convert the said property to his own use and benefit; having been entrusted with certain furniture for and on account of Simeon Blaiberg and others, in order that he might retain the same in safe custody, did fraudulently convert the same to his own use and benefit.

Mr. Huntly Jenkins submitted the indictment was wrongly laid, the alleged fraud being a failure to perform a hire and purchase agreement.

The Recorder said the Statute was very widely drawn and was especially intended to cover the case, although no doubt prisoner might have been indicted for ordinary larceny.

WILLIAM WESTON CRESWELL , Creswell and Bailey, 60, High Street, Wandsworth, furniture dealers. On December 9, 1904, prisoner obtained under hiring agreement produced furniture of the vale of £59 8s. from my firm, which was delivered to Mossbury Road, Clapham Junction. He paid instalments up to March 6, 1906; there is £41 5s. now due. Under the agreement change of address must be given written notice of. I went to Mossbury Road in March, found the furniture had been removed to Euston Road, and shortly afterwards the prisoner absconded after removing the furniture. In August, 1906, I received letter produced from a solicitor purporting

to act for the prisoner. I received no further payment, and have been unable to recover the furniture.

Cross-examined. We do not always prosecute people for removing furniture without notice. That depends on the circumstances. The agreement was altered at prisoner's request from 30s. a month to 7s. 6d. a week. We have not sued. The police communicated with us.

Mr. Huntly Jenkins submitted that there was nothing in the agreement to show that the furniture was entrusted to the prisoner for safe custody.

The Recorder. It is too clear for argument.

Re-examined. We have given the prisoner every chance of repayment—we have not been able to find him at all.

SIMEON BLAIBERG , partner in the Islington Furnishing Company, 335, Upper Street On July 5, 1904, prisoner obtained from me furniture to the value of £32 10s. under hiring agreement produced, which was delivered at 37, Montague Road, Clapham Junction. On October 28, 1905 the payments being in arrear, we found that the prisoner had removed the furniture and that his house was entirely empty. I found he had been living at 225, Euston Road, but have never seen the prisoner nor the furniture since.

Cross-examined. Since prisoner has been arrested, a woman on his behalf came and wanted to make me on offer, but I refused to ditcuss it with her. We want possession of the furniture if instalments are not paid. I went to the station to make enquiries about the prisoner. I have not actually applied for a warrant, but I put it in the hands of the police.

Detective-sergeant EDWARD BARRETT , B Division. When the prisoner was charged with these offences he made no reply.

Statement of prisoner. I can only say I am quite willing to pay Creswell's costs. I did not have it at the end, someone else had it, but I am quite willing to pay him as well.

The Jury intimated that they had made up their minds.

Mr. Huntly Jenkins having addressed the Court, a verdict of Guilty was returned.

On May 18. 1903, prisoner received three months hard labour for living on the immoral earnings of prostitutes. He was stated to have been formerly a professional wrestler and to be a bully of the worst type.

Sentence, 18 months' hard labour, and an order for deportation.


(Friday, November 22.)

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-36
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

STANLEY. Joseph (41, agent) ; uttering counterfeit coin well knowing the same to be counterfeit.

Mr. Sands prosecuted; Mr. Burnie defended.

MOLLIE ROUX . I live with my husband, Auguste Sidney Roux, at 21, Bolsover Street. I was married in July last. I remember

going to Hyde Park on July 11 with my husband. We sat down near the Marble Arch. This was about 7.30. My husband left me sitting on a chair while he went across to the Atheists' meeting. Prisoner came and sat on the chair next to me. I noticed that he had a disfigurement of the nose. He entered into conversation with me, passing some remark about the weather, and I informed him my husband was on the other side of the road. There was a number of people on chairs on either side of me. He told me he had just come to England and asked me if I had any gold. I said I had half a sovereign in my handkerchief. He said, "Would you like 10s. worth of silver?" I said I did not mind. I took the half-sovereign from my handkerchief and prisoner took one lot of money out of his pocket and then another lot from another pocket. He looked at the first lot before he put it back. He asked me if I minded 2s. pieces. I said, "No." I took the 10s. piece out of my handkerchief and he put the 2s. pieces in it, and I put them in my pocket. Shortly after he said, "Good night." I noticed that his fingers were rather stained, and I suppose I remarked upon it, for he said that in his business he used a lot of deadly poisons, but that was after the money wiii changed. He said he earned about £2 a day, but that day he had earned only 27s., on account of not going to business so early. He said he was living at an hotel as it answered his business better. He did not say where it was, nor whether anyone was living with him there. I stayed there a little while longer. Then my husband came across and we went away together. Next morning my husband wanted some money for his papers, and I gave him one of the 2s. pieces. When he came back he asked me for the other hand and I gave it to him. He asked me where I had got the coins. I found on examining them that they were a little greasy and they did not look like the ordinary 2s. pieces. The coins produced are the coins I had. I went to the police station and I handed the coins to the police. I gave a description of the man from whom I received them. I was taken to Bow Street Police Station last month and picked out prisoner from a number of men. His hands were in the same condition as when I saw him in the Park.

Cross-examined. Prisoner stayed with me 20 minutes or a quarter of an hour. He remained five or ten minutes after the coins were changed. I did not mention it to my husband that night. I did not see prisoner again until I saw him in custody. I did not tell my husband how I came by the 2s. pieces until after he had been out to get some change.

AUGUSTE SIDNEY ROUX gave evidence as to going to the Park and receiving next morning from his wife a florin which was refused as bad.

Sergeant WILLIAM WILLIAMS, 13 A. Mrs. Roux came to the Hyde Park Station on the morning of July 12 and brought five counterfeit florins and made a statement as to how they had come into her possesion. She gave a description of the man she received them from, which I took down in writing and handed to the detective police.

THOMAS UPSDELL . I am manager of an hotel kept by Messrs. Pearce and Plenty, 85, Farringdon Street. Prisoner was living there at the beginning of July, and up to the time of his arrest. There was also a man living there who used to speak to him occasionally. Some time in the beginning of September a lodger said something to me, and I afterwards spoke to Thomas Hawley, one of our boys, about what had been told me by the lodger.

THOMAS HAWLEY . I went to the hotel at first as a shop boy, and was afterwards promoted to be bedroom attendant, my duties being to clean out the bedroom and make the beds. It was my duty to clean out the bedroom of Stanley amongst others. I happened to knock down one of his waistcoats. Two coins wrapped up in tissue paper rolled out of the pockets. I took the paper off and looked at them. They were wrapped in separate pieces of paper. I wrapped them up again and put them back in the pocket. The edges were rough and scratched. I did not say anything to anybody about it at the time. On September 14, being in his room again, I saw lying on the floor another florin wrapped in tissue paper. The edges of that coin were the same, and there were three lines across it on both sides—a flaw. On the following Tuesday afternoon I saw something else and I then spoke to Mr. Upsdell. That had not reference to Stanley's room, but to the room occupied by his friend.

Mr. Sands asked if he could question witness as to what he saw in the room on Stanley's friend, but his lordship would not allow the question.

Detective-sergeant ALBERT YEO, New Scotland Yard. I was furnished with a description of the coins handed to Mrs. Roux. On October 16, in company with Sergeant Story, I saw prisoner in Shoe Lane and said to him, "I am going to arrest you for uttering five 2s. pieces and stealing 10s. by means of a trick from Mrs. roux, of Bolsover Street, in July last." He said, "Is she a respectable woman?" I said, "As far as I know she is a highly respectable woman." I took him to Bow Street police station and placed him with eight other men dressed similarly to himself and as much like him in appearance as I could find. The prosecutrix on being brought in immediately picked him out. He gave his correct address in Farringdon Street. I knew his address by that time. I noticed that his hands were badly stained and drew his attention to them. He said, "That is caused in my business," but did not say how.

Cross-examined. I got the description on July 12. In the interval before the arrest I had seen him several times.

Sergeant WILLIAMS. I read the description given by Mrs. Roux over to her. She did not sign it.

Judge Lumley Smith. I think it is evidence.

Sergeant YEO, recalled. Before I arrested the prisoner I had seen him on about eight or nine occasions, and on each of those occasions purchasing tin, antimony, and copper wire, all ingredients used in the manufacture of counterfeit coins. (To the Judge.) I saw him at shops where they sell metal. I had not the prisoner's description

during the whole of that time. The first time I saw the man I had a description and I was endeavouring to locate the man to his address, knowing that he was wanted.

WILLIAM JOHN WEBSTER . I have seen five coins—florins. They are counterfeit and from the same mould. They are very good, but there is a flaw on one or two of them. The general analysis of them is about 80 per cent, tin, 18 per cent, antimony, and about 2 per cent. copper.

Verdict, Guilty.

Several previous convictions were proved, including convictions for bigamy and long firm frauds.

Sentence, Three years' panel servitude.

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-36a
VerdictGuilty > insane
SentenceImprisonment > insanity

Related Material

HUMPHREYS, George (34, seaman); committing an act of gross indecency with Frank Marshall, a ship's boy.

Mr. Percival Clarke prosecuted.

Verdict, Guilty, but insane at the time.

Sentence, To be kept as a criminal lunatic in Brixton Prison during His Majesty's pleasure.

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-37
VerdictsNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

MILCOY, William, and MALYON, Thomas ; stealing a pony, a barrow, a set of harness, a tarpaulin, and a rug, the goods of Walter Saggers; WILLIAMS, Charles Herbert ; feloniously receiving a tarpaulin, the property of Walter Saggers, well knowing it to have been stolen.

Mr. Stephenson prosecuted.

WALTER SAGGERS . I am a greengrocer, living at 19, Church Lane, Islington. I kept my pony and other things in Pied Bull Yard, Theberton Street, Islington. I last saw the pony and barrow and other things on last Wednesday week at nine o'clock at night. When I went to my stable the next morning, Thursday, I found it empty. The pony, harness, and barrow are worth about £24; the tarpaulin is worth about 8s. When I found the things were missing I went to the police station. I have since got them all back except the tarpaulin, which the police have got. On the Thursday night, about a quarter to ten, I met Milcoy in Upper Street, Islington. I asked him to go to the station and tell the police where he got the pony, and barrow and other things from. He went to the station. (To the prisoner Malyon.) I do not know that you only took the pony and barrow out for a ride. (To the Judge.) Malyon lives near where I live. I never knew him until this occurrence. He had taken it once before; his brother brought him back and he said he was not going to do it any harm. I said I would look over it. He was brought back with it; he had not got far enough away. I do not know the other boy, Milcoy.

Police-constable TOM TANNER. I am a Sergeant in the A Division. At ten o'clock on November 7 I saw the prisoners, Malyon and Milcoy, at Islington police station. When charged Milcoy said, "We took it; we went for a drive round Barnet; when Mr. Saggers brought me here I was going to take it back." Malyon said, "That

is right" I said, "The tarpaulin is missing; where is it?" Malyon said. "We sold it to a man near the water-trough at High Barnet for 6d." On the 13th of this month at about 3 p.m., I went with Police-constable Hamilton to prisoner Williams's address. I told him we were police officers, and that I had two boys in custody for stealing a pony, barrow, and tarpaulin. I said, "They say you bought a tarpaulin near the water trough last Thursday for 6d. Have you it?" He took me to a coachhouse, and said, "Here it is just as I bought it." I said, "Do you know the value of it?" He said, "Well, I ought to" I said, "Did you make any inquiries?" He said, "No; I saw the two boys near the water trough and they offered to sell me a rug for fourpence. I would not buy it. They afterwards came down to me and told me they were hungry and I gave them sixpence for the tarpaulin." I said, "I shall take you into custody for receiving it well knowing it to be stolen." He said, "Well, I did not know it was stolen; I am sorry I bought it now." I took him to Islington Police Station and he was charged. (To the Judge.) I had the boys in custody. They did not bring the things there; the prosecutor saw the boy Milcoy in the Upper Street, Islington, near the "King's Head." He brought him to me. Williams lived at this place, where I found the tarpaulin. I had some difficulty in finding him.

WILLIAM MILCOY (prisoner, on oath). I am 15 years of age. I do not work at anything; I used to work for the Midland Company as vanguard. I have been out of work now for about 12 weeks. I took the pony and the barrow for a ride to Barnet; Malyon went with me. We lot the horse go out on the grass up there. I afterwards brought it back again about half-past nine or quarter to 10 on the Thursday. We were taking it back when someone who saw as went and told the owner, and we waited up the lane until the owner came, and then he took us into custody. I did not take it back to the stable, but waited for the owner to come. I did not intend to steal it. William asked us if we wanted to sell the pony for 50s. He looked at the pony's teeth and examined it. We said we would not sell it. Then he told us to come round to his house late at night. We went round because we wanted to tell him we were not going to sell the pony, but he was out. He had the tarpaulin. He asked us if we wanted to sell it. At first we said "No." We afterwards sold it to him for 6d. When we got back at night we did not tell the prosecutor what had been done with the tarpaulin. A police officer went over with Saggers to see if everything was correct, and he s"w the tarpaulin was gone. I told him the man who had got it; I did not know his name.

Cross-examined. We did not offer to sell the rug first. If Williams says we did he is not speaking the truth.

THOMAS MALYON (prisoner, on oath). I am 17 years old next January. We took the pony just for a ride; we did not mean any harm in taking it; I am very sorry we did it. We brought it back on the Thursday night. I am a carpenter by proper trade. I have been out of work a long time. As to the tarpaulin, we were going

along and Williams was in a cart like ours. He had "savoys" on it and was selling them, and he gave his horse a drink at the fountain, and we came up to give our pony a drink. He said, "What have you got there?" We said, "We have only got an old rug and tarpaulin; you can have the old rug for fourpeace." Williams said, "No, I will buy the tarpaulin for sixpence." I said, "No." Then he got asking us, and then we said, "Yes." He took it and opened the tarpaulin and looked at it and saw the name on it, and he bought it. He gave us sixpence and took it. The owner's name, "Saggers," is on the tarpaulin. Williams said, "What is this name?" We said, "It is the owner's name." (The tarpaulin was produced in court and the prosecutor's name and address were upon it, though not very distinct.) Williams did not ask us our names. He simply gave us 6d. and took the tarpaulin away.

Cross-examined. He saw the name and address; he spoke to us about it. He said, "What is this?" We said, "The owner's name." He said, "All right." He rolled the tarpaulin up and took it away. (To the Judge.) My mother has died since I have been in prison. I think I have been punished enough.

CHARLES HERBERT WILLIAMS (prisoner, on oath). I am a greengrocer. On this particular morning I had been to get a load of cabbages off the farm, and I pulled up at the water trough to water my pony; these two lads came up at the same time. They said, "Will you buy an old rug for four pence?" I said, "No, my lads, I don't want any rug," and with that I went home. When I had been home a few minutes they came round and begged me to give then sixpence for the tarpaulin, as they were hungry and wanted to buy food. I told them at first I did not want it; then I gave them sixpence for it simply out of charity. I did not look at the name.

Cross-examined. I would not give a shilling for it if I wanted it ever so much. I gave the boy sixpence out of charity. I did not want the thing. I had never seen anything of these boys before. I cannot say what there is about me that would make them think I wanted to buy tarpaulins. They spoke to me first. It is absolutely false to say I asked them first about the tarpaulin. I never said a word about the pony. When they say I offered to buy the pony they are saying what is false. I do not often buy things out of charity from boys, but on this occasion I did. I did not think it was theirs. I did not ask them any questions about it. I am not in the habit of buying things without asking. I suppose that a tarpaulin and penny and cart are not generally the property of boys. What I did was done innocently. (To the Judge.) I did not think at the time that they would not be likely to have a pony and barrow and tarpaulin of their own; I did it without a thought. They pitched me such a pitiful tale, saying they had not had any food all the morning and I gave them sixpence for the tarpaulin. I did not know that it had got a name on. When Detective-sergeant Tanner came to me he asked me if it had a name on it. I said I did not know,

I had never seen the name; and neither had I. I simply gave them sixpence for it, thinking it would come in handy some day.

Verdict, each Not guilty.

The parents of the prisoners Milcoy and Malyon were cautioned to look after then.

The tarpaulin was ordered to be handed over to the prosecutor.


(Saturday, November 23.)

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-38
VerdictsGuilty > pleaded part guilty
SentencesImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

CARPENTER., Henry, (36, stick mounter); feloniously marking silver wares with a forged and counterfeit die, resembling the die of the Goldsmiths' Company, and uttering the same; feloniously producing upon certain silver wares an imitation of the mark of the die used by the Goldsmiths' Company, and uttering the same; having in his possession, without lawful excuse, a forged and counterfeit die, resembling a die used by the Goldsmiths' Company for marking silver wares, and possessing certain silver wares having upon them the marks of the said die; having in his possession, without lawful excuse, imitations of marks of a die used by the Goldsmiths' Company for stamping silver wares.

Pleaded Guilty to having the die in his possession.

Mr. Bodkin and Mr. R.F. Graham Campbell prosecuted; Mr. Elkin appeared for the prisoner.

Mr. Jun. Sinclair spoke to the prisoner's good character hitherto.

Sentence, Nine months' hard labour.

Mr. Bodkin applied that the 1,462 silver articles that had been seized should be handed over for destruction. To this course his Lordship assented.

Mr. Elkin asked that the wood work to which the articles were fixed should not be destroyed, and to this Mr. Bodkin agreed.

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-39
VerdictsNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

PHILLIPS, Edward (28, litter) ; feloniously demanding by menaces from Leah Diamond the several sums of 10s. and 3s. 6d., with intent to steal the same; obtaining by false pretences from Leah Diamond the sum of 10s. with intent to defraud; attempting to obtain by false pretences from Leah Diamond the sum of 3s. 6d, with intent to defraud.

Mr. Sydney E. Williams prosecuted.

Mrs. LEAH DIAMOND . I am the wife of Simon Diamond, a tailor, of Wardour Street. On October 26, about half-past one, the prisoner came to my house. He asked for my husband; I said he was not at home. I had not known him before. He waited outside my house about 10 minutes. When my husband came prisoner said, "Come inside. I have to speak to you about some business about a shop." As prisoner came in he shut the door behind him and then he spoke to the two of us. He said, "Do you know who I am?" I

said "No." He said, "I am a thief; somebody has sent me up to steal your jewellery, which lies under the bed in a basket, and in the basket in a little box, and in this box there is a little purse; this purse contains a five guinea piece, a pair of earrings of the value of £35, a lady's and gentlemans chain, two bracelets, and some other little things, what am I worth that I have mercy on you and do not steal these articles? I have never stolen articles from such poor people as you are." I then gave him 3s., and he threw it back. I made no reply to his statement about my property. I said nothing. I was afraid of him. My husband is a very weak man; he turned white like a ghost. When the prisoner came in he shut the door behind us md I was afraid of him. He said I have got some took that thieves are using—burglary tools. I gave him 3s., and he threw it back and said, "If you cannot give me 10s. you will be sorry." Before I gave him over the 10s. I said "Who sent you up here?" He said, "Come downstairs, and I will tell you who it is, and also show you the photograph of the man who sent me." The first time prisoner came my husband was not at home. When he returned the three of us went upstairs. Our shop is a tailor's shop. (To the Judge.) Why we went upstairs was because I did not now what to think about it. He said, "Come upstairs," and we went upstairs. My brother came in at the door. I asked my brother that he should give me some money quickly because I was very upset. I asked my brother for it because I had no money with me at the time, and because the prisoner said, "If you do not give me 10s. You will be sorry for it." It was half-past one in the middle of the day, dinner time. I got frightened of him, and I was very excited and I turned white.

I got evidence of the witness not being intelligible, the jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.


(Saturday, November 23.)

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-40
VerdictsGuilty > unknown
SentencesImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

STEVENS, George Walter (35, traveller) ; obtaining by false pretences from Alfred Ling 7,000 paper bags, with intent to defraud; obtaining by false pretences from James Clarke 60,000 paper bags, with intent to defraud; attempting to obtain by false pretences from James Clarke 105,000 paper bags, with intent to defraud; forging and uttering a certain receipt and acquaintance for money, to wit, a receipt and acquittance for £2 7s. 6d, with intent to defraud.

Mr. C. Harvard Pierson prosecuted.

JAMES CLARKE (Messrs. J. and D. Clarke and Co.), paper bag manufacturers, 4, Cabinet Buildings, Hoxton. I employed prisoner as traveller on commission in the name of W. Cats, of 97, Landor Road, Stockwell. The order produced is an order purporting to come from W. Williams, and is for 105,000 paper bags. The order was to be executed in three deliveries, and the first delivery of 60,000

was made on June 22. My carman brought back the receipt produced, signed N. Harris for W. Williams. On account of informtion received we did not complete the order. That was after we had endeavoured to collect one or two other accounts. I spoke to the prisoner about it. He said he was very sorry; he had made the mistake of his life by it, and he asked me to forgive him on account of his mother's health, and I thought to myself, "Wed, if a man is down, I am not going to be the man to tread on him. I will give him another chance," so for the time being I looked over it. He admitted that he was Williams. I received a letter from him dated July 8, and subsequently went to 97, Landor Road, where I recovered 43,000 of the bags on the payment of 12s. 6d. to Mr. Harris, from whom prisoner had rented a room where the bags were delivered. I subsequently discharged prisoner. The value of 60,000 bags is £6 13s. 6d.

NATHANIEL HARRIS , 97, Landor Road, Stockwell. In July prisoner rented part of a store room from me. He gave the name of Williams. He wrote me a letter agreeing to pay 2s. 6d. a week for a stock room, and asked me to take in goods that were coming from Messrs. Clarke and Co. I remember the goods coming, and signed a receipt for them on June 22. I remember the prisoner taking parcels away from the house. Some time after that Mr. Clarke came to see me, and on the payment of 12s. 6d. I allowed him to take the remainder of his goods away.

ALFRED LING , 94, Crondall Street, Hoxton. I employed prisoner under the name of Stevens as traveller about September 18. I received from him an order in his own handwriting for 7,000 paper bags for W. Williams, 15, Park Crescent, Clapham, and I sent the goods by Carter Paterton to that address. The order is on one of my forms. I made application for payment for these bags. They have not been paid for. I subsequently discharged prisoner. At the time I sent those bags I did not believe that Williams and the prisoner were the same man.

ELIZABETH MARGARET WASHINGTON . I am the wife of Frederick Washington and live at 15, Park Crescent, Clapham. On August 5 prisoner came to take lodgings and gave the name of Cass. A parcel was subsequently delivered for him. Prisoner left my house on October 23. I remember Mr. Ling calling.

JOHN ERNEST COX . 33, Penton Road, Brixton Hill, a carter in the employ of Messrs. Carter Paterson, produced the delivery note showing the consignment by Mr. Ling to Williams at 15. Park Crescent on September 28 or 29.

Police-sergeant RANDALL HOBSON , G Division. I arrested prisoner on October 23 and told him the charge. He said, "Good God! They are practically paid for with my commission."

Prisoner gave evidence on oath, and stated that, as he had already told Mr. J. Clarke, he obtained the bags with a view to disposing of them in the Borough Market in small parcels. Commission, he alleged, was due to him.

Verdict, Guilty, and prisoner confessed to a previous conviction.

Sergeant HOBSON said that after prisoner's arrest he found a packet of receipt forms like those used by Mr. Ling, which prisoner had evidently had printed for the purposes of fraud.

Sentence, 2 years' hard labour.

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-41
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

BUSHNELL, Robert George (22, labourer) and CHRISTMAS, John Henry (20, cook) ; both maliciously damaging 2 glass windows, value £9, the property of Edward Jennings.

Mr. Harold Wright prosecuted.

Police-constable FREDERICK CRABBE , City Police. At 20 past four on the morning of October 26 I was on duty in Mark Lane. I noticed that two plate glass windows at prosecutor's shop, No. 82, had been broken. I had seen prisoners that morning in Crutched Friars, but not in Mark Lane. My suspicions being aroused I sent a description of them round to the police station. Finding these windows broken I left someone in charge of the premises and myself went to look for them, and about a quarter-past five in company with another officer, I saw them in Aldgate. I went over to them and told then I had reason to believe they had recently broken two windows in Mark Lane, and they admitted it. Bushnell said, "Yes, we did it, and we intended breaking as many as we could before we got pinched." Christmas said, "I broke one; we must do something. I wasted to get away to sea, but they told me they could not take me unless I was a discharged prisoner." I produce two stones. One I found in Mark Lane and the other was inside the shop, having gone right through the window.

ROBERT ARTHUR HART , manager to Mr. Edward Jennings, hosier,. Fenchurch Street and Mark Lane, deposed to finding the windows broken, and stated their value to be £4 10s. each.

The Foreman of the Jury. There is no evidence that anyone saw the prisoners break the windows.

Judge Lumley Smith said that as the prisoners denied the offence it was only a question whether the jury believed what the policeman said.

Verdict, both Not guilty.

Judge Lumley Smith. I cannot say I agree with you.

The Foreman of the Jury. There is no evidence.

Judge Lumley Smith. If you believe the constable there is evidence.

The prisoners' record was subsequently handed to the jury for their inspection.

BEFORE THE RECORDER. (Monday, November 25.)

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-42
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

ADAMS, James ; committing wilful and corrupt perjury.

Mr. Geo. Elliott, Mr. Ernest Cockle, and Mr. Eustace Fulton prosecuted. Mr. R.D. Muir and Mr. Travers Humphreys defended.

WALTER CROW , chief clerk Marylebone Police Court. On August 6. 7, at the hearing of a charge against William John Church and Earnest Walter Sexton for obstructing the police on the morning of August 6, prisoner swore, "Shortly after 1 a.m. I had a prisoner (Howard) in custody. He was violent PC. 433 X (Jenkin) assisted me. I saw prisoners come behind Jenkin and try to pull him away. Church said. 'No, you don't; he is a good old pal of mine.' I went on to the station with Howard, and on coming back I met 433 X with the second prisoner in custody at the top of Cirenceater Street. That was about 20 minutes to two. (Cross-examined by Church.) I did not go down into Church's room."

Cross-examined. Stephen Knight was first charged with being drunk and disorderly; he pleaded guilty and was fined 3s. 6d. William Howard was then charged with being drunk and disorderly and using obscene language, and pleaded not guilty. Prisoner swore. "At one o'clock this morning in Cirencester Street I was dispersing a crowd. Prisoner said, "Why do you not take those f—g roughs!' He was very violent." Howard did not cross-examine. Jenkin said, "I corroborate. (Cross-examination by Howard.) I did not strike prisoner." Laura Howard (the wife) said, "Prisoner was taken while upstairs." Howard was then fined 40 or a month. He had been detained in custody all night. Church and Sexton were then jointly charged with obstructing the police. The third witness was John Heard, a shoemaker. He said, "After one o'clock I was in the Harrow row Road. I saw a crowd in Cirencester Street. I went up and saw the two police-constables being roughly handled. I taw Sexton strike Police constable 433 X on the chest. I said, 'Why don't you act as an Englishman and assist the police when they are in trouble, and not be against them?' I pointed Sexton out to Police-constable 433 X. who arrested him. I saw Church there, but did not see him do anything. I followed to the station and helped to keep back the crowd, who were like savages. Both police-constables were not there when prisoners were arrested, which happened about 1.30. (Cross-examined by Sexton.) I saw Sexton in Cirencetter Street, and spoke to him." Church (the defendant), 52, Cirencester Street, horse keeper, then gave evidence. "I don't know Sexton, and never saw him before. About 1.20 a.m. I came up my steps to say good-night to a man, Bradley. A police-constable said he would summons me for obscene language. Twenty minutes later I was in my bedroom when both the police constables came in and said they wanted me 433 X struck me in the mouth. I walked with them as far as the infirmary. Harrow Road, when 498 said to 433, 'Go back and fetch someone else. It doesn't matter who it is. I can manage this one I went on with 498 and Sexton was brought in by 433. I had never seen Sexton before. Beatrice Church gave evidence "My husband was on the area steps to say good-night to friends when the police-constable accused him of using obscene language. He denied it. A quarter of an hour later we were in the room when the two police constables came in and seized my husband. 433 was boozed and fell

over my children. He dragged my husband out and hit him three times. I followed as far as the Lock Bridge. I went to the station to ask for bail. I said the police-constable was drunk. He (sergeant) said, 'I know that,' and said it ought to be reported. I did not see Sexton in Cirencester Street or at the station. I was sent out of the charge room into another room." William Bradley, 51, Cirencester Street, horse dealer, stated: "I got home about quarter to one. Church asked me in to have a drink. I went to his room. A gentleman and a police-constable at the top of the steps asked his name, and he gave it. I went home then opposite. Then I heard him calling 'Mother,' I went back and saw the two police-constables dragging Church up the area steps. I did not see Sexton there. I don't Know him." The case was remanded to the 7th. Inspector Stock said, "I was at the station from 10 p.m., 6th, till two a.m., 7th. I took the charge against Knight at 1.15 a.m. William Howard was brought in at 1.20 a.m. Prisoners were brought in about two. I did not see Sexton till he was brought in and charged. Prisoners made no reply. (Cross-examined by sexton.) Prisoners were brought in together. I did not see Sexton outside the station. I have not seen Mrs. Knight till now. Sexton made no reply to the charge and made no complaint. (By the Court.) Anyone coming for bail must see me. Heard sold me the same as the police-constables. He came in at the same time as the prisoners. After taking the charge against Howard I told Police-constable Adams to go back and help Police-constable Jenkin. I absolutely deny speaking to Sexton in the police station. My office is close to the door. I did not see Sexton or Mrs. Knight. Sergeant Richardson, was not in the station till two am. He had an appointment elsewhere for 1.30." He was recalled the next day and said: "The time of taking the charge is entered on the charge sheet as two a.m. I did not see Sexton till he was brought in and charged. Prisoners made no reply." Sergeant Richardson was then called by Sexton and stated: "I got to the station at two am. I saw Sexton in Harrow Road about one a.m., 200 yards from the station. He said he wanted to bail out a man named Knight. I asked when he was arrested, and he told me. I told him he had better let Knight have a sleep and come back later and I would bail him out on his (Sexton's) bail. I next saw Sexton at two a.m., when he was in the dock. I have known Sexton for some time. I believe he is very respectable. (By the Court.) Where Sexton spoke to me was five minutes walk from Cirencester Street. That would not be on Sexton's way home. I am not sure of the time. I can't say in what direction he went. I went on mist the police-station. He did not come with me." Sexton then gave evidence; "Ernest Walter Sexton (defendant), 12, Elgin Crescent Mews North Coachman for three years to Ives and Son. I was in the Elgin' public-house from 10 p.m., 5th, till 12.25 a.m., 6th. My house is 40 yards off. Mr. Ives was with me. At 12.25 I went back to my stables. There was a bother in the mews and Knight, was arrested. After that I saw his mother in Portsdown Road. Mr.

Wedger and Mr. Barnes were with her. I went with all three to Carlton Bridge Police Station. (I first went home to put a collar and tie on.) We got to the station about one or 1.10. a.m. The door was shut. Mrs. Knight went to the door. I did not go in the stations at that time. Mrs. Knight did not go in, but was answered at the door. We left about 1.20. I took Mrs. Knight to the coffee stall close to the station. We were there 10 minutes. Mrs. Knight then went away. Barnes, Wedger, and I then waited quarter of an hoor on the footway outside the station till quarter to two. I then saw Sergeant Richardson outside the station. He was coming from West-bourne Park Station way. He asked me what I wanted, and I told him. He said, 'Oh, come along—that's only a matter of a minute. 'I went into the station with Richardson, and I heard him say to the inspector in his office, 'There's a man Knight here, and someone is here to bail him out.' Richardson went to the charge-room and shut the door. Inspector Stock then came out to me and said that Knight would not be released till four o'clock. I was about to leave the station when I was surrounded by policemen and thrown into the dock with Church and charged. I had never seen Church before is my life. I turned my back to Church and said I did not want to be mixed up with that class of man, as I was gentleman's coachman. They would not listen to me. I know Cirencester Street, but I have never been in it. The police have made a great mistake. I spoke to Richardson about 20 to 2. I was put in the dock about five minutes after first speaking to Richardson. I told Inspector stock I had just spoken to him at his office door. My two friends were waiting on the station steps while I went in. Wedger is on a jury to-day. Jenkin's evidence is untrue. He did not have me in custody. Heard's evidence is absolutely untrue, and so is Adams's. I told Inspector Stock they had made a big mistake and that I had two friends outside. I did not ask for my friends. I was not allowed to speak. I was hushed up. Heard tells a lie in saying he saw me strike the police-constable. There was no crowd at the station—only five or six of us." Recalled the next day, he stated, "I accept Wedger's statement that he lost sight of me at 1.25 to 1.30. I don't admit it was two a.m when I was charged. Between the time Wedger lost sight of me and when I was charged I was in the police-station. My evidence of yesterday is correct." Ellen Knight, 16, Elgin Mews North (widow), was called by Sexton and stated: "My son was locked up. I know Sexton as a neighbour. I left home at 12.45 and met Wedger and Barnes in Portsdown Road. Sexton ran up, too, and said he would come after putting a collar and tie on. He came back with a collar and tie on. That would be about quarter to one. We all four went 10 Carlton Bridge Station. We got there about 1.5 a.m. The door was partly closed. I went up the steps and the men remained at the bottom. I saw someone (much stouter than Inspector Stock). I told my business, and was told to come later between four and five. I came down the steps and Sexton took me to the coffee stall close by and I had some tea. I left the three men at 1.30 at

the coffee stall and went home Sexton had been with me all the time. I became bail for my son and for Sexton." The next witness was "Alfred Barnes, 13, Elgin Terrace (driver to Vanguard Company). Have known Sexton three months. I have heard none, of the evidence. I saw Sexton in the Lord Elgin public-house at 10 p.m., August 5. I remained till 12 and stood outside for threequarters of an hour. Wedger was in the public-house. I saw Sexton at quarter to I in the Mews. Wedger and Mrs. Knight were there. We all four went to Carlton Bridge Station. We got there about quarter past one. I went to the door, but not to the office. Mrs. Knight went to the door. We three waited outside. I and Wedger went round the corner. Mrs. Knight went home about 1.30. Sexton left us to speak to a sergeant, and I and Wedger went back. I thought Sexton had gone home. I was surprised to see him come out of the station at four a.m. when I went about Knight's bail. It was about two o'clock when I went home. We stopped there about a quarter of an hour after Sexton went to the sergeant. We were speaking to Sexton quite five minutes after Mrs. Knight left us. There was no crowd outside the station. I and Wedger had a cup of tea at the coffee stall after Sexton disappeared. Mrs. Knight left at 1.30. We then talked with Sexton for five minutes. Sexton then went to a sergeant and talked with him. I and Wedger were then together there quite 20 minutes after that before going home." On the 8th Sexton called Harry Wedger, who stated. I know Sexton for five or six years. I see him pretty often. On the 6th I saw him at the Elgin public-house about 10.30 p.m. I was with him till 1.25. I went with Barnes and Sexton from Elgin Mews to Carlton Bridge Police Station. I lost sight of Sexton there at 1.25 a.m." The next witness was, "Frederick West, 13, Elgin Mews North, coachman. On the night of the 6th at 10 p.m. I went with Sexton to the Elgin. Just before one a.m. I saw Sexton in the Mews." Then Church called a witness, James David Ratty, 49, Cirencester Street, engine driver, who said. "Just before one a.m. on the 7th inst. I was leaning out of my window and saw two police-constables arrest a man (I believe Howard). After they had gone I saw a police-constable and a man in private clothes come and speak to Church on his area, steps. The police-constable and man came back about a quarter past one with two other police-constables. Two of the police-constables went down Church's area and the other two (one police-constable and man) stood at the top till the two police-constables brought Church up the area steps and took him away." Then Ellen Hams was called, of 52, Cirencester Street (married). "I was awakened by Mrs. Church's screams. I got up and saw two police-constables pulling Church out of his room. (By the Court). I stood on the kitchen stairs. I live in the same house."

Mr. Paul Taylor, before convicting, heard 15 witnesses—four for the prosecution and 11 for the defence, and then convicted and fined Church 20s. and Sexton 40s.

ERNEST WALTER SEXTON , 12, Elgin Mews. I have been coachman to Ives and Sons, job masters, for three years. I had previously

been in the Army, and left in 1901 with my discharge marked "Good." On Bank Holiday, August 5, I returned to the mews at 6.30 p.m., took my horses out, went upstairs and had tea, and returned into the stable at 7.30 p.m., when Frederick Invest spoke to me. I went on with my work until 10.15, when we went across to the "Lord Elgin" public-house; stayed half an hour having one drink, and returned; visited the "Lord Elgin" again at 11.15, remained half an hour having one drink, and made a third visit shortly after, remaining till 12.25, just before closing time. Invest was with me all the evening. When we returned at 12.25 Invents sister was at a neighbour's playing and singing, and we stood outside listening for about a quarter of an hour. I then went up to my bedroom and partly undressed. I heard a noise, looked out, and saw that one or two constables had hold of Knight, and were taking him for being drunk. I saw Mrs. Knight (Knight's mother), spoke to her, returned and put my clothes on, and followed and caugtht her. As I left the mews I heard the church clock strike one. Wedger and Barnes were with her, and we all four walked to the police station, which took about 20 minutes. Mrs. Knight went to the station door and returned to us. We went to a coffee stall, had a cup of tea, returned again to the station door, spoke to Police-constable Sharp, and Mrs. Knight left. I then saw Sergeant Richardson, whom I knew, coming over Carlton Bridge towards the station. When he got outside of the station I spoke to him, and followed him into the station. He spoke to the inspector, and left me outside the inspectors door, he going into the charge room. Inspector Stock shortly after spoke to me. I said, "Thank y—"when four men, two in uniform and two in plain clothes, ran me in the charge room, when I was placed in the dock by the side of Church, whom I did not know, and we were jointly charged with obstructing the police in the execution of their duty. Stock followed me into me charge room. I said to him, "Why, you have just told me you would let Knight out about four o'clock, that I need not wait any longer, and it would be all right. "I also told him about Richardson bringing me into the station. I asked Church if he had ever seen me before, and he answered, "No." I had gone there to assist Mrs. Knight to bail her son out. I was placed in a cell, and remained till about four a.m., when Mrs. Knight returned to bail her son out, and she bailed me out as well. The next morning I was charged before Mr. Paul Taylor, and was convicted and fined 40s. or a month; I paid the fine. I have never been is Cirencester Street in my life—I know it lies off the Harrow Road. I did not try to pull Jenkin away from a prisoner. I was not in Jenkin's custody with Church in Cirencester Street. I was perfectly sober. No charge has been made that I was the worse for drink.

Cross-examined. This was a serious matter to me as a coachman. I drive for a particular lady and gentleman. When I heard the clock strike one I was at the corner of the mews. I told the magistrate we got to the station about one or 1.10 a.m. I heard witnesses say they heard the clock strike one when I was just outside the mews.

I was overcome with the case and excited. I could not say whether one or two constables took Knight. I saw one take him round the corner by a van and another man followed. I had only had four drinks at the Lord Elgin altogether; they were shandy-bitter, mild and bitter, and stout and mild. Sharp, Police-constable 290 A, is the man I spoke to at the station door. He said to Mrs. Knight, "They are taking charges; call back in about two hours." There was no woman there with Mrs. Knight. A constable shut the door. A few minutes afterwards she knocked at the door, Sharp opened it and she asked to bail her son out. Sharp said, "Come again in two tours." I said, "Cannot we have Knight now—he will be all right now—he cannot get any more to drink," and we were told to come back again in an hour's time. We went back the second time because Mrs. Knight's son was starting work the next morning,' and she wanted to get him out at once. Mrs. Knight then said, "I will get off home," and left Wedger, Barnes, and myself outside the station. I then spoke to Richardson. I did not mention the second visit of Mrs. Knight to the station or that I spoke to Sharp before the magistrate. I was flurried and did not give all my evidence. I have known Richardson four or five years frequently spoken to him, never had any quarrel with him, and so far as I know he is a perfectly reliable officer and a kind-hearted man. When he came up to me at the station he said, "Hullo, old boy, what are you doing up here?" I said, "There is a neighbour in the Mews in for being drunk." He said, "Come along with me, old boy, it is merely a matter of a second." Then he took me into the passage and left me outside the inspector's office. He went in and said to the inspector, "You have man here of the name of Knight—we want to take him out." Then Richardson went into the charge-room, telling me to wait outside. After seven or eight minutes Stock came out and said, "I should not wait any longer if I were you, we will let him out about four—he will be all right." I was about to thank him and go home when I was pounced upon by Jenkin, Adamms, a third policeman, Heard, and another man in plain clothes. I was pushed and pulled down and kicked, my trousers were all torn down the pocket, and I was pulled off my feet. Jenkin, Adams, the third policeman, and the plain clothes man were drunk—Heard was noticeably drunk. Stock and Richardson were not drunk. I did not say to the inspector, "All these men are drunk"—they would not listen to me. I said they were drunk before Mr. Paul Taylor, and repeated it before Mr. Plowden. If it is not on the depositions (which were read over to and signed by me), it is because I did not pay sufficient attention to it, and it was a mistake. Mr. Plowden asked me, "Would you say that it was an honest mistake on the part of the police?" and I said, "Yes." Jenkin was the most drunk of the lot, Adams next, Heard not quite so bad. They were all drunk. They did not absolutely fall about—they were incapable. They all jumped off the form in the charge-room. I was not struck—they simply wanted to charge me. I cannot explain the reason—"I did not meet Richardson at one

a.m. outside the Prince of Wales. I could go from the Mews to the station past the Prince of Wales. I told Mr. Paul Taylor I got to the station at about one or 1.10 a.m. I now say it was 20 past one if I left the Mews at one a.m. I could not possibly have been at the station at 1.10. We came out of Elgin Mews into Portsdown Road, along Elgin Avenue, to the corner of Harrow Road, where the Prince of Wales public-house is. I called Richardson as my witness; it it not true that he met me at the Prince of Wales. I was not alone when I spoke to Richardson. I did not say that Knight was locked up for a drop of loose. He did not say, "Let him take a sleep; come to the station later on and I will bail him out." I did not go to Cirencester Street.

Re-examined. I never had any unpleasantness with Richardson.

To the Recorder. In the station I appealed to Richardson to protect me. He made no reply. I also appealed to the Inspector; he did nothing. I called Richardson as a witness because I thought he would speak the truth and say that he had taken me into the station. I also appealed to Inspector Stock, and he made no reply. Both Stock and Richardson must have known the charge was false. I cannot explain why the Inspector should take this false charge against me. The whole thing is a mystery to me. Until the next day I thought that I was charged with trying to rescue Church. I was not drunk and I have a clear recollection. Richardson was sober. It it a mystery and I cannot explain it—that is what I say. (To the Jury.) Richardson and Stock were not drunk.

(Tuesday. November 26.)

ROSE SEXTON , 12, Elgin Mews, wife of Ernest Walter Sexton. On Bank Holiday, August 5, I was at home all day. My husband came home about 6 or 6.30 p.m. with the carriage for the last time. He took his horse out, washed the carriage, then came upstairs to tea; had tea, and put his feet up and went to sleep till about 9.30 p.m. Then he went down to clean his horse. Looking out of the window, I saw him come into the yard again at about 10.30. He went to the Lord Elgin with Invest and returned about 12.25. He stood listening to Miss Invest singing for a little time and then came in to go to bed. From the window we saw strange men, who came into tht Mews singing. The police told them to move on and they went out. There were a lot of people; two policemen came round the corner and arrested Knight at about 12.40. Mrs. Knight came out and said. "Oh, my son is taken." She went in and put her clothes on and went to bail her son out. My husband ran to the top of the Mews and spoke to Mrs. Knight; returned, put his collar and tie on, and followed her. As he left the mews I heard the clock strike one—I put my watch right by it.

Cross-examined. I do not say that there was a bother in the mews. (To the Recorder.) Knight was not doing anything when taken. (To Mr. Muir.) Wedger and Barnes went up to the top of

the mews with Mrs. Knight. When my husband was before Mr. Paul Taylor he was a little bit confused and did not know what he was saying. I have not altered the time because I heard witnesses say the clock struck one as my husband left the mews.

Re-examined. At the time my husband left me he was perfectly sober.

JESSIE JOHNSON , 9, Elgin Mews, wife of William Henry Johnson. On August 6. at about 12.45 a.m., I saw Knight arrested. Mrs. Knight followed. Sexton went after her and spoke to her, returned, and went upstairs. My window faces his house, and I saw him in his room putting his collar on. He then went after Mrs. Knight, and as he turned the corner to leave the mews I heard the clock strike one.

Cross-examined. I am certain there were two policemen who arrested Knight. I should think it took Sexton a quarter of an hour from when he ran after Mrs. Knight first until he left the mews; I could not remember whether he ran back or not. When the clock struck I said to my husband, "It is going one." He was sitting by the fire and came to the window as Sexton turned the corner.

Re-examined. From the position of my window I can see further along than Mrs. Sexton can from her window.

RUBY BOSMAN , 15, Elgin Mews. On August 5 my husband returned home at 12.30. He put his horses in, dressed, fed, and watered them, and tidied the stable up, which took about quarter of an hour, when I saw Knight arrested Mrs. Knight was upset. She went and put her things on and left the mews, I think, at about four or five minutes to one. Sexton ran after Mrs. Knight without his collar and tie on, he returned and went in, came out again with them on, and followed Mrs. Knight at, I believe, three or four minutes to one.

Cross-examined. Two policemen arrested Knight—he was the worse for drink. I should think it took Sexton three minutes to come back and put his collar and tie on.

KATHLEEN INVEST , 90, Maida Vale. On Bank Holiday, August 5, I was at my brother's in Elgin Mews, and at a quarter to one I saw Knight arrested. Mrs. Knight went up to him and followed. I saw Sexton go after her at one p.m.—just as he left my brother drew my attention to the fact that the clock was striking one.

Cross-examined. Two policemen in uniform arrested Knight. I first mentioned this when I was asked to go to the solicitor's office—that is more than a week ago. I could not say whether it was a month ago. I remember quite well the clock striking one on the morning of August 6, but I cannot say when I went to the solicitor's office.

FREDERICK INVEST , 13, Elgin Mews, coachman. On August 5 at 10 p.m. I asked Sexton to go to the Lord Elgin for a drink; we remained three-quarters of an hour and returned. We went again shortly afterwards, and again at 11.30, finally leaving the Lord Elgin at 12.25, just before closing time. Sexton and I were listening to

the singing at one of the houses in the mews for about a quarter of an hour. I and Sexton then went indoors, and about three or four minutes after I saw from my window Knight come out of his stable. As he came out of the doorway two policemen came and tools hold of him. He was not drunk, but certainly had had a glass or two. Mrs. Knight came out and followed with Barnes and Wedger. Sexton put his collar and tie on and went after her. As he left the mews I heard the clock strike one and turned to see if my watch was right.

Cross-examined. I was then a teetotaler. I drank cider at the public-house. I generally look at my watch when I hear the clock strike. I remember this particular occasion, because Sexton has been charged. I said the clock struck one before the magistrate. I was in Court when Sexton and Mrs. Knight gave evidence before Mr. Paul Taylor—I do not know why it was not put down that I said the clock struck one. Barnes left the Lord Elgin with Sexton and me—he was quite sober. I did not see him turned out.

Re-examined. I have heard since that he was turned out. Sexton With sober—he had been drinking mild and bitter or stout and mild.

ELLEN KNIGHT . 16, Elgin Mews. Stephen Knight is my son, lives with me, and is 31 yean of age. He is at present in regular employment for a company. On August 5 I had been one to tea and returned home at 12 o'clock midnight. My son Stephen and his brother, who also lives with me, were standing outside the "Lord Elgin," which is at the top of the mews. I beckoned to them and they walked home with me. We got to 16, Elgin Mews, at 12.5. There was singing in the mews, and they remained outside to listen. Stephen had had something to drink, but he knew what he was doing. I went upstairs and was cutting sandwiches for the morning when my daughter called me to the window, when I saw my son arrested by two policemen in uniform at, I should think, 12.45. I went downstairs and expostulated, but found it was no use, and they took him away. He has never been arrested before. I went upstairs, got my things on and took my rent book, as I have been living where I am now for nearly 28 years, in order to bail him out. Going up the roadway I saw Wedger and Barnes, who offered to come with me Sexton came up without coat and waistcoat or collar and tie and spoke to me, ran back and dressed himself, and joined us in the Portsdown Road. It was then, I should think, about one a.m. We all four went straight to the Carlton Bridge Police Station. I was rather tired, and it took us about 20 minutes. I am certain Sexton did not leave us on the way. We did not go near Cirencester Street, nor meet two constables with a prisoner, nor did Sexton interfere with any constable on the way. I was walking in front and the three men were a little behind. When we arrived at the station I went to the door, which was open, and saw a number of policemen; a stout one who spoke very nicely to me asked me what I wanted. I said, "The police have brought here a man of the name of Knight. I am his mother; might I bail him out?" He said, "Well, madam, we are very busy taking charges now, if you come in two hours you can

bail him out." I joined Sexton, Barnes, and Wedger, and told them what had passed. Sexton went up the steps and said to the same policeman, "Cannot we get him out?" I said, "We will take great care of him if you will only let him out" I was very anxious because he had to go to work at six a.m. The policeman said he was very sorry, but he could not let him out till four o'clock. I then went with the three men to a coffee stall and we bad a cup of tea. Sexton said he knew the sergeant and would try and find him, as he thought that he could get him out directly. I then left at about 1.30 or 1.35. Sexton had been with me from one a.m. to that time. Sexton, Barnes, and Wedger were all sober. It took me about 20 minutes to get home.

Cross-examined. We went along Elgin Avenue and crossed the Harrow Road at the "Prince of Wales," but on the opposite side. I now identify the polite policeman as Sharp; he was quite sober, and was very civil and nice to me. My son takes too much to drink at times. I could not say if there were other people with my son when he was arrested. I was very much unset. When I first went to the station there was a woman in front of me who spoke to Sharp about bail for someone else. I was present before tie magistrate when Sexton gave evidence, but do not recollect what he said. I gave evidence after him. If it is put down that I said we got to the station at 1.5 a.m. it should have been "1.25." I cannot account for Sexton saying we got there about one or 1.10 a.m. I only spoke of one visit to the station door. I forgot that Sexton came up again with me. We went up the second time, but I was worried and did not think of it. Before Mr. Plowden I heard Sexton speak of two visits to the police station door, and that brought it back to my mind I heard Barnes give evidence that we got to the police station at 1.15 by the station clock. I said to the lady sitting next to me when Sexton was giving evidence that I must say she same.

Re examined. I said I must say the same to the lady, because I found I had made a mistake.

HENRY WEDGES 12; Elgin Terrace, labourer. On August 5 I was with Sexton from 10.30 to 1.25 a.m. We went to the "Lord Elgin" at 100, stayed till closing time, returned to the mews and listened to a sing-song that was going on. At one a.m. Sexton, Mrs. Knight, Barnes, and myself went to the police station to bail out Stephen Knight. We walked very slowly, and I should say that it would take us 25 minutes to get to the station from the mews. We were all perfectly sober. Having got to the station, I saw Sexton and Mrs. Knight go up to the station door. They were told to wait. We went to a coffee stall and had some tea. Mrs. Knight went home, and I went round to the side of the station and returned to Barnes and Sexton. I said to Barnes, "You had better go and see whether they are coming out or no." He went to the door, and they said, "Have you got your rent back?" Barnes said "No." Then I said, 41 We will go back and fetch Mrs. Knight," and we left.

Cross-examined. I was in the "Lord Elgin" from 10.15 closing time—in and out. Barnes left with me. I believe he was ordered out in consequence of a dispute over twopence change, but I was outside at the time. I did not take particular note of the times when these things occurred. I heard the clock strike one as I was going across Portsdown Road. I said before Mr. Paul Taylor. "I know Sexton for five or six years. I see him pretty often. On the 6th I saw him in the 'Lord Elgin' public-house about 10.30 p.m. I was with him till 1.25. I went with Barnes and Sexton from Elgin Mews to Carlton Bridge Police Station. I lost sight of Sexton there at 1.25 am." That is all I said.

Re-examined. I am quite sure when I, Wedger, Mrs. Knight, and Sexton came down Elgin Avenue Sexton remained in my company all the way from the mews to the police station; he did not leave us at any part of the journey, and we went nowhere near Cirencester Street.

ALFRED BARNES , 13, Elgin Terrace, mechanic to Vanguard Omnibus Company. On August 5 Knight was arrested in Elgin Mews, and I followed with Mrs. Knight and Wedger. As we left Portsdown Road I heard the clock chime one. Sexton joined us and we got to the station at 1.15 by the clock outside the station, which I noticed. I saw Mrs. Knight and Sexton go to the station door. Five minutes after we went to the coffee stall and had tea. We were there about four minutes. Mrs. Knight then left at 1.25 am. Wedger and Sexton stood outside talking together about five minutes. Sexton then went to speak to Sergeant Richardson, who was standing against tot coffee stall. Wedger and I went round the corner because we heard screams of "Murder." I am quite clear the sergeant spoke to him after Mrs. Knight had left. I did not see Sexton again till he was bailed out at four a.m.

Cross-examined. I was turned out of the "Lord Elgin." I made a bit of a bother with the landlord at not getting my change. I was not refused drink that night. I was quite sober. Two constables were brought in. I did pass the remark to people in the bar that it would take three something policemen to have me out. It was only a joke. I did not see the police behind me. I gave evidence before Mr. Paul Taylor: "I have known Sexton for three months. I have heard none of the evidence. I saw Sexton in the 'Lord Elgin' public-house at 10 p.m. on August 5. I remained till 12 and then stood outside for three quarters of an hour." That is not true. I did not have sufficient time to say what I ought to have said. The magistrate seemed in a hurry. It did not look very nice to explain that I got turned out of the "Lord Elgin"—that is partly why I said I was standing outside three-quarters of an hour—they put things very low in the papers. I have been barred the use of the "Lord Elgin" since that Bank Holiday night on account of getting turned out. I have had drinks there which have been paid for by others.

(To Mr. Muir) I took particular notes of the times at which events happened on this night. The first time I noted was the time

we were going to Elgin Mews. That was one o'clock. I noticed that on account of the clock chiming one. The next time I noted was the time we arrived at the station—a quarter past one. I saw that by the clock just outside the station. The next time I noted was the time I left. I saw that by the same clock. The time was exactly halfpast one to a tick. I did not take exact notice of the times after that on account of myself and Wedger going out together; we went to the mews for Mrs. Knight. I did not think there was any cause to note the time after half-past one. The cause of my noting the time before half-past one and at half-past one was, I was anxious to get home. I was out till after four o'clock in the morning. After getting to half-past one I thought it did not matter as to noting the times. I took them quite accurately. At to my telling the magistrate I got there about a quarter past one, I think it was quite sufficient when I said that.

WILLIAM JOHN CHURCH , horse keeper. I live at 52, Cirecester Street. I was out hawking with my wife on August Bank Holiday, selling Japanese hats; I go by hawking when I have no work. We sold all out, and got home about six a clock. I then had tea and laid down. I got up about a quarter to nine and took the "missus" for a ride on the tram. We got back to Lock Bridge ac a quarter to 11, and went to the "Princess of Wales" public-house, staying there until halfpast 12. After that we then went home to supper. My mother was with us about half an hour, and I should think she left about a quarter to one. There was also my step-father with us, but he had no supper with us. I said at the police court that I saw him before we went down the steps, but I, made a mistake, it was just afterwards. It would be about 10 minutes to one when I saw him at. my house. My mother left us about a quarter past one. When we walked up the steps to see her off I heard someone speaking to me from above—that would be on the ground, because we live in the basement. I looked up and saw a policeman—Jenkin—who asked me for my name and address, and also a man in plain clothes, who I now know is named "Heard." I asked the constable what he wanted my name and address for. He said he was going to summon me for being abusing language. I told him there must be some mistake, or else he was drunk. He did not say anything about obstruction or charge me with anything but obscene language. When I said he was drunk he said nothing. I told him my name and address. I first said "John L. Sullivan," as I thought he was joking. I then gave him my right name and address. He wrote it down on a piece of paper outside his pocket book and placed the two in his pocket. The constable and the other man walked up the street towards Harrow Road. I wished my mother "Goodnight" and went down into my room. After taking off my could and vest I finished my supper. After that I was undoing my boots—about half-past one or 20 minutes to two—when I heard some noise coming from the passage, and Jenkin opened the room door followed by Adams. I recognised Adams quite well as the man who had spoken to me before. I swear he came

into the room with Jenkin. Jenkin said, "I want you." I said, "What for?" He said, "Never mind, come along with me." He they came round to the other side of the bedstead and caught hold of me and started dragging me towards the door. When I got to the other side of the bedstead Adams caught hold of the side of me and between them dragged me outside. I was taken into the passage, where I was struck several blows. I could not say what with I think it was Jenkin who struck me on the back of the shoulder. Adams did not take any part in this beating that I am aware of. I could not see what it was with until I got into the area, and then I saw that Jenkin had his truncheon drawn. He gave me a couple of light taps on my head, but the majority of blows fell on my shoulder. As far as I know, Adams did not strike me. He said to Jenkin, "Put that thing away, you do not want to use that." I should think it was a dozen blows all about the shoulders. I showed my wife the bruises next day. I was taken into the street and along Cirencester Street, until we got to the corner of Desborough Street. I could not say how far it is from my house. I got about as far as Desborouph Street, where I was thrown down by Jenkin forcing my arm up my back and forcing me down on to the ground. I received several back handed smacks across my mouth from Jenkin, which made my lips swell. I got up, and we were just outside the infirmery in the Harrow Road when Adams said to Jenkin, "Go back and take someone else, it does not matter who it is; I can manage him"—meaning myself. While I was being managed by Adams there was no further violence. We walked to the station until we turned round just by the "Princess of Wales." We had not got a long way round the corner before Jenkin joined us again, but he had no one with him at that time. He walked with me and Adams to the station. When we got there I was told to sit down on a form. I was sitting there with my head between my bands three or four minutes when I heard a hustle at the door. I looked up and I was Sexton being brought in. I did not know him before, and had never seen him in Cirencester Street. That was the first time I saw him—in Carlton Bridge Station. We were both put in the dock and charged with obstructing the police while in the execution of their duty. I said nothing. Sexton protested, but he was told to "shut his row" by some man who stood on the left-hand side. Sexton was saying he had come there to bail somebody out. We were looked up and bailed out at four o'clock in the morning. The next morning we were taken up before the magistrate, and after being remanded were fined. I did not see Howard's arrest. I knew nothing whatever about it until in the Carlton Bridge Police Station. I took no part in the attempted rescue; I was not in the street on that night at all. He was not a friend of mine, and I had never spoken to him. I heard Howard speak in the cell and knew he was locked up.

Cross-examined. This was the first time in my life that such a thing had ever happened to me as this. I was not very indignant, at the station at the way I was treated; I was upset, but did not show

it. I could not say if Inspector Stock was the person who took the charge against me, but I saw him there, as I know him now. There was someone sitting there when I was charged. It was not the first time I have been to a police station. I did not complain to anybody of the way in which I had been treated by the police, because it is a well known fact that the police ill use you when you get inside if you say anything that upsets them. (Inspector Stock was called into Court, but witness was unable to identify him.) I did not notice whether there was an inspector or a sergeant. I should think there were about 10 or 12 policemen there in uniform. There was another charge waiting before I went in. I think there were two or three thers. None of the policemen ill used me. I thought they would ill use me if I told those in authority how badly I had been treated. I have never been ill used before by the police at all, that I am aware of I have been arrested four or five times, I should think altogether. The first was over the "Horsehair" affair. I was charged with stealing horsehair and sentenced to three months' hard labour. I pleaded guilty. On that occasion I was arrested by the Great Central police, and handed over to a Metropolitan police-constable, but nobody knocked me about then. Three or four years ago I was arrested for being drunk while in charge of a horse and fined 20s. There was no ill treatment. About the same time I was fined 40s., or a month, for being drunk and disorderly and assaulting the police. I went to prison, as I could not pay the fine. There was another occasion, about ten years ago, when I had four months' hard labour for stealing fruit. There was no ill-treatment that time. I did say before Mr. Plowden, "I was sentenced to a month's hard labour four years ago for assaulting my wife," but Mr. Plowden said that it was not assaulting my wife at all—it was assaulting the policeman; it was the same case as I have just spoken of. Adams has never had me in custody, and as far as I know he did not know me, or where I lived—neither did Jenkin. I was not doing anything at all in the street to justify being spoken to by the constables. I was coming up the area steps quietly, saying goodnight to my father and mother. I cannot suggest any reason why the policeman should interfere with me, only, as suggested to Mr. Muskett, that undoubtedly there might have been a man run through the front door, as it is always open, who might have been very much like me. There is a man in the street who is very much like me. Adams was not drunk—Jenkin was. Adams was perfectly sober and acted in a straightforward way as regards me. He helped to drag me up the steps. I cannot say if that is a proper thing to do; I do not know the law. I asked them to let me walk up the area steps; so did my wife. There was one in front and one behind, and that is how they hustled me. I did not show my swollen lip. I showed it to Mr. Ratty, the man who bailed me out, as soon as I came outside. When I was asked for my name and address and gave it as "John L. Sullivan" the man not in uniform said, "Why don't you give your right name, Bill?" because he had heard my wife address me as "Bill"

That is the man I know now as Heard. I saw him inside the station a few minutes after I got there. I cannot suggest what Heard wanted to come to the station for unless as an associate of the police. He told the inspector what he had seen, which was exactly what Adams and Jenkin said that they had seen. Every word of it was untrue. Adams and Jenkin said I had obstructed them while they were arresting Howard. Heard said he saw Sexton strike the police-constable but did not see me do anything. All the constables in the station were, as far as I could say, sober and acting properly as far as I was concerned. I put a lot of questions to Jenkin, he being the one I knew was drunk. On August 6 I gave evidence before Mr. Paul Taylor. I think my wife and Mr. Bradley were called before I went in the box. I cannot say whether I was asked whether I saw Sexton brought into the station. I was sitting at the left hand of the charge room door at the 'station and saw him fetched in. There were about five persons, including Sexton, Heard, Jenkin, and Adams. I told Mr. Paul Taylor, "I went on with 498"—that is Adams—but I do not think I said that "Sexton was brought in by 433"—that is Jenkin. I was sentenced to 14 days, which I did. We were living then at 52, Cirencester Street. Proceedings were already taken, as far as my wife told me, against the police. My wife told me I had to go and see Mr. Timewell. I know him now as the "Honourable" Secretary of the Police and Public Vigilance Society. I have seen him a dozen times since about this case. He came to take our statements. He came again to see whether I had been molested by the police, as some of the other witnesses had. All I expect to get out of this case is being paid for my attendances at this Court—4s. 3d. per day for the time I have been here. (To the Judge.) I have not done any work since August 6 as a horsekeeper. The hawking business has not been prosperous—it is a bad time for hawking just now. (To Mr. Travers Humphreys.) Last month I had to get relief from the relieving officer—Mr. Downing. I did not tell him that Mr. Timewell had told me I should get £40 or £50 out of this case—I told him I had heard I might get it—a compensation. I have heard it from some friends of my own and papers I have been reading. I refuse to give their names; they are not witnesses in this case. People have not told me what Sextxon or Howard are going to get out of this. I might have been three or four times to the relieving officer in the last two or three months. I have not ever thought who is going to pay me £40 or £50. I only know by reference to the commission books where a man was awarded £20 damages against a policeman. I did not give evidence before the Royal Commission; I have only been reading the books. There is a book published about it by Timewell. I think I am quite sure about the times; as near as I say they were about—I do not say absolutely for certain not within an hour.

Re-examined. When I was sentenced to three months' hard labour for stealing horsehair, I had four little starving children at home, and I did it for them. £50 would not compensate me if I'm innecent

in this case. At no time from the moment I was arrested at my house until I reached the police station was any other person in custody with me. Until Sexton was brought into the charge room by those four or five men I still say upon oath that I had never seen him before in my life.

Mrs. BEATRICE CHURCH , 52, Cirencester Street, wife of William Church, the last witness. Last Bank Holiday I went out with my husband "costering." We returned home between six and seven o'clock. We then had tea and went out again alter I put my children to bed. I and my husband went out about half-past nine to College Park Hotel on the tram, returning home about half-past ten. We stayed downstairs for a few minutes, and then I and my husband came up the steps to go and have a little refreshment down the street. I saw my mother-in-law cross the road, and we asked her if she would partake of refreshment with us. She was not with us all the time as we were talking to a couple of friends in the public-house; and when we returned home I and my husband went down-stairs and asked my mother-in-law if she would have some supper, which she did. After supper my husband and mother-in-law went outside to say good night. My mother-in-law went across the road and we saw my father in-law. We asked him if he would like to have a bit of supper with us, and he came downstairs too. He said he did not want any supper, so we gave him a drop of beer. We took a pint and a half down, bat there were three of us to help drink that. We talked for a few minutes, and then I and my husband came out in the area to say good-night to my father-in-law and just before we got into the area we looked up and saw a constable standing there and a private gentleman who I now know to be Heard. The constable said to my husband he would have us up for obscene language. He would want our name and address. He got his pocket book out to write down the name and address. My husband said, "John L. Sullivan." The constable asked him if that was his right name, and my husband said, "If you want my right name, it is William John Church." The constable asked my husband if he lived there, and he said, "Yes." That was all that passed then. We went down into our room. My mother-in-law and father-in-law went home. This was about a quarter past one, or a very few minutes before. I was getting ready to go to bed, and my husband had got his boots and things off, when we heard a tramping of footsteps in the passage and two constables opened the door—Adams and Jenkin. Jenkin got hold of Mr. Church by the throat as he sat on the side of the bed. Adams flung the door wide open and it struck the bedstead; he stopped there. Jenkin caught my husband by the throat, and, in pulling him across, both he and my husband fell on my two little children, who lay on a chair bedstead. Adams caught hold of Jenkin and said, "Get up, Phil, you are hurting the children." They got up and dragged my husband out into the area, and Jenkin got his truncheon out and hit my husband three times on the forehead. Adams turned round to Police-constable Jenkin and said,

Put that away, it is not wanted." They got my husband to the street and dragged him along. I followed with my little baby in my arms. They got as far as Desborough Street, when they pushed my husband down. They got up and behind us there was another young constable (whom I have not been able to recognise), and Heard. who were following on behind. We all followed until we got to a street against the Lock Bridge, and this young policeman told me that if I did not take my child away he would hive me too. I took my child and went home. Mr. Ratty bailed out my husband. During the whole of the time I was following my husband, and during any time in the street, I never saw Sexton. The first time I saw him was the next morning in the dock alongside my husband. All the time in Cirencester Street the constables were taking only one man and that was my husband.

Cross-examined. There were three constables there. One stood at the gate on one side of the area and the private gentleman stood the other side. My husband is always sober; I have been married nine years; he is a good husband to me and my children; he never did such a thing as knock me about—he might push. He is a respectable man. That is his character as I would give it to him. I Had only had two drinks up at the College Park Hotel and two in the "Princess of Wales," at the bottom of our street. I could not say how many drinks my husband had, because I was interested with the people I was talking to. I do not say that he did have more than me, because I had the money. He went into public-houses to sell his things, and sometimes I went with him. If he had a drink every time he went into a public-house he would have been drunk. I and my husband had had that day about the same amount of drink we generally have. He might have had a little less or a little more. When he is out all day I do not know what drinks he has. When he comes home after that he is always sober. I might have said to the magistrate we had more drinks than usual that day. If I laid it, is was true. I never saw Jenkin or Adams in my life before. They did not know me or my husband. There was not any reason that I could see why Jenkin should want my husband's name and address. Heard said to my husband, "Go downstairs Bill, and don't be a fool," although he did not know him. I had not seen Heard before and I do not think my husband had. Four people came to arrest my husband—three policemen and Heard. Two of them stayed at the top of the steps and two came down. Jenkin said, "If you are John L. Sullivan, or Church, come along with me." Adams stood at the room door and heard that. When Jenkins seized my husband, Adams stood there and never said a word. My husband did not resist being arrested at all. All he tried to do was to free his throat. Jenkin and Adams were both drunk, I should say. Jenkin was worse that Adams. Jenkin was visibly drunk. I could see that Jenkin without any provocation pulled out his truncheon and hit my husband hard on the head. I am quite sure of that. He hit him hard enough for anybody to hear it. It did not seem to make a mark on Mr. Church's

forehead, but it seemed to make a mark when they pushed him down into the area. They bruised his shoulder. When my husband came back at four o'clock in the morning I did not notice any mark on the forehead; I noticed he had two thick lips. I did not look at his forehead; I was too much worried. I should have seen them the next day if he had all these blows on the forehead. The blows would have changed colour. I have seen a black eye—they change colour. I had not any idea, what my husband was being arrested for, only what Jenkin said, "You have been obstructing the police in the course of their duty." They fell over the children in the bed because they were so drunk. My little girl had a bruited foot. I mentioned it at the police court, but did not think there was need to produce the baby. I never saw Heard at the police station. I could not tell at all exactly the time I went there. It might have been half an hour or a little longer after my husband was arrested that I went to the police station. On the left hand side there, is the room where the dock is. There was a man and a woman sitting on the seat there in plain clothes. There was a young policeman sitting on a table. I asked him if I could have bail for my husband. I have not seen the policeman since. (Police-constable Sharp was called into court but was not recognised by the witness.) I do not know what other people had done, why they should be arrested, but my husband had done absolutely nothing. (Sergeant Richardson was here called into court.) That is not the sergeant I saw. He never had stripes on his arm. The policeman said, "Yes," I locked down the book, and said to me. "There is a man of the name of Howard been locked up; that is not the man you want?" I said, "No,". He said, "What is his name? I said, "William Church." He said, "Yes, you can bring up a rent book and he shall have bail." I said, "Thank you; you understand sir, that the constables that took him took him innocent, and they are drunk." Then the constable or sergeant, whoever it was, turned round and said "I know that; they ought to be reported." I am quite sure about that. It is quite true, as the rest of my evidence, that Richardson was not in either the Inspector's Room or the Charge Room. Cirencester Street is noisy on Saturday nights, but I do not know about Bank Holiday nights. It is during the day time on Bank Holidays and Saturdays. I am not very often out of a night time. It was not a bit noisy on this Bank Holiday. I reckon there were only myself, my husband, and my mother-in law that came up our way. I never saw anybody up the top end of the street or coming towards us. Not only my husband did nothing, but there was no disturbance for the police to come in. It was a quiet evening—unusually quiet for holiday times.

JAMES DAVID RATTY , 49, Cirencester Street, opposite the house where Church lives. I have been a locomotive engine driver, but I am now a stationary engine driver in the employ of the Westminster Supply Corporation. I live on the second floor above the basement, back and front. From my window I have a view of part of the way down the steps in front of Church's house. On August 5 I got home

about ten minutes past twelve. I had some supper, and was sitting by the window at about 20 minutes to one. I knew Howard by sight. The odd numbers are on one side and the even numbers on the other. The only thing that attracted my attention to anything taking place at Howard's house was two policemen coming down the street from Harrow Road. After the policemen had a little chat between themselves, they crossed over the road to Howard's house. At that time there was not any crowd, or fight, or anything of that kind. When they got to Howard's house they took him off his doorstep, which is a matter of between five or six feet from the public footpath. Howard was sitting on the doorstep. I did not see Howard do anything which would lead to the police taking him into custody. They took him up the street towards Harrow Road. I am not able to identify the constables who took him. They took him quietly. During the time that Howard was in their custody he did not behave in a violent manner. I had a clear view from 25 to 30 yards. I never saw anybody in the street at all; it was exceptionally quiet for Bank Holiday. As far as I could see there was no attempt to rescue Howard by anybody. I know Church by sight. To the best of my recollection the first I saw of him that night was when the police spoke to him on his steps. After the two constables had taken Howard away I still continued sitting at my window smoking. The next thing was, that a policeman came down the street, and another man in private clothes. That would be something like ten minutes after Howard was taken away—about one o'clock. I cannot recognise him as the same policeman. They came down the street from the Harrow Road, and having spoken to Brinksman (who lives next door to Church), the officer and the plain clothes man went to where Church was standing on the area steps. The policeman pulled a book out of his pocket. After that the constable and the plain clothes man went towards Harrow Road. I lost sight of them. Church went down his are again. I was still at my window smoking. I then saw three policemen and a plain clothes man coming along the street. Two constables went down, and one and the plain clothes man remained at the top. The two policemen were out of my sight for two or three minutes. I was not able to hear any conversation or scuffling. (To the Judge.) I heard a woman scream, but I could not say for certain who it was. It came from the direction of Church's house. I next saw these two policemen bring Church up the steps. They hurried him up the street, and the plain clothes man and the other officer followed on behind. They took him quietly. There was not anything which indicated that any of these constables were drunk as far as I could see. (To Mr. Elliott.) I could not see whatever took place at Desborough Street. Church was the only man in the custody of these officers. It was between 20 and 25 minutes past one when Church was taken away.

Cross-examined. I cannot see more than 25 yards up the street when I am leaning out of the window, but if I am sitting at the window by myself I can only see five or ten yards. The policemen

were about 10 or 15 yards away when I first saw them, and I never saw any other person in the street. I heard singing across the road and that was the only singing I heard; I do not think they were singing hymns. I do not know anything about the people living next to Howard; I never heard them singing. There was no sort of disturbance in the street whatever, and I do not think there was any reason for anyone to be arrested in the street. It was unusually quiet or Bank Holiday time. Howard went off quietly. I did not see anybody following them. If something happened more than 25 yards away I should be out of "the know" then. I should think it was about 75 yards from my house to Harrow Road. I did not hear any noise after Howard went, for a minute or two, and there was no noise in the street from beginning to end. The reason I stayed up so late was that I went to bail Church out. I have known Church as a neighbour some few months, living opposite him, and I know his wife; I do not know whether Mrs. Bradley is his mother or not, and I do not know her as old Mrs. Church, nor anyone as "old Mrs. Church" I know another woman called Mrs. Bradley by night, but I do not know exactly whether it is his mother or not. I cannot say that I have never spoken to her, because I saw her at Marylebone Police Court. I have not spoken to her apart from that that I am aware of. I swear I have not. I have only said to her, Good morning, Mrs. Church." I have no knowledge at all that a Mrs. Harris was there. I know nothing about Mrs. Bradley's usual condition. I do not know anything about the suggestion that Mrs. Bradley has said that Mrs. Church and myself were paid to give false evidence. I have never heard the conversation which took place. I know nothing at all about Mrs. Bradley calling myself and Mrs. Harris "false swearers," and that we were getting paid for false swearing. That conversation never took place to my knowledge. I do not know Mrs. Humphrey, who lives in the street. I know nothing at all about Mrs. Bradley being a very drunken woman. I say I know nothing about her; I have never seen her drunk to my knowledge.

Re-examined. I have been paid for loss of time that I lost from my work; I lost 10s.; I earn 35s. a week. The society has paid me. I had two days' work at the police court, for which I received the sum of 10s. I do not remember hearing anybody telling me that I was being bribed. I have been in regular employment for 18 1/2 years. I have always earned an honest living and I have never been in trouble. I have never had any difference with the police, nor any ill-feeling against them.

(Wednesday, November 27.)

WILLIAM HOWARD , 53, Cirencester Street. On August Bank Holiday I had been to the "Princess of Wales," and left at closing time. On arriving home I found the street door shut and sat down on the doorstep with my little daughter. My wife was with me and was asking permission of the lady that lives in the kitchen to go down.

that way and open the street door. Two policemen came down on the other side of the street, stood there two or three minutes, and then one of them (Adams) claimed me by the back of the neck and dragged me on to the pavement. The other constable (Jenkin) seized me by the left arm. I asked them what they were taking me for, and they said, "You have got to go to the station with us"; what for they did not explain. When we had got a little way up the street, Jenkin twisted my wrist and bent my arm right up my back. I had to bend and twist to avoid his blows and also to ease my arm. No one is the street had been causing any disturbance. They took me down Cirencester Street to the Harrow Road. No one made any attempt at rescue or struck at either of the constables or tried to pull either of the constables away. We got to the police station at 1.10 a.m. as near as I could possibly say. At the station a man named Knight was waiting to be charged. At the top of Woodchester Street I turned round to Adams and said, "Will you kindly take the other constable away, because I cannot put up with the pain any longer." He turned to Jenkin and said, "You go back and get a man for rescue." Jenkin struck me three times on the mouth coming up Cirencester Street. Jenkin then went away and Adams with another young constable took me to the station. I was charged with being drunk and disorderly.

Cross-examined by Mr. Muir. I was not drunk. I asked to see the doctor. When they opened the cell door I stood up. The doctor said, "Which is the prisoner?" And the inspector said, "That is him." He asked how long I had been there, and the inspector told him about half an hour. Then the doctor said to me, "How many glasses have you had?" I said, "About five or six all day." He said, "What of—whiskey?" I said, "No; I do not drink whiskey." Then he put something underneath my arm and asked me to stand on my feet. Then he asked me to walk up and down the cell. Then he and the inspector went the distance of about a yard from the cell door. I asked the doctor what he thought of me and he turned round and said, "Drunk." He looked into my eyes and asked me to stand on one foot and also to walk about. I was in the "Princess of Wales" about three hours and had three glasses. While we were sitting on the doorstep my little daughter was humming a little school song, "Ba, ba, blacksmith," or something similar to that. It might have been, "Ba, ba, black sheep." My wife was talking to Mrs. Evans, the lady who lives in the kitchen, and Mrs. Church was standing at the top of her area steps. Mrs. Evans said to the police that I had not done anything. There was nobody else about so far as I know. It is not true that there was a large crowd about; it was very quiet. My wife and I were not "rowing"; we were very comfortable and had been all day. I did not know what I was being taken for. I did not struggle. It was no use to struggle against two men like that I am a carman and have not had a regular job since last February, only "casualty." I have not been promised any money for coming here. I have not heard rumours that fellows who have been wrong

fully arrested are to get £40 or £50 compensation from the police. I know that I have been punished innocently, but whether or not I am entitled to anything I don't know. Mr. Timewell brought me some fruit for my children and I have had eighteen pence from him. I do not know that my daughter went stopping with Mr. Time well. I know that he gave her a loaf of bread and some tea and sugar. I have seen Mr. Timewell three times. I have seen him in the witnesses' room, but have not spoken to him beyond saying, "Good morning," or anything like that. I believe the constables who took me were drunk—Jenkin was the worst. He reeled and staggered about. I did not call the inspector's attention to the fact that Jenkin was drunk, because there does not seem to be any notice taken of what we do say. I have been twice convicted for being drunk, once seven years ago, and the other about three years. I think in saying I was drunk the doctor made a mistake. I complained to the inspector that I had been knocked about. I had been struck on the mouth and my lips were swollen. I did not call the attention of the doctor to it. I was brought up the next day before Mr. Paul Taylor and fined 40s. or a month.

To the Recorder. I believe I told Mr. Paul Taylor that I had been taken off my doorstep and that I had not done anything at all. I did not tell the magistrate that I had requested a doctor should be sent for to determine whether I was drunk or sober.

Mrs. CHURCH, recalled, stated, in answer to Mr. Travers Humphreys, that when she went to the police station after her husband had been taken she saw two officers.

(Sergeant Richardson and Police-constables Sharp and Little were here brought into court for identification.)

Witness. When I went into the Inspector's office, the officers I saw were not or those three. It is not true that after my husband had been charged I had a fight with my mother-in-law, Mrs. Bradley, in Cirencester Street. It is a lie to say that I accused my mother-in-law of being the cause of my husband getting looked up, and that I said, "If you had gone indoors it would not have happened." While my husband was doing his 14 days, I went to see Mr. Timewell in Gower Street. I heard of him from my father-in-law, 'Bradley, who told me that he was a gentleman who took up cases of "Police and Public," and that if I explained my case to Mr. Timewell be would take my case up as well.

MAY TORNEY , single woman, 52, Cirencester Street. In the basement there are two rooms. I live in the front room and Mr. Church at the back. For a living I sweep a crossing, which I have had for 15 years, but I have never got into trouble. The window of the front room looks out into the basement. On the extreme right is a door leading into a passage which goes from the front of the house to the back. Anyone going to Church's room would have to come down the steps and pass my window and my door. The doors of the two rooms are very close together, so that coming out of my door and looking round I must

look right into Mr. Church's room if the door is open. On August Bank Holiday I went to bed about 10.30 and was awakened by hearing heavy footsteps coming down the steps at, I should think, about half past one. I jumped out of bed and looked through my window, and in the area I could see two policemen. I got up then and heard footsteps going through the passage to Church's door. One of the policemen said to the other, "Have you got a light?" I heard the door pushed open; you can hear the knob of the door upon the bed rail. Mrs. Church screamed out, "Do not hurt my children." I then opened my door, and looking into Church's room, I saw the two policemen. I cannot identify them. One dragged Church across the floor and the other took hold of him by the arm. I then went back into my room and closed my door. Church had but little clothes on. I heard him scream out as if in pain.

Cross-examined by Mr. Muir. I could not hear any blows because one of my sisters went into hysterics. She occupies the same room as I do. I did not hear any sound like a truncheon on a man's head. On the evening of Bank Holiday I did not go further than the top of the area steps. I did not spend the evening sitting on the doorstop drinking cans of beer fetched from the "Princess of Wales." I never had a glass of beer all day on Bank Holiday. I know Mart Anne Smith—she lives in our parlour. I do not remember seeing her that evening. Ellen Harris was not with me that evening. A Mrs. Johanna Conway lives at No. 40. I saw someone go across to Mrs. Conway's door, and a little girl told her she was not in. Mrs. Conway afterwards came to her window. I did not shout across to her, "You were in you b——y, f—g liar. Mrs. Conway did not come across and ask me what I meant by calling her that name. I was not very drunk. I did not try to strike her with my stick or call her vile names. I never used bad language. I was not at home on Sunday, October 6, when Mrs. Bradley, who is sometimes called "old Mrs. Church," was very drunk in the street. I did not hear her say, "I will put all my son's witnesses away for false swearing." I know Elizabeth Foley. I never told Mrs. Foley that the policemen were summoned for perjury. With reference to the perjury I did not say, "I do not know anything about it, as I was drunk in bed and do not remember a thing." I was not taken to bed helplessly drunk about one o'clock in the morning. I never get drunk and have never been drunk in my life.

To the Recorder. I cannot say how long I have lived in the street, but my mother was married from there there and I have lived there nearly all my lifetime.

MARY ANNE SMITH , 52, Cirencester Street. At the commencement of August I had the ground floor, consisting of three rooms immediately over May Torney and Mrs. Church. On the night of Bank Holiday I went to bed early in the morning. I did not get home till 12 o'clock. I sat talking to my sister for a few minutes, and then I went and sat at my window with my daughter. My

husband is a labourer. I know the man Howard who lives at No. 49, almost opposite. I saw two policemen take a man in custody off his step. I do not know what man it was. It was about one o'clock as near as I can remember. I watched him being taken away as far as I could see. He did not seem to me to make any resistance whatever. There was no disturbance and I did not see any persons following. A woman came out and said, "Where is my husband?" And I heard someone say, "They have locked him up," and the little girl was crying "Oh, my daddy!" I saw no attempt at rescue. I sat at my window for some little time after that, and the next thing I noticed was a constable and a man in private clothes come to the top of the area steps. I heard the constable say something to Mr. Church about summoning him for abusing language. I heard Mr. Church came to the top of the steps and say, "You must be mistaken, or you are drunk." Then I heard him give the constable a name which is not his name—I think it was O'Sullivan. He turned to me and said, "Mrs. Smith, did you hear me using any abusing language!" and I said I had not heard him. The constable than took Church's in per name and address and they went away. A few minutes afterwards, while I was preparing for bed, I heard a kind of signal on the area steps, and on lifting my window I saw two coo stables going down the steps and another constable and the same man in private clothes standing on the top of the steps. I afterwards went to the top of the kitchen stairs which lead down directly to Church's room and saw two constables with Church coming out of the area gate into the street. I thought Mr. Church was being handled rather roughly. I did not see any blows.

Cross-examined by Mr. Muir. I do not recognise either of the constables. I was first asked to give evidence on the Saturday after Mr. Church bed his sentence. That was within a week of this occurrence. I live in the same house as Mrs. Church, but I have not talked the matter over with her; I do not talk to neighbours at all. I did not say anything at the police court about the policeman saying he would summon Church for abusing language. I may not have thought of it at the time. I have spoken to Mr. Timewell since then, but not upon this matter. I was not with May Tomey on the evening of August Bank Holiday. I was not drinking beer with her which had been fetched from the "Princess of Wales." I know Mrs. Conway. I do not remember Mrs. Conway standing on her doorstep, and May Torney shouting something across to her. I saw May Torney that afternoon, but I should not say that she was drunk. (To the Recorder.) The policemen taking Howard did not appear to be at all rough from what I could see of them.

ELLEN HARRIS , 52, Cirencester Street. I am a married woman and my husband is a carman. We occupy the first floor back immediately over the last witness. On the night of August 5 I was preparing for bed when I heard Mrs. Church scream out, "Mother! Mother! Mother!" I ran downstairs and saw two constables polling her husband out of his room. I could not identify the policemen. Church

was not fully dressed and seemed to have hardly anything on him. I thought they handled him very roughly. I did not see any blows struck.

Cross-examined by Mr. Muir. I did not hear anything said by anybody. After I had seen Church taken I went upstairs. I did not hear any row outside. I spent the evening very quietly along with my husband. May Torney was quite sober that evening. I did not see Mrs. Conway at all. I do not recollect having a row in the street with Mrs. Bradley, who is sometimes called "Old Mrs. Church." She told me to take my children away from her barrow and I turned round and said, "My children isn't hurting it." That was on Sunday night. I did not hear Mrs. Bradley shout out, "I will put all my son's witnesses away for false swearing." I was first asked to give evidence when Mrs. Church came back from Marylebone Police Court, where her husband had been charged with rescue in Cirencester Street. I said, "They took him out of his own room, and how could he be rescuing when he was in his own room?"

ROSE TORNEY . I am a single woman and live at No. 52 with my sister, and do laundry work for a living. On August 5 I went to bed before 12, and remember waking and hearing the "coppers" coming down the area. They then went into the passage and into Church's room. I did not see what took place. Another sister who lives with us was screaming because she was frightened. My sister May does not drink at all.

ELIZABETH SLATER , wife of George Slater, dustman, 41, Cirencester Street. On the night of August Bank Holiday, about a quarter to one, two policemen came down the street opposite where me and Mrs. Pyle were standing, and they returned in about five minutes with Howard in custody. We followed to the top of Cirencester Street where it joins Harrow Road. Howard was not struggling at all. I did not see anybody get hold of the constable. At the corner of the street another policeman and a man in plain clothes came running round the corner and the constable said something to Adams and Jenkin. Jenkin then released Howard's arm and this other policeman with Adams took him up the road towards the station. Jenkin stood a minute or two outside the pawnshop and then came down the street with a man I now know as Heard. I crossed over to meet my husband, who had just turned the street corner. I then went upstairs and, looking out of my window, saw Jenkin and Adams opposite Mr. Church's area. Jenkin had his book out, and I heard him distinctly say, "I will take your name and address and summons you for using obscene language." I heard Church speak to him, but what he said to him I could not say. They then went away and I watched them to the top of the street. In about ten minutes they returned and went down the area steps. I could not see to the bottom of the area, only to the top of the kitchen window. I heard scuffling in the passage. In about five minutes they came up again with Church in custody. The two policemen had Church, and then there was another policeman and the man Heard at the top of the

area steps. From my window I saw him taken up the street, and watched as far as the "Spotted Dog." There was hardly another man in the street. I know Church as a neighbour, having lived in the street for many years. I have never spoken to him.

Cross-examined by Mr. Muir. I saw Howard taken into custody, I was talking to Mr. Pyle, and after that his wife came up behind him. There was one more woman and I don't believe there was another person present. I saw four in all. Howard was walking very quietly. At the policemen passed I noticed that one was drunk, that was Jenkin. He reeled just as he passed me and Mrs. Pyle. I did not notice Adams at all. I did not hear Howard protest; he went very quiet. I did not near Howard say he was not drunk. I did not see any crowd, nor hear any hooting or swearing, nor see any throwing of gravel. The street had been re-gravelled some time in the summer. I saw the policeman and Heard come round the corner. Jenkin stood a minute or two outside the pawnshop with Heard. I did not notice whether he was standing steady, as I was looking for my husband. Jenkin and Heard afterwards walked down the street. I did not notice how Jenkin was walking. I could not say whether Heard was sober.

ELIZA PYLE , wife of Arthur Pyle, 35, Cirencester Street, gave similar evidence. The two policemen came down the street laughing together and passed witness and Mrs. Slater at their door, and a few minutes afterwards they came up and brought a prisoner (Howard). Howard was not struggling, but walking perfectly quietly. The darkish policeman (Jenkin) was twisting his arm round and the poor man was calling out "They are hurting my arm; you are breaking my arm," and every time that he called out me darkish policeman pushed him with his knee in the back, and he would have fallen down if it had not been for the fairish policeman (Adams). Witness and Mrs. Slater followed to the top of the street with several other women. Mrs. Howard was crying, "They have took my husband for nothing, off our door." Witness also described how Jenkin was relieved of his charge at the corner of the Harrow Road.

Cross-examined by Mr. Muir. This was a quiet night for Cirencester Street. I have lived there for 18 years and never knew such a quiet Bank Holiday; and my husband, who has lied for 40 yean in one house, passed the remark as he came home from work about 11 o'clock. "Where is all the people." I suppose they were saving their money to go "hopping." I did not notice that either of the constables was drunk and I do not remember that Mrs. Slater said anything to that effect. With regard to how I came to give evidence, two gentlemen came to me, I think it was last Friday week when I came home from work. They said that they had been informed that I knew something about this case and would I kindly tell them what I knew, so I told them what I knew. The statement was taken down in writing and I signed it, but without reading it over. During the 18 years I have been in Cirencester Street I cannot say that I have seen a policeman on duty drunk.

CHARLOTTE WHITE 39, Cirencester Street, wife of Henry White. On August 5 I went to bed between eleven and twelve p.m. At 12.45 a.m. I woke up hearing a man shouting, "Mind my arm—you will break it." I dressed and looked out of the window and the street was clear; there was no disturbance. I sat at the window and a little while after I saw a policeman and a man in plain clothes go up to Branscombe, who was standing at his door, which is three doors off on the opposite side. I heard the policeman say, "Do you want trouble?" Branscombe said, "No, sir. I am waiting for my son to come in." With that Branscombe turned indoors; the constable went after him and staggered as he went up the step. He went from there to the next door area—Church's—and said, "Come up here, I want you." Church came up and the constable wrote something in a book and left with the other man. Shortly after two policemen came and went down Church's area; another policeman and a man in plain clothes came and stood at the top of the area for eight or nine minutes until the first two policemen fetched Church up. Church had no cap on; his little boy was screaming and said, Oh, they have locked my daddy up."

Cross-examined. My husband was in bed with me; he did not wake up. I was in a bad condition at that time and was waking up at all hours, and while sitting up in bed I heard a man say, "Mind my arm—you will break it." When I got to the window the street was clear. I sat there and spoke to Mrs. Wright, who lives next door. She told me Howard had been locked up. I could not say the first policeman was drunk, only he staggered. The plain clothes man did not stagger. I cannot recognise any of the policemen. The other two did not stagger. I believe the one who stood at the top of the area was the same who had spoken to Branscombe. I heard him say to Church, "I am going to summons you for obscene language. Church said, "You must be drunk." If the policeman and the plain clothes man had wanted to take Church away they could have done so. Church was quite sober so far as I know—he spoke pretty clear. I heard no obscene language, and I do not know why they wanted to summons Church or why they did not take him then and there.

HANNAH EVANS . 39, Cirencester Street, wife of George Evans. On August 5 I went to bed between ten and eleven, and at 1.45 was awakened by hearing a man say, "Oh, my arm—you will break my arm." I looked out of the window and saw nothing. I sat at the window and saw a private person and a policeman come down the street, pass my window, cross to Branscombe's house, and speak to him; then they went to Church's house, No. 52, leaned over the area and asked Church what was the matter down there. Mr. and Mrs. Church came up the area steps, the constable wrote something in a book, and some conversation passed, and the police officer and the other went up the street. About 15 or 20 minutes afterwards three policemen and the same man in plain clothes came to Church's area and two policemen went down. I heard somebody say, "Oh, oh." and a few minutes afterwards they dragged Church up and took him

along Cirencester Street towards Harrow Road. No one was in custody besides Church.

Cross-examined. I lost sight of them when they were four doors past my window. I did not look right out because I bad my baby in my arms. The street is generally very noisy at holiday time, but on this Bank Holiday it was extremely quiet. Between eight and nine the boys and girls came up singing. When Church was taken there was a noise. After I heard the man complaining about his arm there was no one in the street, and I sat there looking at the empty street. Branscombe was very quiet. The policeman who spoke to him staggered as he passed No. 43—to a certain extent like a drunken man. There was nothing unusual in the policeman stopping to speak to Church. If they hear abusive language used they stop it. It is mostly the young men and girls who use bad language; the men are the worst. After they left the street remained quite deserted. I could not identify either of the three policemen who afterwards came. I only saw two or three steps down the area.

LOUISA BRADLEY , 51, Cirencester Street, wife of William Bradley, horsekeeper, mother of William John Church. On August 5 I went with my son, William John Church, to the "Princess of Wales" public-house and left at closing time. I went home and at 12.45 went in with my husband to my son's room, which is the back kitchen of No. 52, just opposite my house, and we had supper with him and his wife. After about twenty minutes Police-constables Jenkin and Heard came and looked over the area railings and asked Church for his name and address. Church said, "You must have made a mistake—you are drunk." He asked again for his name and address, and thinking it was a joke Church said, "John L. Sullivan." Jenkin said, "I am going to summons you for using obscene language." Church then gave him his right name and address, which the constable wrote down and then went away. I and my husband then went across to our home. I had undressed and was just getting into bed when I heard my daughter-in-law cry, "Mother, mother, mother." I put on my skirt and blouse and ran across the road. A policeman and Heard were at the gate. The policeman tried to stop me from getting down to my son, but I slipped past him and got into the area, where Jenkin and Adams had my son on the ground with his arm doubled right behind him, he moaning as if in pain. I said, "Do not hurt him; he will go quietly." I then went over to my gate, my son was taken down the street, and I followed as far as the Lock Bridge in the Harrow Road. There was only my son in custody.

Cross-examined. There were only three, or four or five, following besides myself. I was not with the others who were following. I was at home all day until about 11.30 p.m., when I went to the "Princess of Wales," had two glasses of beer with my son and his wife, and remained until the house was closing. My son had not done anything that I am aware of. He is a good husband and a thorough good father; he does not drink any more than any other man—he is not an habitual drunkard. My husband said to him, "Give your right

name and address, Bill; you have done nothing." It was not Heard who said, "Give your right name and address." I had never seen Heard before, and there was no way in which he knew my son's name. My son was not drunk; he wm arrested and taken to the station for doing absolutely nothing. I was not drunk—I had not had a drink all day until 11.45, when I had two glasses of beer between that and 12.25. I had no fight with my daughter in-law—she was not drunk. She is a most sober woman. I did not have a row with Mrs. Harris or say that she ought to be locked up as well M my son. I have known Mrs. Harris about two years, but I do not associate with any women in the street except my daughter-in-law. I sometimes stand at the top of my area steps. Mrs. Humphries, who lives next door, is always there minding other people's business. I do not know Mrs. Sharland. On Sunday, October 6, I had had a glass of beer. There was a barrow of my husband's outside and Mrs. Harris's children annoyed me by pulling it about. I did not say to her, "You and Ruby are false swearers." She did not say, "Then I will open the ball, because we have all been telling lies against the police." I should have thought false swearing comes in when Johanna Conway asked Mrs. Harris whether she would turn King's evidence for the policemen, and she would be well paid and well protected. My son generally goes quietly?—I do not know. I have never seen him arrested before.

JOHN VIXCE . 42, Cirencester Street. On August 5 I went to bed about ten and was awakened at a little after one by my wife. I went to the window and saw a policeman looking over the railings of Church's house with a notebook in his hand. He dropped his pencil and the plain clothes man, who was with him, picked it up and gave it to him. I said to my wife, "That is nothing. I am going back to bed," which I did. About ten minutes afterwards I looked again and saw two constables taking Church up the street towards Harrow Road. I saw no one else with them. The only man they had in custody was Church. I identify one of the constables as the prisoner.

Cross-examined. The prisoner assisted Church up the street; he had come up the area when I saw him. I never saw a third policeman. I have lived in Cirencester Street for about four years. It is noisy on Saturday nights and Bank Holidays, particularly between 12.30 and 1.15 or 1.30, after the public-houses are closed; people start arguing outside their houses. I arrived home that evening at seven or a little later and went to bed about ten. Constables occasionally take people's names and addresses and caution them. There were about eight people following Church about ten yards behind the constables.

MARY VINCE , 42, Cirencester Street, wife of John Vince. On August 5, about one a.m., I was awakened by someone in the street saying. "What a shame—he has done nothing." A few minutes after I looked out of the window and saw a policeman and a plain cloths man looking down Church's area. The policeman said, "I want your

name and address. I shall summons you for using obscene language." Church acid, "My name is William John Church, but I think you have made a mistake—you must be drunk." The constable wrote something on a book or paper and went away up the street. I went to bed, and shortly after heard more talking and looked out. Two policemen with the man in plain clothes were bringing Church up from his area. I watched them from the window as far as Desborough Street, when one of the policemen and Church fell to the ground.

Cross-examined. It looked as if the policeman tripped and dragged Church with him. I did not hear Church say anything further—he may have said something else. I saw him at they were bringing him up the last three steps from the area. I did not see a third policeman, but there may have been one. I do not always get up when there is a row—I should not get much sleep if I did. It it a very noisy street. There is a lot of singing and dancing alter the public-houses are closed. That night it was unusually quiet.

CHARLES CHALMONT , 43, Cirencester Street, labourer. On August 5 I was indoors all the evening. I did not hear a found until I heard a woman screaming at 1.30 a.m., when I ran across the road and saw two policemen dragging Church up the area steps. There was another constable and a plain clothes man outside. I then returned to my room and saw no more. I identify one of the constables as the prisoner, whom I assisted last year by blowing his whistle when he was arresting a man outside the "Princess of Wales" public-house. It it a noisy street—working class people live there. I saw no one, else in custody.

Cross-examined. I deny that the prisoner or any other constable has cautioned me for disorderly behaviour. There was only Mrs. Church and two or three others following Church to the station.

ELIZABETH KELLINO , 43, Cirencester Street, wife of Albert Kelling. On August 5 I went up to bed between one and 1.15 a.m. I sat at the window and saw a constable and a private clothes man come down the street. The constable crossed to Branscombe at No. 60 and asked him, Did he want trouble? Branscombe said, "No; I am waiting for my son." They went next door, looked down the area, and asked what was the matter. A women's voice said, "Nothing. Can you tee anything the matter?" He said, "Come up here," Mr. and Mrs. Church came up the area. He then said, "Give me your name and address." Church said, "John L. Sullivan." The policeman said, "I am going to summons you for obscene language." Church said, "Man, you must be drunk." He then gave his name, "William John Church." The constable and the private clothes man then went up the street. I went to bed.

Cross-examined. Cirencester Street is at times very noisy, and the police are wanted there nearly every night. I was asked to give a statement by a grey-headed gentleman. He asked me if I saw Church locked up and I told him "No."

Re-examined. This gentleman did not press me to say that I had seen him locked up.

THOMAS FOX BEANSCOMBE . 50. Cirencester Street, painter's labourer. On August 5 I was standing on my doorstep at 12.45 when a man went by with two policemen. They returned a quarter of an hour afterwards, and one of the policemen asked me if I wanted trouble. I said, "What for," and that I was waiting for my son. He then went next door to Church's. A quarter of an hour afterwards I saw three policemen and a plain clothes man fetch Church up and take him away down the street. I cannot see far owing to my sight failing me. I am sure that the police only had Church in custody then.

Cross-examined. When the policeman spoke to me I took his number, "433." I have seen him up and down the street and have also seen him at Marylebone Police Court giving evidence. He has said "Good morning" to me in a friendly way. There was no reason why anybody should have spoken to me that night as I was all by myself, and I never saw the street so quiet as on that night. Generally on Bank Holidays there is a lot of singing and noise—jollification. When the policeman spoke to me I did not understand what he meant—perhaps he thought I was in the skirmish when Howard was taken away. Howard went past me as quiet as a lamb. I only heard his wife crying, "My husband, my husband." There were a few followed—not a lot of people. I could not say whether Police-constable 433 was sober or not. I saw nothing to show he was drunk. I heard the clock chime half-past one, and Church was arrested at quarter to two.

Re-examined. There were no signs of an attempt at rescuing Howard. I am sure Howard was arrested at 12.45, because I heard the clock chime just before.

A. BRANSCOMBE , 50, Cirencester Street, carpenter (son of last witness). On August 5 I went to Hampstead Heath with a young woman and got home at 12.45. I stood at No. 31, where my young lady lives, and saw two police constables with Howard in custody Howard said, "Let go of my neck; you are choking me." I saw him taken to the top of Cirencester Street. He went steady enough. There was no attempt at a rescue or interference with the police in any way. At a little after one o'clock Jenkin, whom I know by his number, 433 X, came with a man in plain clothes to me and asked me if I lived there (at No. 31). I said, "Yes," although I live at No. 50. Jenkin said, "Get inside," using foul language. I went upstairs and the constable ran in after me up the first flight. When he saw he could not get hold of me he ran out and slammed the door. A little after I went out and saw Jenkin and two other constables going towards Church's. Jenkin and another constable went down the area and fetched Church up. They were about ten minutes down there. They then took him up the street. They took him steady enough from what I could see. I cannot say the exact time.

Cross-examined. I and my father and my young lady are teetotallers. There had been no disturbance between us that evening. I cannot make any suggestion why Jenkin should interfere with me and use bad language to me. His language was too bad to repeat.

He also pushed my young lady's mother against the banisters—she had never said a word. He looked drunk; he could not go straight in the passage. The plain clothes man was on the doorstep but said nothing; he saw what happened. I first mentioned this when Mr. Timewell came to me a fortnight after Church was tried and asked me if I would like to give evidence for Mr. Church. When I went to the police court I thought I was giving evidence for Mr. Church; I did not know I was giving evidence on a criminal charge against a policeman. I heard at Marylebone Police Court that the constable was going to be charged with perjury. My young lady, Miss Lemon, was not having a row on the doorstep of No. 50. We got home from Hampstead Heath about ten o'clock. (To the Recorder.) I was not creating any disturbance and am unable to explain why the police came up at all.

Re-examined. I told the truth before Mr. Plowden. If I had known it was a criminal trial it would not hare made any difference in my evidence.

ALICE LEMON , 31, Cirencester Street. On August 5 I had been to Hampstead Heath with the last witness, returned soon after ten, went out again and returned about 12.45. We went to No. 50 and then crossed over to my home at No. 31. My mother and I went upstairs. I came down and was talking to Branscombe when a policeman and a man in plain clothes came and asked if he lived there. He replied. "Yes." The policeman said, "Get inside," using obscene language, such as I should not like to repeat. Branscombe was doing nothing, only talking to me. We went inside and the constable followed. My mother came down on hearing the noise and the policeman pushed her—knocked her hand and bruised it slightly. We went up one of the flights of stairs and the policeman followed, then walked off, slimming the door. From the first floor window I saw him making towards No. 50 on the other side.

Cross-examined. I did not see Church arrested. A grey-headed gentleman told me that my young man had made a statement and asked me if I would do so, and I said I would. He said he was going to take Church's case up. I said, "I know nothing about Church's case." That is true.

(Thursday. November 28.)


Police constable JOSEPH KNIGHT . 678 X, X Division, stationed at Harrow Road. On the night of Bank Holiday. August 5, I paraded at the police station for duty at a quarter to 10. I went on duty at 10 o'clock and my duties ceased at six o'clock on the morning of the 6th. I was on duty in Elgin Avenue, Portsdown Road, Carlton Vale, Maida Vale, Sutherland Avenue, and Lauderdale Road. My attention was first directed to Elgin Mews North at about 10 minutes put 12. I then crossed from the corner of Portsdown Road into Elgin Terrace and was met there by the potman of the "Elgin" public house. A lot of shouting, singing, and brawling was going

on amongst the stable men. I cautioned some of the people and went away. I continued on the beat and came back to Elgin Mews about five minutes afterwards. The same sort of thing was going on and I again cautioned some people. Shortly before closing time I returned to the news and stayed some little time. Then I doubled round into Portsdown Road and arrested Stephen Knight. He was in the middle of the mews shouting, dancing, singing, and making a noise. He was singing. "You can't diddle me," and was very drunk. I took him to Harrow Road Police Station by way of Elgin Avenue, and crossed the Harrow Road, where the "Princess of Wales" public-house is. He was very violent all the way and resented me taking him to the station. That made progress very slow, and it was 10 minutes or thereabouts past one when I got to the station. The distance from Elgin Mews is 1,500 yards. I took my prisoner into the charge room and put him in the clock, and Inspector Stock came in from the inspector's office to take the charge. Knight was locked up and the next day at Marylebone Police Court pleaded guilty to being drunk and disorderly and was fined 3s. 6d. or five days and paid the fine. Before I returned to my beat Constable Adams brought Howard in. I had been called into the "Lord Elgin" that night to eject two men who were debarred the house and would not leave. One of them was Alfred Barnes, who has given evidence in this case. I asked Barnes to leave the bar. He would not do it, so I ejected him. He went towards the mews and I saw no more of him. We were short-handed that night as owing to holiday time the constables were out patrolling during the day time.

Cross-examined. I am quite clear that Adams was in the police station with Howard about 1.20; therefore, any attempt to rescue Howard from Adams's custody must have occurred before 1.20. Under ordinary circumstances it would take me about 15 minutes to walk from Elgin Mews to the station. Knight was very drunk and very violent, but I cannot say he was one of the moat violent prisoners I ever had in custody. The time of the arrest was 12.35 and I fix that by the shutting of the "Elgin" public house, so it took me considerably over half an hour to take him to the station. It was no use calling for assistance as there was nobody there. We always take a note of the time when we take a prisoner. I have heard that Mrs. Knight went to the station and bailed out her son. I am aware that she has sworn that Sexton was in her company from the mews to the station.

Re-examined. I was able to deal with Knight although he was drunk. He was hanging on to the railings, and it is pretty hard to take a man who is hanging on the railing.

To the Recorder. I should not have been justified in summoning asaistance unless I thought prisoner was likely to effect his escape. If I had done so without reason I might have been severely reprimanded.

Inspector WILLIAM STOCK , X Division. I have been in the force 18 years and an Inspector nearly two years and am seven or eight years

off my pension. On the night of the August Bank Holiday my hours of duty were from 10 o'clock to six o'clock the next morning. From 10 o'clock until two a.m. I was in charge of the station, and from 2 a.m. until 6 A.m. I was patrolling the streets. I remember Knight being brought in I entered the details on the charge sheet. He was brought to the station at 1.15. While I was taking the details of this charge Police constable Adams brought in Howard. Adams has been in the force about eight years. I entered the time that Howard was brought in as 1.20 am. He was charged with being drunk and disorderly and using obscene language in Cirencester Street, Paddington. The charge sheet as filled in by the magistrates clerk tells that he was fined 40s. or one month. Adams told me he had left Police-constable Jenkin in Cirencester Street surrounded by a hostile mob. The police do not patrol in pairs in that part. Jenkin was on point duty near Cirencester Street and Adams was patrolling. Adams told me they had been hustled and shingle had been thrown at them while they were bringing up the prisoner Howard. I said, "For God's sake, Adams, get back, or Jenkin will get his ribs kicked in down there." I have been at the Harrow Road station since last December and should not describe Cirencester Street as a quiet and peaceable street. It is one of the roughest streets in London. I have been on duty in the East End, and I do not think there is a rougher street there. Adams left at once without waiting to sign the charge sheet, end as, after he had left, Howard disputed that he was drunk, I sent for Dr. Robertson, the divisional surgeon, who came at 1.20 and certified him to be drunk. Church and Sexton were brought to the station at two o'clock by Constables Adams and Jenkin. They were charged with unlawfully obstructing the constables while in the execution of their duty in Cirencester Street. Church is entered as having been bailed at 4.20 had Sexton at 4.30. Church was fined 20s. or 14 days and Sexton 40s. or a month. They were charged as soon as they were brought in and neither of them made any reply. If either of them had made any complaint I should have attended at the police court next morning. It is absolutely untrue that Sexton had previously spoken to me about bail for a man named Knight. It is untrue that he was arrested in the station by four drunken policemen. There were no drunken policemen there. It is not true that the arrest took place in the presence of myself and Sergeant Richardson. Sergeant Richardson came to the station at 2 o'clock while I was taking the charge. There is not a word of truth in the statement that Church when he was brought in sat on a form in the charge room and was sitting there for some time before Sexton ever came in at all. Sergeant Richardson had no right to come into the station at 1.35. His duty was to patrol the streets until two o'clock. It would have been a breach of discipline for him to come into the station at 1.35, and he would have had to account for being there unless he brought in a prisoner in custody or unless a big burglary or same unusual event had occurred and he had come in to make a report. I had never seen Sexton before in my life. Jenkin was not drunk. He showed no sign of being drunk and I

could not detect any smell of drink about him. He has been in the force, I think, about 14 years. Adams was also perfectly sober. Constable Sharp 20 X was in uniform on what is known as second reserve duty, looking after the prisoners. He was sober. Police constable Little was on first reserve duty, taking telegraphic and telephone messages and sending them out to the various stations by our private wire. The telegraph room opens out of the Inspector's office. The three officers I have named and myself represent the whole of the force at the station. The plain clothes men had all gone off duty some time before, about one o'clock, as is shown by the duty book. Police-constable Little is a lifelong abstainer, and I believe that, like a great many people of the kind, he has a great horror of drink, and if his fellow constables were drunk he would not be likely to look on it with indifference. If a constable came in drunk I should not pass it over; he would be suspended at once and reported to the Superintendent. In that case we should make a variation in the duty book and say that the officer had been suspended for being drunk. The duty book and all documents are examined in the morning by the Superintendent.

Cross-examined. There was no pressure of business that night, and the charges were taken almost immediately they were brought in. Things were fairly quiet for a Bank Holiday. Perhaps I may explain to the jury that at Bank Holiday times the police do not take notice of trifles as they might at any other time. If they were to take notice of every little case of drunkenness on Bank Holiday we should have the station full three times over. The police exercise discretion at such times. When Adams brought Howard in he said he had been hustled, but he did not say that there had been an attempt to rescue the prisoner and he did not say he would have to arrest anyone for what took place at that time. I did not know Heard before this case. I now know that he is a sworn constable in the employ of the Great Western Railway. The prisoner made no reply at the time, but very often you get quite respectable people who on being charged with drunkenness have nothing to say; they are too disgusted with themselves. I do not say that Sexton was drunk when he was brought in; he had been drinking. I not only say that Sexton was not arrested in the station in my presence, but that he was not arrested in the station at all. Police-constable Jenkin had Church and Police-constable Adams had Sexton.

To Mr. Travers Humphreys. We have very rarely had people charged with attempted rescue. The only charge was obstruction of the police. Nothing was said about attempted rescue.

Police-constable ADAMS , 498 X (prisoner, on oath). Examined by Mr. Trivers Humphreys. On the night of August Bank Holiday I paraded for duty at a quarter to 10, and went on duty at 10. I was on beat duty that night, and my beat included part of the Harrow Road and Cirencester Street. Jenkin was on fixed point duty at Alfred Road, a turning nearly opposite Cirencester Street. I passed Jenkin

a number of times—last time about one o'clock, when I came from the direction of Westbourne Terrace. Then hearing a lot of singing and shouting, I turned down Cirencester Street; there was a lot of bad language and general uproar. Jenkin followed me down very closely. One hundred and fifty yards down the street we saw a large crowd; some were singing, some were quarrelling, others were using bad language, and there was a general tumult. We did our best to disperse them, that being part of the general instructions given to every policeman. In the course of my duty I found it necessary to arrest Howard. I requested him several times to go away. He turned round to me and said, "Why do not you take some of these f—g roughs up?" As he would not go away I took him into custody. He was very drunk and was very abusive. I caught hold of his right arm and turned him round, when I was joined by Police-constable Jenkin. Howard did not go quietly, but was very violent—trying to throw himself to the ground and to resist apprehension as much as possible. I should say there were 70 people round us at the time, but they increased as we got up the road. They obstructed us by pushing, and we were awaking from one side of the road to the other. When near the top of Cirencester Street, two men caught hold of Police-constable Jenkin by the back of his coat and caught hold of Howard and tried to get him away from us. One of the men, Church, I recognised as having seen before—Sexton I had not seen. A quantity of gravel was thrown at us as we were going through the street. The road had recently been tarred over. On entering into the Harrow Road Church made an attempt to get hold of the prisoner Howard, and said, "No, you don't take him; he is a good old 'pal' of mine." Owing to the crowd continually obstructing, I said to Jenkin, "You keep back and keep the crowd away and I will take this man to the station." Jenkin then fell back and I took Howard to the station by myself, arriving there about 1.20 a.m. I told the inspector we had had a rough time of it in Cirencester Street and that I had left Jenkin there. He said, "You get back as soon as you can, or else he will have his ribs kicked in," or words to that effect. I have been stationed here about 15 months, and have been assaulted four times within a twelvemonth. I should not describe Cirencester Street as a peaceable and quiet street—it is a very rough neighbourhood. Without waiting to sign the charge sheet I went back to assist Jenkin. I met him at the top of Cirencester Street with Church and Sexton in custody. He handed Church over to me and I preceded him to the station. The inspector came into the charge room and took the charge. Neither of the men made any reply. I afterwards went back to my beat and remained there until 6 a.m. I had no occasion to make any further arrest that night, though there was some trouble down there, as there always is. I knew nothing whatever of Church. It is not true that Howard was arrested by me and Jenkin when he was sitting on his door-step doing absolutely nothing. The statement that Church was taken out of his own room by myself and Jenkin is a pure invention.

Cross-examined. I adhere to the statement that two men seized Constable Jenkin by the collar when he had Howard in custody; that Church was one, and that Sexton was another. There can be no mistake as to my seeing Sexton in Cirencester Street. I suppose it would be about a quarter past ten that I first went into Cirencester Street, which is about 300 yards long. At 1.10 I had left Circecester Street with Howard. The attempt to rescue Howard must have occurred between 1 a.m. and 1.10 a.m. We reached the station at 1.20. When I returned to the assistance of Jenkin I did not run, as I did not suppose he was in any immediate danger. If I had run I should not have been much good. To the best of my knowledge I got back to Cirencester Street about 20 minutes to two. I had never seen Heard before that. Heard came into the charge room with Church and Sexton, but I did not listen to what he said. I should say there were 200 people at the corner of Cirencester Street when I got there, and Jenkin was practically surrounded. Heard had hold of Sexton with one arm and he was Keeping back the crowd with the other. I heard Heard give his evidence before Mr. Paul Taylor. When I got to the station with Church and Sexton there was no one in the charge room, but Inspector Stock came in immediately; Police-constable Sharp was also there. I did not notice Sergeant Richardson. Before I was at the Harrow Road I was stationed at Willesden. I was removed from there as a punishment for being drunk on duty. I heard Mrs. Knight swear that she walked from Elgin Mews in company with Sexton, following after her son, who had been taken into custody. Knight arrived at the station about 1.15. a.m. The assault on Jenkin in Cirencester Street was about 110. I agree that if Sexton with Mrs. Knight arrived at the station after 1.15 it is impossible he can be the man who committed the assault upon Jenkin. I will take it that No. 52 is about the middle of Cirencester Street. Assuming I walked straight from the station at 1.25 to that place, it would have taken about a quarter of an hour or 20 minutes there and back, leaving about five minutes to go down Church's area and take him out. I swear I never went down that area. Mrs. Church's story is pure invention, also that of the other witnesses about it. Howard was very drunk and violent. Had I been by myself I should have come off very badly. Howard did not say, "If you send that other constable away I will go quietly." I am sure I never saw Heard before. I know he lives at Southall. It was not a surprise to me that he did not tell the magistrate he was a policeman employed by the Railway Company I am quite clear that Sexton was the man who took hold of Jenkin's arm. I did not see Heard while the crowd were surrounding us; he was at the back with Jenkin as far as I know.

Re-examined. I have been on duty in different places from Cirencester Street, but I have received no instructions not to go down that street. I took no notice of the time when I was with Jenkin in Cirencester Street—there was no necessity to.

Dr. GEO. ROBERTSON , Divisional Surgeon, Harrow Road Station, deposed to certifying (as per entry in book produced), that on

August 6, 1.30 a.m., William Howard was drunk. There was no sign of illness; it was an unqualified "drunk."

Cross-examined. There is no definition of drunkenness. I could not say that of necessity the man was stupid or not clear. He might be perfectly capable of recollecting what happened.

Police-constable PHILIP JENKIN , 43 H. On August 5 I went on duty a five p.m. In the ordinary way I would come off at one in the morning. During that time I was on point duty at the corner of Alfred Road—that means I should not go farther than I could see from Alfred Road down to the shops generally—about 100 yards. In the course of the evening I saw Police-constable Adams, who was on other duty. I saw him two or three times—the last time about one o'clock, when he came up to where I was standing. It could not have been later than one when Adams came to me—as I should go off at one unless there was some trouble. About that time I heard shouting in the direction of Cirencester Street and I went there with Adams. When there I assisted Adams to take William Howard into custody. About half way down the street Howard appeared to be drunk and was shouting and quarrelling with other people. When we had got round the corner into Harrow Road Adams said, "All right, Phil, I will go on with this one." I then went back to Cirencester Street, and about half way down I saw Church, who I know was one of the men who had interfered with us. I had not known him before. He was on the pavement on the left hand side. There was still a lot of people about I took Church into custody. When I got near the top of the street I saw Sexton, who was standing among the crowd. I also took him into custody. About the time I saw Heard—who was a perfect stranger to me—he appeared to be one of the public. At that time the crowd were all round us and pushing. Heard caught hold of Sexton, so that we both had hold of him. I had not called on the public to assist me. As we got into Harrow Road I met Adams, who was coming from the police station. I handed Church over to him, and they went towards the station. I followed with Sexton and Heard. We all went into the station practically at the same time. The prisoners were then charged. I did not hear Heard say anything to the Inspector, nor hear any statement by Sexton or Church. I searched my man and then went home. Next morning I gave evidence at the police court.

Cross-examined. Heard said nothing to me when he came up and caught hold of Sexton. I do not remember him saying anything subsequently either. He did not point Sexton out to me; if he did I did not see him. I thought Heard was assisting me when he caught hold of Sexton's arm, and I did not ask him any questions. I am not sure of the time when Howard was arrested; it may have been ten minutes past one, judging by the time we got to the police station. It was two o'clock when I got to the station with Church and Sexton. I left Adams and Howard about ten minutes after the latter was arrested. It takes about ten minutes from the corner of Cirencester

Street to the station. Any assault that occurred in Cirencester Street whilst Howard was in my custody must have occurred before 1.10. I am positive Sexton was one of the men who committed the assault. Between the time of my first seeing him and his being in custody was about half an hour. I should say. During that time I was trying to get down Cirencester Street to find the two prisoners. Church was standing near No. 52 when I took him. Heard and I did not walk up the street together. It would be untrue to say that Heard and I spoke to Church at the top of his steps. When I took Church I was molested by a number of people. I know that Adams left the station in a great hurry; I do not know exactly when. A man going hurriedly would take five or seven minutes from the station to Cirencester Street. I carry a watch, but had no opportunity to look at it at this time. Church was not struggling when I met Adams at the corner; it was the crowd who were. I did not see Heard till he put his hand on Sexton; I was not surprised at him doing that. I did not ask him what he was doing. I should not do so in a case like this, unless he tried to pull the prisoner away. Some of the crowd followed right up to the station. Sexton, Heard, and I were all walking in a line to the station. We were behind Adams. Heard was trying to keep the crowd off, telling them to behave themselves and keep off; I was also telling them to do so. I did not ask Heard to come into the station; he walked right in with his prisoner. There was nobody in the charge room that I saw, and there was nothing said until the inspector came. I did not hear the latter say anything to Heard, nor ask me who he was I was looking after the prisoners then in the dock. I told the inspector what the prisoners had been doing. There was a noise of people walking about, so I could not hear whether the inspector spoke to Heard. There was nothing unusual in a man walking into the police station with the officers, if he was assisting the police. The inspector would ask who he was before he left, of course. (Witness described where he and Heard and the others were situated in the charge-room.) The inspector might have spoken to Heard and I have failed to hear. I did not go down Church's area steps, nor did I notice them. I have seen them since. The witnesses are telling lies who say I went down the steps. I know Sexton is a coachman—respectable as far as I know. He appeared to be sober. I do not know whether Mrs. Knight went with Sexton to the station that evening or not. I do not know whether Church, when I arrested him, was going down his area: he was close to it. I did not know he lived there at the time. He gave his correct name and address at the station. I have been in the H Division (Whitechapel). I was moved to my present division in the ordinary way, "to benefit the service." (Witness declined to say whether there was any reason for his being moved.) I made a report to the inspector, but I do not produce it.

JOHN HEARD , detective in the Great Western Railway Company, by trade a shoemaker. I live at 6, Haradine Cottages, Western Road, Southall. On August 5 last I was on duty at Paddington station.

At one a.m. I had an hour off for supper. I am on for ten hours at night-time. I usually have supper in the canteen, but this being Bank Holiday I went out to go to the coffee stall. While I was out I met my brother and his wife, with whom I went as far as their door, at 1, Hampden Road, and parted from then about 1.30. As I got into Harrow Road I heard a terrible noise and walked towards the scene, finding myself in Cirencester Street, a street where it is not safe for respectable people to walk after dark. I knew it well. I saw a huge crowd and walked towards them. In the centre I saw a constable, who was being roughly handled, with a man in custody. I saw the man named Sexton deliberately strike the constable. This was just turned half-past one. I jumped in, pushed Sexton to one side, and said, "Why don't you act like an Englishman and assist the police when you see them in trouble—not go against them?" He tried to get away, but I caught hold of him and said, "No, you don't." To the constable I said, "All right, officer; I am with you; here is the man that struck you." I did not know the officer before. We walked together, both of us having hold of Sexton, towards Harrow Road, or rather we had to push our way through. The crowd behaved very roughly. After a terrible struggle we got to the corner of the street, and as we turned into the Harrow Road another constable came on the scene; that would be Adams. He took Church into custody. One of the constables said to me, "Follow us to the station and keep the crowd back as well as you can." The crowd, which was pretty noisy, followed as far as the "Neeld Arms," nearly opposite the Infirmary gates. I went into the station and gave my name to Inspector Stock. At his request I attended next morning at Marylebone Police Station. In giving evidence I described myself as a shoemaker.

Cross-examined. Adams was not there when I witnessed the assault on Jenkin. I was at the hearing before Mr. Paul Taylor, but I did not know what particular obstruction was being tried. I did not know what the charge really was, though I heard the men charged in the charge-room. I did not thoroughly understand it. I was a private individual assisting the police. I know now that Church and Sexton were convicted for obstructing Police-constable Jenkin in the execution of his duty. Adams could not have witnessed Sexton strike Jenkin while I was there, because Adams was not there. If he said that he said wrong. I said to the magistrate that the time was about 130. It is not correct, as taken down by the magistrate's clerk, that I said "after one o'clock I was in Harrow Road and saw a crowd in Cirencester Street." I did not say it. It is true that "I saw Sexton strike Policeman 433 X in the chest." I did not know Mr. Paul Taylor was trying the obstruction which I did not see.

The Recorder. I do not know which obstruction Mr. Paul Taylor was trying. What is there on this note to show what particular obstruction he was trying?.

Mr. E. Fulton. There is no other obstruction except in regard to this witness's evidence to-day.

Mr. Cockle. If your Lordship will look at the evidence of Jenkin and Adams you will see what the obstruction was exactly.

Mr. Muir. This witness gave additional evidence, which the magistrate was entitled to act upon.

Witness. I gave evidence of what I saw. What I did not see I know nothing about. The gate of Paddington goods station through which I came—the Stafford Gate—is not far from this place, about 370 or 380 yards. No. 1, Hampden Street is on the way to Cirencester Street. I occupy all my spare time in making shoes. I do nine hours a day for the railway company; if on night duty, ten hours. I do the shoemaking for money. I did not tell the magistrate I was with the Great Western Railway Company, because my senior officer does not like us to leave the station while we are on night duty, and I did not want them to know. I went out on this night because the canteen was shut and I had not taken any refreshment in, as my wife was away. I cannot tell you what Jenkin said when I jumped beside him; he had no chance to say much. He must have heard what I said, I should think. I was severely handled at the time—pushed and mauled about. Sometimes I take prisoners into a station on my own. When I went into the station the inspector asked me what I saw. I believe he spoke to the constables first. I told him I had seen Sexton strike Jenkin and I jumped in and assisted him like all respectable Englishmen should do. I suppose the constables said something then. I positively swear I had never seen Jenkin or Adams before. I was on the scene by mere accident. I did not know Howard. (To the Recorder.) I have been with the Great Western as a detective for two years. Before that I was a police constable, having been an appointed servant for six years. Before that I was a shoemaker; that is my trade. I am not aware of any complaint against me by the railway company. I did not see any policemen drunk. I had nothing to drink.

Re-examined. I am 35. Until I was 29 I was shoemaking, at 33, Malvern Road, West Kilburn. You cannot get a job unless you have a good character.

(Friday, November 29.)

CHARLES HEARD , 1, Hampden Street, Harrow Road, labourer. I am the brother of John Heard, who was examined yesterday. On Bank Holiday night I with my wife, met my brother accidentally at the Stafford Gate of the Great Western Railway opposite the "Stafford." My wife, my brother and I went together towards the Lock Bridge, Harrow Road. It was about 25 minutes past one when we parted, and I got home about half past one.

Sergeant RICHARDSON , 44 X division. I shall have been in the force 23 years next March and have been sergeant since January 1, 1894. I am what is called section sergeant. The station sergeant is next to the inspector, but on occasion I do the duty of the inspector at the station. On the night of the August Bank Holiday I paraded at the police station at 10 o'clock for duty. My duty was to patrol the streets

from 10 o'clock until two in the morning, and from 2 a.m. to 6 a.m. to take charge of the station, relieving Inspector Stock. When on patrol it was my duty to visit the sergeants at the four different sections. My beat extended from Maida Vale in one direction to Ladbroke Grove in the other, and from Kensal Green High Road on the north to Ranelagh Road and Porchester Road. In the ordinary course of business certain points were arranged by Inspector Stock at which I was to meet the different officers. This is done every night by the senior officer at the station. The points arranged are only known to the sergeants in charge of the section, not to the men, and the visits are in the nature of surprise visits. The points are put down in what is called the duty book. If necessary I can explain the points that had to be visited that night from what is called the "Sergeant's Take." The last two points I had that night were at Bravington Road at 12.40 a.m. and at Tottenham Street, Kensal New Town at 1.30 a.m. After leaving Bravington Road I met some disorderly people outs de the "Frankfort" public-house at the corner of Ashmore Road and Harrow Road. That would be about a quarter to one. I endeavoured to disperse them and then went on my way towards the "Princess of Wales" public house. Constable Wallace was stationed on point duty at the corner of Elgin Avenue and Harrow Road. When I saw him at one o'clock he was going to the station to report himself off duty and had just gone to get his cape. The man Sexton then came up and spoke to me. I didn't know his name at that time, but I knew him as a coach-man employed by Messrs. Ives and Son, Canterbury Terrace. Sexton told me a man named Knight had been locked up and he wanted to bail him out. I asked him what he was locked up for and he said "A drop of booze." I said, "Let him have a sleep, and come back later on. I shall be in the station after two o'clock and I will accept your bail for him." Sexton himself had had a drop of drink but he was not out of place for a Bank Holiday night. He was quite capable of looking after himself. He then went away. I went along the Great Western Road towards the Carlton Bridge, and I arrived at the Totterham Street point about two minutes to the half hour and spoke to the sergeant in charge of the section, Police-constable Terry, who was acting sergeant on that night. From there I went with him to Edenham Street, where a disturbance was taking place. I then went to Southam Street, where there were two or three rows taking place, a very usual occurrence there on Saturdays and Bank Holidays. I put one man indoors; I got him to his door and pushed him inside. I then worked my way back into Edenham Street, at the corner of which there is a public house called the "Lord Craven." The landlord looked out of his window and spoke to me. I then went along Golborne Read and Kensal Road to the station, where I was due at two o'clock. Terry went back to his section. It is not true, as is said by Sexton, that I spoke to him at 1.35 outside the police station and that then he and I went back into the police station at about that time. I was in Kensal New Town at that time. I had no right to go into the police station before two o'clock unless my duties compelled me on account of some big

robbery having been committed or some such thing as that. In such an event I should have to communicate with the station either myself or send a man. I should in that case have to report to my superior officer to account for my presence there at an hour at which I was not due, and the superior officer would judge whether my explanation was satisfactory or not. On arriving at the station at two o'clock I relieved Inspector Stock, who then went out to perform the duty of patrolling the streets. I didn't go into the charge rooms. I simply reported as I passed the door and said, "All right, sir," to the Inspector. I saw that there were two men in the dock in the charge room as I passed, one of whom I recognised as Sexton; the other (Church) I had never seen before to my knowledge. I had nothing to do with the taking of the charge, but stopped in the inspector's office and went on with my work. My duties were then to take any charges that came into the station, to make out the papers for the following day, and to visit the prisoners in the cells. I visited Church about half past three or a quarter to four. I also visited Sexton. I looked through the trap of the door and asked, "All right?" and he replied. "All right." We do not open the cell door unless we do not get any answer. No complaint was made to me by either Church or Sexton. At 20 minutes past four Mrs. Knight came to the station and I accepted her bail for her son. She was made aware of the fact that Sexton was in the cells, and knowing that they lived in the same mews I accepted her bail also for him. Five minutes later a man named Ratty came and bailed out Church. As to the statement of Mrs. Church that she saw a sergeant at the police station that morning. I never saw Mrs. Church until I saw her at the police court. There was no other sergeant but me on duty that night at the station. The other officers on duty were Police-constable Sharp 290, the second reserve man, who was attending to the prisoners and on duty in the charge room, and Police-constable Little 495, who was attending to the telegraph and telephone messages. No complaint was made by anybody whatever. I didn't have any conversation with Sexton as to the circumstances under which he came to be arrested. When Church was released I didn't notice any mark upon him indicating that he had been badly treated. I didn't notice any bruises or cuts on his forehead, or swollen lips.

Cross-examined. I see by the charge-sheet that Knight was charged at 1.15 a.m. and Howard at 1.20 a.m. As to Church and Sexton, I came in at two o'clock as they were being charged. It was about one o'clock that Sexton spoke to me at the junction of Elgin Avenue and the Harrow Road. Knight was charged at 1.15, but that is not inconsistent with my having met Sexton at the time I state, as Knight might not have reached the station till then.

The Recorder. A man of Sexton's class would probably speak of a man being locked up from the moment he was taken into custody.

Witness. I do not accept the suggestion that at the time I was speaking to Sexton it must have been a good deal past one o'clock, though he was able to tell me that Knight was locked up. You will

find sometimes a crowd of 300 or 400 people at the station long before the prisoner gets there. I have known Sexton three or four years as a coachman and to the best of my knowledge he is a very respectable man. He was not the sort of man that I should have thought would have attacked the police and I was very much surprised when I heard of it. It didn't occur to me to say a word to the inspector as to my knowledge of this man. The inspector is the officer in charge of the station and receives the evidence from the constable who has the man in custody and it is not my place to interfere. It did not occur to me to mention that I had had conversation with the man an hour before. It did not occur to me to be material that I should mention it; it would be more material to my interests not to interfere with a superior officer. Possibly I might get a black mark against me. It did not occur to me as highly improbable that this man who was talking to me at one o'clock or a little after, Bank Holiday sober, should within a few minutes be interfering with the police. I have not discussed this matter with either Mr. Ives, his son, or his manager.

Police-constable JAMES WALLACE , 609 X, gave evidence as to being on point duty on the night of August Bank Holiday at the corner of Elgin Avenue and Harrow Road from nine p.m. on August 5 to one a.m. on August 6. He was visited twice by Sergeant Richardson and afterwards saw Richardson talking to Sexton just as he was going off duty at one o'clock.

Police-constable ALFRED TERRY , 409 X. On the night of August Bank Holiday I was acting sergeant of the first division, which comprises Kensal New Town, Tottenham Street, and that district. I have been in the Force nine years and nine months. I was in charge of the section from ten p.m. till six o'clock next morning, and my point was at Tottenham Street, where I met Sergeant Richardson at 1.30. He was there two minutes before the half-hour. In the ordinary course of my duty I went with him through various streets. There were disturbances in Edenham Street and we went down there to quell them. We then came back to the "Lord Craven" in Southam Street and the sergeant pushed a man indoors. After that we went by way of Golborne Road, Kensal Green Road, and Great Western Road to the police station. I accompanied the sergeant almost to the station. As we got to the station it struck two o'clock. I then returned to my section. I did not know Sexton at all.

Police-constable SHARP , 290 X. On Bank Holiday night I was on duty at Harrow Road Station as second reserve man from ten o'clock at night until six in the morning. When Stephen Knight was brought in I was in the charge room. It is the practice when a charge is being taken to shut the outer door. Mrs. Knight came to the door when Knight was being charged. She was accompanied by a woman, but I did not see anybody else. She asked to bail her son and I told her he had only just been brought in and that she would have to come later on. After putting Knight into a cell I came downstairs again into the charge room. I then found that the prisoner Howard

had been brought in by Constable Adams. After Howard had been examined by the divisional surgeon and certified to be drunk I put him into a cell. (Witness also gave corroborative evidence as to Church and Sexton being brought in.)

To the Recorder. I have been in the Force 18 years. There is no foundation for the charge made against me that I was drunk that night.

Examination continued. I have heard Sexton's story that he was speaking to Inspector Stock in the station when he was suddenly arrested and that he was not brought in by a police constable at all. With regard to that I have only to say that I never saw Sexton until he was brought in by the constable. It is not true that Police-constable Little was drunk.

The Recorder. What is suggested is that as Sexton was having conversation with the inspector at the door of his office he was arrested by four drunken policemen and charged with Church, who had just been brought in. Is that true?.

Witness. No, untrue. As far as Little is concerned he is a life abstainer.

Police-constable THOMAS LITTLE , 495 X. I have been a teetotaler all my life. On the night of the August Bank Holiday my duties were connected with the receiving and sending of telephone messages. I received a long telephone message at 1.40. It would take me about four minutes to receive and write down that message. I did not, in fact, see Sexton and Church brought into the station. It is not true, so far as I am concerned, that Sexton was arrested in the police station by several constables. Mrs. Church has been pointed out to me in the course of the case. I did not see her on Bank Holiday night. She did not come into the inspector's office while I was there. I saw Sharp several times during the night. There is no foundation for the statement that he was drunk that night when on duty. There were no other officers on duty that night except myself, Sergeant Richardson, and Constable Sharp.

CHARLES WILLIAM MATTHEWS . I am a contractor's foreman, employed by Meesrs. Tatham and Co., of Somers Town, and live at Windsor Place, Harrow Road, near Cirencester Street. On August Bank Holiday night, a little after one, I was near Cirencester Street on my way home. There was great disturbance in Cirencester Street. I know the street well. It cannot be described as a quiet, peaceable street. It is a most notorious street for ruffianism. There was a great quantity of people I should say from 100 to 150, and there was the Bank Holiday disturbance which is usual in the neighbour hood. Being rather inquisitive I went and had a look at it. I saw the two constables go down. There was a lot of people running and on looking down the street I saw two constables with a man in custody. He was being taken towards Lock Bridge through Cirencester Street. About 50 yards up the Harrow Road one constable (Jenkin) left the other one (Adams) with the prisoner and turned back and went to Cirencester Street. A great many of the crowd also returned

I went after them 140 or 150 yards, as near as I could get. I saw a big crowd hustling and swearing and shouting. After some minutes I saw them arrest another man. I heard a woman call out, "Run, Bill." It seemed to me the arrest was made by a dark constable (Jenkin), who was alone amongst the crowd. I could not discern where the other man was at the time he was arrested. The crowd continued to increase and I followed pretty close up as they moved towards the Harrow Road. At the corner there was a big rush and I saw a stout man (Mr. Heard) go to the rescue of the constable. (Mr. Heard was here brought into Court, and witness stated that to the best of his belief he was the man.) Heard seized hold of another man and there were then two in custody. As nearly as I can guess the time was then about twenty minutes to two. Going along the Harrow Road, Jenkin was joined by another constable, who, to the best of my belief, was the prisoner Adams. After the second constable had come up they went off to the police station. I followed to the Lock Bridge and then went indoors. There were only two constables as far as the Infirmary. There were certainly two persons in custody.

Cross-examined. I communicated with the police. I could not recognise Sexton; I do not think he was the second man. I have not seen Church as far as I know. I can only give a faint idea of the man; there was such a crowd and I did not want to get too close. Sometimes I could only see the policemen's helmets. I did not see any attempt to rescue the first man who was arrested (Howard) at 1.10. I only saw the rough crowd. I have not been taken to identify Howard by the police. I saw the policemen come back down Cirencester Street and arrest the other man. I was near enough to see if the man was down an area at the time; I did not see anybody go down. I did not see the man before he was arrested. I had not seen Heard do anything before he pounced in and seized another man.

Re-examined. I cannot tell whether the man who was taken some 150 yards down Cirencester Street had all his clothes on; he had no hat and no coat. When I went down the street I kept the constable in view. I do not think he could have gone down an area and into a house. (To the Recorder.) I do not agree with Mr. Ratty that the street was deserted when Howard was being taken away.

FREDERICK WILLIAM BOYLE , porter at Elgin Mansions, Maida Vale. On August 5 I was at Weymouth, returning to Paddington Station at 12.30; I then went to a friend's house to have some supper. I was walking along Harrow Road about 1.10 towards Carlton Bridge and passed the top of Cirencester Street, where I saw two constables coming out of the street with the prisoner. They went along Harrow Road towards the police station; then one of the policemen dropped back and the other took the man to the station. I went home. When the constables came out of Cirencester Street there was a crowd shouting out, "Let him go"—I suppose about 100 people.

Cross-examined. I did not see any attempt to rescue the prisoner.

LOUISA BLOOMFIELD , 24, Cirencester Street, tailoress. On the night in question I was in Cirencester Street at one a.m. There was an uproar in the street; about 100 people—I should say more than 100. I saw a constable pass me while I was speaking to a young man. (Jenkin stood up in Court.) I believe it was that one. After the policeman passed there was a quarrel, with people, fighting and screaming; he passed me on the left hand side of my house in the direction away from Harrow Road. He had hold of somebody; I could not tell you who it was because there were a lot of people round him; the people were screaming and swearing—an awful noise. The gentleman who was speaking to me went away. After that I went to my door and the policeman passed with someone in charge. The crowd were throwing different things at the policeman and screaming after him. I then went indoors and did not see anyone else that night. I know Church, but I do not remember seeing him that night.

GEORGE COX , 215, Church Road, Willesden Road. I am employed by the Willesden District Council. On August 5 I was in Cirencester Street about 1.20 or perhaps a little later. There was a very big crowd shouting and swearing. I saw a policeman there halfway down the street trying to disperse the crowd. I then saw him arrest one man, who had no hat and no coat on. He was on the left hand side going from the Harrow Road, on the pavement. There was a crowd all round him, nigh 100 people. The policeman then took the man up towards Harrow Road, and towards the top he arrested another man. Just after that a short stout man jumped in and assisted the constable. (Mr. Heard stood up.) That is the man. They went into the Harrow Road and then another constable came up from the Lock Bridge. The crowd was still pushing and swearing. I followed to the "Princess of Wales" and then went home. The crowd gradually broke off when they got to the Infirmary. I never knew anything about the case of perjury until I saw it in "Lloyd's Weekly"; about October 20. I believe. When I read it, I thought it my duty to go up and let the police know what I had seen, which I did on the following day.

Cross-examined. My duties under the District Council are anything; my salary is the same. I expect I came on the scene after everything had taken place. I never saw Howard arrested nor saw any attempt to rescue him. I do not know who the second man was who was arrested.

JOHANNA CONWAY , 49, Cirencester Street. My brother lodges with me. I had been at home during the day and evening of August 5 and had seen May Torney, Mary Anne Smith, and Ellen Harris, who had been sitting on the doorstep with cans of beer; May Torney was drunk; the others were not quite so bad. I was sitting at my window directly opposite them, and they were there just after seven until I came to the door at 10.30, when Torney picked a quarrel with me. I remember Mrs. Church having a quarrel with Mrs. Ratty on the

first floor in the house I was living in; she was very quarrelsome and drunk. Then she quarrelled with Mrs. Harris; she said she would open the ball; she would give her son's witnesses away for false swearing.

Cross-examined. I am not a teetotaller; I like a glass of ale, but I am not a drunkard. I had not been out during the Bank Holiday, but I had my beer at home. I had a glass of ale for dinner, and in the evening a couple of glasses. I have to work on a Bank Holiday. I am not in the habit of taking more than three glasses. These other people are constantly at it. I took up the quarrel with May Torney, and gave her as much as she gave me. I have lived in Cirencester Street for 21 years; it is far from quiet, noisy on Saturday and Sunday nights and Bank holidays. It was not deserted on this night.

Re-examined. I am ward cleaner at St. Mary's Hospital; have been for 12 years.

MARY HUMPHREY , 58, Cirencester Street. My husband, Robert Humphrey, is a wheelwright. We collect the rents in the street for the landlord. I was at home on the evening of August 5. I know Arthur Branscombe, who lives at No. 50, and saw him between 11.30 and 12 o'clock on his doorstep; a young lady was with him, Elsie Lemon, and Mrs. Lemon, her mother. I saw Mrs. Lemon trying to push her way in the doorway and she was prevented by Branscombe. Shortly after the public-house closed, I saw Mr. and Mrs. Howard go from the "Prince of Wales;" they were both drunk and quarrelling. They lived in our house at that time. One of their babies was scalded through their drunken ways. When they had finished quarrelling they sat on our step and sang songs. My husband and I then went indoors, and went to bed about one o'clock. There were a lot of people about. We could not shut our door because of Mr. Howard being out of doors. After I had gone up to bed, hearing a noise in the street I looked out and saw a crowd passing towards Harrow Road. I did not see any police at that time. About ten minutes later I saw the crowd come back again; I then saw one policeman; the crowd were holloaing. Then we went to bed, but were woke up by Mrs. Church, young Church, and his stepfather quarrelling again. We went back to bed again, Mr. Humphreys saying, "Let us go back to bed again; we do not want to hear that." After that I heard someone shout, "Run Bill, run." I was getting out of bed when I heard young Mrs. Church say, "Mother, mother." I went across the room and heard old Mrs. Church say, "For God's sake, what has he done? Do not take him." I then looked out and saw the policeman take hold of Church's arm. Church had got hold of the railings. They then went away towards Harrow Road. There was only one policeman there, followed by a large crowd holloaing. Mrs. Church (Bradley) came down shouting and holloaing, and stood at her gate until she crossed the road to Mrs. Ellen Harris's and knocked at the door. When Mrs. Harris came down Mrs. Church said she ought to have been taken as well as her son. Young Mrs. Church later on quarrelled with her mother-in-law, saying

it was her fault that Church was locked up. Everybody in the street knows that it was through the mother that he got locked up.

Cross-examined. I have heard Howard sing songs before; many a night he has annoyed us. He was not knocking anybody about when he was on the doorstep singing songs. I never saw him arrested. There were other people on the doorstep with him. I only heard from the crowd that he had been arrested. I could not say whether he had done anything to deserve being taken. The first I saw of Church was when looking out of window I saw the policeman holding his arm. Church's wife's voice calling, "Mother, mother," seemed to come from the area. "Run Bill, run," seemed to come from the same side as I live. We san see from our window into Harrow Road. I followed Howard with my eye about half way down. When the crowd was outside No. 47 I heard Mrs. Harris say something and run inside and slam the door. (To the Recorder.) Whilst Howard was sitting on the doorstep drinking beer out of a bottle and singing there were, a number of people in the street who had come out of their doors and were singing also.

(Monday, December 2.)

Verdict, Not Guilty.

In regard to the case against Jenkin, on Tuesday, December 3, Mr. George Elliott said that after consulting with his clients, the prosecutors, he had come to the conclusion, with their authority, that it would not be advisable to offer any evidence against Jenkin in view of the above verdict.

The Recorder said, had the charge been persisted in, it would have meant practically trying the man twice for the same offence, which would have been a public scandal.

The Jury formally returned a verdict of Not Guilty in regard to Jenkin.


(Monday, November 25.)

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-42a
VerdictsNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

SEILEL. Fritz (31, merchant), and SCHMIDT, Hermann (25, agent); both conspiring and agreeing together to cheat and defraud one Frederick Neuenschwander; Schmidt stealing one box of cigars and the sum of 35s., the goods and moneys of Lewis Baum.

Mr. Bodkin and Mr. Symmons prosecuted. Mr. Hinde defended Seilel and Mr. Burnie defended Schmidt.

FREDERICK NEUENSCHWANDER , merchant, 38, Harrington Street (examined through an interpreter). I have been in England two months. On October 24 I was looking for a situation. About five o'clock I was outside the Palace Theatre, when Schmidt came up and spoke to me in broken English. After some time we went and had a glass of beer together, for which I paid. After a little

while Schmidt was joined by another man named Stein, and they started playing cards, and Seilel won, I believe, about £3. They asked me why I should not join them, but I excused myself on the ground that I had not sufficient money with me and I agreed to meet them in the evening in front of the Palace Theatre at eight o'clock. Stein gave me an address near the Crystal Palace in the High Street in the name of Stein, and I arranged to go there on the following day. Stein then went away. After I was alone I went to the Vine Street Police Station and made a statement to the police. I kept the appointment at the Palace Theatre and met Schmidt, and we afterwards went to the Gambrinus Restaurant and met a lady there named Miss Atkinson. We then went to the Pavilion Theatre. I paid for myself and they paid for themselves. The lady had a seat and Schmidt and I went on to the Promenade.

Cross-examined by Mr. Burnie. The man who joined us in the public-house spoke in German. The money lost at cards was paid in gold, and the loser also showed bank notes.

FRANCES ATKINSON . I am employed at a tobacconist's shop, 124, Shaftesbury Avenue. Prisoner Schmidt was a customer. I made his acquaintance about September 17, and I was on petty good terms with him. I recognise the other prisoner, but before he was arrested I did not know what his name was. I saw him once in the Bernhardt Cafe. I know a man named Levenson. He was charged is connection with this case and discharged by the magistrate. I remember having dinner at the Gambrinus on October 24 in company with Schmidt and the prosecutor. Schmidt said he was going to the Palace Theatre to meet a friend on duty, and he came back with Neuenschwander, to whom I was introduced. The three of us then went to the Pavilion Theatre, myself being in the centre. As we were walking to the Pavilion Schmidt tapped me on the shoulder and said, "I have only known you four days." He said that in English. I do not speak German. I was puzzled when he said that and did not know what to think, so I said, "What do you mean?" He did not say anything else until we got into the Pavilion. In the Pavilion we were all standing together, Schmidt, the prosecutor, and I, and Schmidt said to me, "I want to make money out of the man." I said to him, "Why do you not leave the card alone?" He said he would buy me a hat if he made money. I told him I did not want a hat—I did not want anything. Smith passed the remark that Neuenschwander was rich. I thought to myself, "How can they make money? They cannot very well rob the man." I do not know why I made the remark about letting the cards alone. I suppose it was instinct. I do not play cards myself. I have seen Schmidt playing cards in the Bernhardt Cafe. I sat in my seat during the evening and had no conversation with them during the rest of the evening. I saw Levenson there, but did not speak to him. I cannot say that I saw Seilel there that night. I do not know that Schmidt had Bank of Engraving notes on him that night or confederate notes except by what I read in the papers.

Cross-examined by Mr. Hinde. I first saw Seilel in the Bernhardt Cafe. I never have spoken to him.

Cross-examined by Mr. Burnie. I gave evidence at the first hearing on October 25. At that time I did not say anything about this request of Schmidt's that I should say I had only known him four days. I had before that made a statement to Detective-sergeant West about what Schmidt had said to me. I understood that Schmidt was being charged with the three-card trick. At the time Schmidt said he wanted to make money out of the man, I did not suppose it referred to cheating. When I advised him not to play cards I did not suspect anything wrong.

Re-examined by Mr. Bodkin. On October 24 I was friendly with Schimdt and had been since September 17.

Detective-sergeant FREDERICK WEST , C Division. I received a communication from the prosecutor on October 24, and in consequence went to the outside of the Palace Theatre shortly after eight o'clock. I saw Schmidt come up to the prosecutor. I was standing inside the vestibule. They walked away to the Gambrinus Restaurant in Rupert Street, where they met the last witness, and from the Gamrbrinus they went to the Pavilion Music Hall. They went first to the upper circle, entrance to which is 1s. 6d., and afterwards removed to the 3s. grand circle. A seat was secured for the young lady, and the other two were talking to each other in the promenade behind. I noticed that Schmidt kept on turning round. In about half an hour he said to prosecutor, "Excuse me a minute, I am going to have a drink." I was standing close by. Then he met the man Levenson and they had some conversation, which I overheard. They then walked back to where the prosecutor was standing. In my hearing Leverson said to Schmidt, "Is he here?" and Schmidt replied, "Yes, come and see." After that Schmidt pointed out Neuenschwander. Levenson afterwards left Schmidt and came back with the prisoner Seilel, who said to Schmidt, "Where is he?" and Seilel pointed out the prosecutor, who was just in front. The conversation was in English and was uttered very quietly. Seilel next said. "All right, I have got the cards." Schmidt then returned to prosecutor and leant over the back of the seat and Seilel went down stairs. Levenson afterwards came back and Schmidt said to him, as he was standing by the doorway of the bar, "I think it will be all right." They looked up and saw me and began talking in German immediately. Levenson then went downstairs and Seilel came up shortly afterwards and spoke to Schmidt in German. I obtained the assistance of Police-constable Barrow. Levenson and Seilel were watching from below. I took Schmidt into custody for being a suspected person loitering for the purpose of committing a felony. He said nothing in answer to that. I handed him over to Barrow, who took him to the police station. Then I went downstairs and called Seilel out and told him I was a police officer and should take him into custody as a suspected person. He said, "I have done nothing" and was taken to the police station by a constable. Schmidt was

searched at the station, and on him I found six Bank of Engraving notes and one $20 and two $10 Confederate notes, a £5 Bank of England note, £3 in gold (English money), a 20 mark piece, and a Russian coin. I afterwards went to the address that he gave and found there the revolver produced (fully loaded), a stiletto, and 11 other Confederate notes. The knuckle-duster produced was on the prisoner when I arrested him. On Seilel I found a pack of playing cards (32 in the pack), a silver pince-nez case, an I.O.U. for £14, and two German cheques. I have been in the police force for 13 years. Bank of Engraving notes are used for the purpose of stealing money by the confidence trick and the three-card trick. I have known Confederate notes used for the same purpose. Confederate notes are known as "greenbacks" and are not in currency now.

Cross-examined by Mr. Hinde. While I was watching the performance was going on, the orchestra was playing; and there was singing. I could nevertheless hear the conversation. I stood as close to Schmidt as I am to my bag. The conversation was in English. I followed the prisoner Schmidt and Leveneon in order that I might hear what they said. When I arrested Seilel I said nothing to him about what had taken place in the afternoon.

Police-constable HENRY BARROW , C Division. On October 24 I was in Piccadilly Circus and was called by the last witness. In consequence of what he said I went to the grand circle of the Pavilion Theatre, where he pointed Seilel out to me. I watched him for about 10 minutes. Schmidt, who was talking to Neuenschwander, pointed him out to Seilel. Seilel then went downstairs, where he met Levenson and showed him a peck of cards. They then had some conversation together. They went back again upstairs and stood behind Schmidt and the prosecutor. After that Schmidt was given into my custody and I took him to the station.

To Mr. Hinde. There were several other people about there. I heard Seilel say at the police court that he was looking out for a friend.

HAROLD BODE , banking and exchange cashier to Messrs. Thomas Cook and Sons, Ludgate Circus, deposed that the Confederate notes were valueless. The notes were issued by the Confederate States during the war and were never of any official value. For years they had not been worth anything, and were only available two years after the declaration of peace in 1864.

EMIL MEINBERG , clerk. I am a German, and came over to this country on September 20 last. I stopped at an hotel in Finsbury Square, which is principally used by Germans. On September 25 I saw Seilel in the hotel. He was staying there. I understood from him that he had just come over and was looking for a position, and then I introduced myself and he introduced himself as Dr. Seilel. He said his business was to place a patent with a limited company. I asked him if he could help me to find a position and if he could get me introductions, and he said, "Yes, if I can I shall help you. I should like to help you." The next day I got a telegram, in consequence of

which I met Seilel. We went to the Charing Cross Hotel and afterwards in a motor to the Albert Memorial and into a house near Hyde Park. I did not know anything of the house before. We saw the occupier, and after a time there was whisky and soda. Afterwards we played cards, Seilel, two friends of his, and myself. It was a German game known as Mauschel. I lost about £6. Each of the players dealt in turn. I noticed that I often got the same cards, and always such cards that I was obliged to lay them down and could only lose with. The best chance in the whole game was always against me, and this chance was always in the hands of Mr. Seilel. The cards produced are similar to the ones we played with. The 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 of each suit had been taken out of the pack. I had only about £4 in gold and 15s. or 18s. in silver, and then I told Mr. Seilel I should like to stop the game because I did not like at all to play. Mr. Seilel said "Yes, but you shall win. I do not want year money; you shall win it back." I said I would prefer that we should not play again, but he said that we should play further, so I lost one sovereign more and I gave it to Mr. Seilel the next morning because I had only a £5 note in my pocket. I do not recognise the other prisoner.

Cross-examined by Mr. Hinde. The pack of cards was quite a proper pack for the game at which we were playing. If I remember rightly we were playing from half-past 12 to half-past seven or eight. At one time I was a winner of £3. There is no less stake than 1s. but there is a pool, and when the pool mounts up you can win or lose a great deal. Latterly, unfortunately, the luck was against me.

Verdict, Not guilty of conspiracy.

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-43
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

HERMANN SCHMIDT was further indicted for stealing a box of cigars and the sum of 35s., the goods and moneys of Lewis Baum.

Mr. Bodkin and Mr. I. A. Symmons prosecuted. Mr. Burnie defended.

Mrs. JANE BAUM . I live at 110. Leman Street and I am a tobacconist. I was in my shop on October 16 shortly after eight o'clock is the morning. The prisoner came in to buy some cigars. He bought a box of 25 Marcellas for 5s. I told him the price. He said he had not any Erglish money; would I take American money? I asked him what money he had got. He took out some ten-dollar notes and said, "That is the smallest I have." I said, I am not in the habit of changing big money like that." Then he said to me in German "I have a sovereign here, but I cannot change that." That was hanging on his chain. I changed the note and gave him 35s. and the box of cigars. At the time I took the note and gave the change 1 believed it to be a genuine note, or else I should not have chanced it. Before I parted with the money the prisoner did not say where he was living, but he said he came off a ship, and was staying at a sailor's home. Then I had some conversation with him about my brother who had left that morning for America in the "Majestic." I was conversing with the prisoner for about a quarter of an hour, as near as I could judge. Before I parted with my money I went with

him to a coffee shop next door and asked the proprietor if he thought the note was a genuine one. He said as far as he knew it was. In the coffee shop the prisoner said he had a lot of those notes. I neat saw him at Marlborough Street on Friday, November 8, a few minutes before I gave my evidence, in a room with eight other men who were standing in a row. When I got into the room I identified the prisoner as the man to whom I had given the money and the cigars. I did not hesitate about him at all. I am absolutely certain the prisoner is the man who gave me this note.

Cross-examined. This was soon after eight o'clock in the morning. I do not think my shop needed lighting up at eight o'clock in the morning. It was not foggy that morning. The man that I saw then had a coin on his chain. He had a uniform sailor's cap in a paper. He had a locket with a stone on it on his chain. On November 4 I read an account of the other case in a newspaper. It was because of what I read that I went to the police at Leman Street. I gave information on October 16 that I had had that note passed on me, and asked the police whether I could identify the man, and they sent me to Marlborough Street. The prisoner is the man. The man who came into my shop had a fair moustache; he was a full-faced man. I looked at the other men in the room when I was at Marlborough Street. There-were other men with full faces and fair moustaches. I did not count how many men of that description there were; I did not think it necessary. I think the prisoner was standing at one end of the row. As I went in I should face about the middle of the row.

Miss FRANCIS ATKINSON . I have known Schmidt since September 17 in London. He did not tell me at any time that he was living in a sailor's home or that he came off a ship.

HAROLD BODE . I am a cashier at Messrs. Cook's. The note produced is quite valueless. It is one of four of the same sort. There are the other seven Confederate notes of different pattern, but they are all valueless.

Police-constable FREDRICK WEST (C Division). I was at Marlborough Street Police Station when Mrs. Baum came there. She picked the prisoner out from amongst nine other men without any hesitation—infact, she picked him out before the Inspector finished telling her what she was in there for. The prisoner said through the interpreter, "I have never seen the woman before in my life, and I do not know where Lemen Street is." He was not searched at that time, as he had been previously searched. I found three other Confederate notes on him when he was searched, and the others I found at his address, which was a place called the "Bernhardt Cafe." I found there the 11 other notes I have here. I also found upon him at that address a loaded revolver, a stiletto, a knuckle-duster, and six "Fank of Engraving" notes, a £5 Bank of England Note, and £3 in gold, and some Russian coin.

Cross-examined. I did not find any locket such as the prosecutrix described either upon him or in his room. (To the Judge.) The Atkinson made a communication to me with regard to a locket.

Re-examined. I found a gold coin on the prisoner when I arrested him, but it was not on his watch-chain. This watch and chain which I produce was being worn by the prisoner when he was arrested. There was not any coin attached to it. This Russian five-trouble piece was found in his pocket—it has a sort of scroll work attached to it by which it could easily be hung on to a chain.

Further cross-examined. I did not find any locket upon him at all. Mrs. Baum at the police court said it was not the coin she had sees.

Mrs. FRANCIS BAUM recalled. (To Mr. Bodkin.) The man to whom I gave the money was wearing a locket attached to his chain, and also an English Jubilee sovereign as far as I could get sight of it. He said to me in German, "I cannot change this because it is attached to my chain." He had an open-faced watch, because he took it out to look at the time. This gold coin produced is not the one I saw before.

Further cross-examined. I always said that was not the coin. I said a sovereign was the coin. The locket was a locket with a stone in. The watch produced is not the one he was wearing.

Miss FRANCIS ATKINSON , recalled. (To Mr. Bodkin.) Since I first knew the prisoner I have noticed what sort of watch he had. In all he had three watches—two gold ones and one silver one. The silver one was an open watch. One of the gold watches had a cover, on and the other was open. I have seen a locket attached to his chair; it had about a dozen small pearls. On one occasion the watch and chain with the locket were missing. I asked him where they were. He said it was nothing to do with me, but I persisted in asking him. and he told me that he had pawned it, and also a ring that had. I noticed that he had something in the middle of the chain just where the waistcoat fastens—a gold coin—but I never took any notice of that so as to be able to say whether it was an English or foreign coin.

Further cross-examined. The locket I saw on the prisoner had about a dozen pearls round it. I did not notice any other stone except the pearls.

HERMANN SCHMIDT (prisoner, on oath). I have been in this country about six or seven months. I am a commission agent. I am living at 3, West Street, Cambridge Circus. I never was in the prosecutrix's tobacco shop; I do not know where it is. I never changed this Cosfederate note with the prosecutrix. The first time I saw her was at Marlborough Street; never before in my life.

Cross-examined. I do not smoke more than one cigarette a week; I never smoke cigars. I am living at a lodging house and restaurant, the "Cafe Bernhardt" at West Street. At the time of my arrest I had been there about three months. I had a room to myself. I cannot tell you the number on it. It might be No. 5; in was on the third floor—at the top of the house. It looked out over the back I used to get up at half-past eight or a quarter to nine. The last days I had my coffee in there, but my breakfast I had outside. One of the servants called "Anna" used to bring me up my coffee. The

last time before I was charged I did not have any meals of a morning in my bedroom except coffee, which was always brought up by the same person—Anna. Before I was charged I think the had missed about three times. On those occasions I did not have any. I paid 9s. a week. With regard to the Confederate notes, I saw them in the window of an antique shop in a street between the Shaftsbury Avenue and where the Middlesex Theatre is, but I do not know the name of the street. I am not a collector of antiques. I do not know how much money I had upon me on the morning—I had a few pounds. I went into the shop and I bought the notes for 10s. the lot I am not sure how many there were. I knew they were worth nothing—I heard they were old money. The "Bank of Engraving Notes" were given to me by a man whom I knew. I told him to give me the notes and he gave them to me. I did not want the notes for anything. (Through the interpreter.) This man took the notes out of his pocket and showed me them. He said, "I have some 'Bank of Engraving' notes." So I said, "Give me a few." He was an equaintsnes whom I had met several times, but I do not know his name or where he lives. I do not know how many notes he had; he showed them to me in a public-house. I brought the knuckle-duster with me from Germany; I have had it since I was a boy 14 or 15 years old. I cannot reply to the question why I had the three notes in my possession when I was arrested. I was not thinking of anything, so I pit them in my pocket. It is possible that I have had three watches since last September, because I deal in such articles. I never had a gold watch with an open face—they were always silver watches. I have always been wearing a gold chain. At the end of the gold chain a locket is attached to it. I have pawned it and taken it out again. I cannot remember when I pawned it. I cannot November if I had it on October 16. I newer used to wear a coin on the other end of my watch chain. I brought the five rouble piece over. This coin produced is for hanging on a watch chain. I swear I never had a coin hanging on a watch chain. I never went in Mrs. Brain's shop on October 16, and I never had one of these notes in my possession.

Verdict, Guilty.

Sergeant West. I knew the prisoner four weeks prior to his arrest. As far as I could ascertain he has never done any work. This cafe is frequented by undesirable characters. The "Cafe Bernhardt" is not a licensed place; the proprietor has been convicted and the place is under observation at the present time. The prisoner refuted to give any account of himself as to where he had been employed. I have ascertained that he was fined ten marks for assulting an official in July, 1896. That is the only thing we got there, they are very anxious to know the result of this case; whether they want him or not I cannot say.

Sentence, Twelve months' hard labour; then to be sent back to Germany.


(Wednesday, November 27.)

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-44
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment; Miscellaneous

Related Material

BEKLIAN, Jean (28, chauffeur) ; feloniously demanding with menaces, of and from David Haig, a railway ticket and the sum of £3, his goods and moneys, with intent to steal the same.

Mr. R 0. Roberta prosecuted.

DAVID HAIG . On October 8 prisoner called at my shop and brought a note from a friend. He said he intended to go to America and asked me to get him a ticket and collect some money for him, or give him a subscription note so that he could collect for himself. He came to me because I am the Treasurer of the Armenian Church. I said I had no right to do that, but I would see the friend who introduced him to me. Prisoner then left. The same evening I called on my friend, Mr. Arpiarian, and had a conversation with him. We came to the conclusion that we would not do what prisoner wanted, but would help him a little ourselves. I gave prisoner half a crown, and he said, "What is this to me? Is this to pay my hotel, which costs 2s. a night, or to go to Manchester, or to America?" My friend remonstrated and I left as it was getting late. This took place outside Mr. Arpiarian's door, at 120, Marylebone Road. I saw prisoner again the next morning. He came to the shop and said, "What Are you going to do?" I said I could not do any more than I did the night before, and he said, "Well, in any case you will have to get my ticket to Manchester, but what are you going to do about going to America?" I said I could do nothing further; he had better go and see other people. He said he had been to other people, and could only get money from one place, 10s. Then a friend came in and I told him to take him round to the Salvation Army and see it they would give him work. Prisoner went out, but came back it two or three minutes and said he was not going to such placets. He asked me to give him the addresses of some other people. Professor Hagopenier and others. I said I did not think he could do anything for him, but as he insisted I gave him the address and he left. He called again a day or two after and said he had a letter to an English lady, but could get nothing from her, and whatever was going to be done must be done by me: I told him I could do nothing else. Then he referred to a wealthy Armenian in New York and said, "Do not forget the fate of Mr. Tauchandjean," who had been asked for money and refused it and was shot dead. He called again on the Saturday at about midday and made the same application. He remained till seven o'clock. I did not order him to go out as customers were coming in and I thought it might disturbance. His manners were offensive, but I did not reply muck, because I did not like to excite him. At seven o'clock a friend came in. who knew him and told him he should behave himself better. prisoner said he was not going to be taught by him. A little later Mr. Arpiarian came in; he was rather excited. He said the gentle—

man who introduced prisoner to him had said, "You had better get rid of this man, or he may get excited and smack your face or throw something at you." Then the gentleman gave half a crown towards prisoner's ticket. We came to the conclusion that we must get the ticket and send him to Manchester to get rid of him. Mr. Arpiarian asked prisoner if he would go to Manchester that night if we got him the ticket. He said, "Yes." but he had washing to pay for. Mr. Arpiarian gave him a shilling to go and get his luggage and prisoner went out. A few minutes later he came back and said he was not ready to go to Manchester that night. He said, "Are you expelling me I cannot go in such a hurry. I am not ready." Then we were both angry and I told him we would have nothing more to go with him. Then, at prisoner would not go, I closed my shop and walked out with my friend, and prisoner followed. At Oxford Circus he slopped me and said, "Will you give me two shilling to go on with this night?" I said, "No"; and at a bus was passing I jumped into it to escape him. Then I went to Marlborough Street Police Station and informed about it, because I was afraid of him. He came again on the Tuesday morning about twelve o'clock. I said, What is it?" He said, "What are you going to do; I am going now." I said, "Well, you had better go out" I took hold of his shoulder to take him out and he said, "Haig, I will do you bad." He repeated that twice; then, at we went towards the door, I said, What do you mean?" He said, "Well, if I go out I will come back and put two razors to your throat." A police officer was present. I told him he had threatened me, and the officer arrested him. The conversation wat in the Armenian language.

Cross-examined. Prisoner did not give me the impression that he was ill and penniless. He said he wanted me to send him to America. He said he did not want charity, only assistance. He had a letter of introduction. I do not know that Mr. Arpiarian promised that I would send him on to Manchester.

Re-examined. I had reason to believe prisoner had money. The first time he came to me he admitted that he had 60 francs. He said he had come from Paris. (To the Court.) I am Treasurer of the Armenian Church Fund. That fund it not for assisting poor Armenians, but for Church purposes only.

ARPIARIAN . On October 3 prisoner called on me and said he came from Dr. Marouche, who lives in London and it a friend of mine. He told me he was in trouble and wanted to go to Manchester, and from there to America. He asked assistance from the Church Council. I told him the Church Council had no special fund for charity, but I gave him a letter to Mr. Haig and said perhaps he could do something for him. I saw prisoner twice between then and the evening, when Mr. Haig called. The second time he told me Mr. Haig was not in London, but would be back on Monday. Mr. Haig came round with prisoner on the Tuesday; we had a conversation, and afterwards Mr. Haig gave him half a crown. Prisoner said, Shall I pay my hotel bill or shall I go to Manchester, or shall I go

to America with this half-crown?" Mr. Haig then left and I tried to pacify prisoner. Before I called on Mr. Haig on the Saturday Dr. Marouche called and advised me to do whatever I could for prisoner to get rid of him. I gave 5s. 6d. myself, got 2s. from Dr. Marouche, and 2s. from another Armenian, and Mr. Haig promised to give the rest to send him to Manchester I told prisoner to go Mid get his luggage and gave him a shilling; he left the shop, but, came back in five minutes and said he could not go. We asked the reason and he said we had no reason to press him to go. I then returned to my business and prisoner stayed with Mr. Haig.

NARCISSUS PECKINEZIAN , 13, Aubrey Street, assistant to Mr. Haig. Prisoner called at Mr. Haig's place of business on October 4 and asked to see Mr. Haig. He called several times. I believe the first time he saw Mr. Haig was on October 8. He asked Mr. Haig for money and a ticket to go to Manchester. He called again on the 9th and asked for money. He came again on the Saturday before two o'clock (which is my time to go home), and an he seemed very excited I stayed till four o'clock. He asked Mr. Haig if he knew that an Armenian gentleman had been shot in America. The last time prisoner was there he told Mr. Haig if he did not give him the money he asked he would cut his throat with two razors. I thought he meant if he cut it with two razors it would go quickly.

Detective sergeant PROTHERO , Maryborough Street. On the morning of October 15 last, by arrangement with prosecutor. Sergeant Vanner and myself kept observation on 235, Regent Street. At about twelve noon prisoner entered and spoke to prosecutor in an unknown tongue. After a little while the actions of prisoner appeared to be angry and prosecutor laid his hand on prisoner's shoulder as if to get him out of the shop. Prisoner pushed his way more into the shop. Prosecutor beckoned to me and said, "I wish to give this man into custody; he has demanded money by threats. He has threatened to cut my throat with two razors." I turned to prisoner and said, "I am a police offer and I am going to take you into custody for demanding money by menaces." Prisoner said, "I came to get a ticket to go to Manchester." I said, "He (Mr. Haig) offered you a ticket on Saturday." He said, "Yes, but I was not ready to go; I had some washing to get. He is an Armenian and should give me money." He was taken to Marlborough Street Police Station and formally charged. In reply to the charge he said, in a very angry voice, "It is an insult." and, turning towards prosecutor, he said, "Liar." He spoke in English, but there were other words he said in French. There was an interpreter there. In reference to the letter that was found upon him, he said, "That is my letter. I had it written for me." It is a begging letter, signed in another name.

JEAN BENLIAN (prisoner, on oath). I am very excitable through my illness. I am a waiter and my last business was a chauffeur. I came from Paris to England about a fortnight before I was arrested. I had been in Paris four days. I went there from Switzerland, where I had been for my illness. I went to my compatriot to ask for

assistance, as I was in great misery and had to sleep out of doors. I asked Dr. Marouche if he could tell me how to find a situation or to go away from here to America. The doctor gave me some asistance and recommended me to Mr. Arpiarian, saying there was some society to help poor Armenians, who might assist me as they had already helped several others, and that Mr. Haig had gathered some money to send a man named Leon, who came from Paris, on to Manchester. I went to Mr. Arpiarian and prayed him to give me help to get to Manchester, and if I could not get a situation there I would go on to America. Mr. Arpiarian said, "I am a member of the Helpers' Society of Armenians, but I am not alone and I cannot do it myself." In giving me a letter to Mr. Haig he said, "It would be easy to get to Manchester, but you may just as well ask if you can be sent to America." When I saw Mr. Haig he told me to go and see other Armenians and gave me some addresses. I went to them and they told me to go to Mr. Haig, as he had to look alter poor Armenians. When I saw Mr. Haig and Mr. Arpiarian together Mr. Haig said, "All I can do for you is to give you half a crown." I said, "I can do nothing with 2s. 6d." I went and saw Mr. Haig again on the Saturday and begged of him for 2s. That was at three o'clock. Mr. Arpiarian came in at six o'clock and said they would give me a ticket if I would go away the same evening. I begged of them to adjourn my departure till Monday. Then Mr. Arpiarian went away. I did not tell Mr. Haig that I would cut his throat with two razors if he did not find the money. I did not talk about tot Armenian who was killed in New York. I did not know that it was so. I was expelled from France through an error.

Verdict, Guilty.

Detective-sergeant PROTHEROE . We communicated with the New York Police and also Constantinople, and found prisoner had been in paris. He was expelled from France on July 15 of this year. The letters are all forgeries with the exception of one. He has not been punished in any way. He is an associate ol a gang who went to an Armenan church in Paris two or three years ago and threatened to throw bombs among the congregation if they did not give them 500 francs.

Sentence. One month in the second division; then to be deported.

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-45
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

LEVI. James (29, labourer) ; robbery with violence on Samuel Davies and stealing from him the sum of 4s. 6d.

Mr. C. G. Mcran prosecuted.

SAMUEL DAVIES , boot finisher. On October 24, at 12.14 am, I was in Flower and Dean Street, when prisoner and four men pounced upon me from different directions. Prisoner struck me violently. I had 8s. 6d.—4s. 6d. in my trousers pocket and 4s. in my waistcoat. Prisoner struck me in the, mouth, and my mouth was so bad I could net swallow any solid food for five days. A constable came up and the men ran away. The constable got hold of the prisoner and asked me if he was one of the men. I said, "Yes." The 4s. 6d. was gone cut of my trousers pocket.

Cross-examined. I left home that night at nine o'clock. I had 10s. then. I had spent some in drink. I had spoken to a woman in the early part of the evening, but I was alone when prisoner struck me. It was not a foggy night. When I made the charge at the police station there was a man who made a charge against a policeman. He did not accompany us from Flower and Dean Street. I counted my money in the police station and showed it to the inspector and the policeman. I took out two florins. I was told by the police to come to Old Street Police Court the next morning. I did not go, because I Was laid up and could not go out. The police told me prisoner was remanded for eight days. They told me to come on the following Friday. I did not go, because I had a day's work to earn 7s., and if I had not gone to work that day I should have lost my situation. The policeman did not tell me that he had said I had 5s. at the police station and that my story should correspond with his. I may have told the magistrate that it was not prisoner who seized me by the throat. I do not know who took the money out of my pocket.

Police-constable EDWARD LLOYD , 326 H. On the morning of October 24, in Flower and Dean street, I heard a shout of "Police." I ran towards the shouting and saw prosecutor with two men on each side of him and prisoner holding him by the throat. I dashed across the road and they separated. I chased prisoner up Flower and Deas Street about 40 or 50 yards. Prosecutor followed and said, "That is one of them." At the station he said he had lost 4s. 6d. I did not see anybody strike prosecutor, but his month was bleeding. There was 4s. found on prosecutor, or it might have been 5s.

Cross-examined. It was a very foggy night. Prisoner was not one of the men who was rifling prosecutor's pockets; he had him by the throat. Prosecutor was quite sober. There was a gentleman came into the station and made a complaint against a constable for knocking a woman down.

Re-examined. I did not lose sight of the man who held prosecutor by the throat. I am sure prisoner is the man.

JAMES LEVI (prisoner, on oath). On the night of October 23 I was in Brick Lane. I there met a woman and had two or three drinks in her company. I gave her half a crown on condition that we should go together that night. She took me down Flower and Dean Street, and said if I would wait at the door of the lodging house she would go and secure the lodging. I wanted ten minutes and then found she had gone out by another door. Later on I found her further down the street, and prosecutor, if not with her. was very close. I accosted her and she appealed to him; he camp between us and clutched me by the collay. I gried to push past him. he hit me, and I hit him back. I was hustled up the lane. I stood there for about five minutes. Then I saw two or three people dash out of the fog with a policeman behind; he went about two yards past, came back and flashed his lamp on my face. I was under the impression that I was arrested for a breach of the peace, until I was

charged at the police station. Then I protested and tried to explain the thing. This woman volunteered to come and give evidence on my behalf, but the policeman knocked her down. A gentleman in the crowd took his number and came to the station and made a complaint. I sent two letters to the lodging house keeper to try and find out anyone who had seen the case but I have had no reply. I do not know anybody in that locality, or I might have been able to get evidence.

Cross-examined. I do not know how many people hustled me up the Lane. I should say five or six. I do not know the man who came to the station and said some woman had been knocked down. When I was arrested I said, "Some of you people come and see fair play," and the woman said, "I will come." The policeman was there and must have heard it. I was taken down to prosecutor and the policeman said, "Is this one of them?" He said, "That is the man that struck me." I said, "You hit me first."

Police-constable LLOYD recalled. I did not hear prisoner when he was arrested say, "Who will come and give evidence for me?" or anything of the sort. I saw no woman there. A gentleman did complain of a police-constable knocking woman down in Commercial Street.

Verdict, Not Guilty.


(Thursday, November 28.)

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-46
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour; Imprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

HOWELL, Charles (27, labourer), HARDY, Eli (26, labourer); both unlawfully and maliciously wounding and inflicting grievous bodily harm upon Albert Waterton.

Mr. A. Gill prosecuted.

ALBERT WATERTON , Police-constable 113 V. I was on duty in Pools Road, Battersea, in the early morning of November 3 between 12 and one o'clock. I saw three men arm in arm. I did not know them at that time, but I now know two of them to be the prisoners. As people were going past prisoners got in front of them and forced them into the roadway; if they refused to go prisoners and the other man would turn round and use most filthy language to them. I spoke to them about their conduct and requested them to go home and use better language, especially Hardy. He turned round and said, You are going to see me home?" I replied, "No, but if you continue this conduct I shall take you in custody." He said, "F—you," and struck me in the jaw on the left side of the face. I then took hold of his shoulder and arm and took him into custody. He immediately snatched my whistle from my tunic, broke the chain, and threw the whistle in the gutter. He struggled to get away. and we both fell to the ground. He shouted to Howell, "Let him have it." Howell come forward and kicked me tares times on the held. The first kick sent my helmet off, the other two were directly on the head. That made me almost unconscious, but I clung

to him, and as Hardy wu getting up he said to Howell. "Look at him." Howell again rushed forward and knocked my arm away from his neckerchief. They both ran away. Hardy ran down the road; I followed, but was unable to go far before I began to vomit. I returned to where the struggle took place, found the whistle in the gutter, and my helmet 15 or 20 yards away. I blew the whistle for assistance and went back in the direction that Hardy ran when I became unconscious. When I recovered I was being assisted to the station, where I was attended by Dr. Kenmpster, who ordered me to be sent home to bed. I have not returned to duty.

Cross-examined by Howell. I was not able to get the name and address of any of the people molested. I have been at Bridge Road Police Station about a year. I did not know Howell's name before this assault. I do not know whether he has assisted the police.

Cross-examined by Hardy. When I accused Hardy of using filthy language he did not say, "I am not using filthy language. I did not push him. When I tried to get hold of him he tried to get away and fell over. He did not ask How to pick up his hat. (To the Court) Hardy struck me in the face just before I arrested him.

Re-examined. It was after we had fallen and alter I had been kicked that Hardy tried to get away.

Inspector MORGAN, V DIVISION. I was at the police station when the constable came in. I sent for the divisional surgeon. That same morning at about half-post two, I went to Howell's address and found him in bed. I said, "I want you for assaulting a policeman." He said, "Not me, not me." He then got out of bed and while putting on hit trousers he said, "I saw him wrestling on the footway and I propped him one." I took him to Battersea Police Station and told him he would be charged with being concerned with another man in assaulting a constable by kicking him. He said, "I only left my wife a short time before the assault was done." When the charge was read over to him he said, "I was there, but I did not do the assault." His boots and clothing were covered with mud. I removed his boots and on the toe of the left boot, adhering to some mud. was a brown mark which I thought was blood. I handed the boot to the doctor for examination. I told prisoner the doctor had examined his boot and found blood on it; he made no reply.

Cross-examined by Howell. There were several other officers with me when I went to arrest Howell. I daresay they heard him make the statement. There was no necessity for him to sign the statsnirnt. The cap I took off the table is still at the station.

Cross-examined by Hardy. Howell's boots and trousers were covered with mud, not his clothes generally.

Dr. FELIX CHARLES KEMPSTER , divisional surgeon at Battersea Police Station. On the morning of November 3 I saw Waterton at the station at about half-past two. He had a severe contused wound behind the ear on the left side of the head, and numerous bruises about the face and body. He was suffering from severe loss of blood owing to an artery being cut through, and also from concussion of

the brain. The wound was two inches long and going down to the bone. A severe kick would cause such a wound. I afterwards saw the boots. I found a small spot of blood on the toe of one boot. The toe of the boot exactly fitted the wound. The constable has been very ill, very delirious, and has had partial paralysis of the facial muscles. I have been afraid that he unfit for further duty.

Cross-examined by Howell. I did not know whose the boots were. The bruise on the jaw was caused by a fist. The bruises on the body were caused, some by falling and some by blows. I found bruises on the temples, forehead, and back of the head. (To the Jury) A sharp-pointed boot would be more likely to cut a man's head than a broad-toed one. Prisoner's boot was a medium-pointed boot.

Detective-sergeant PURKISS , V Division. On November 14 I saw Hardy in Praed Street. I had had a warrant for about a week, but he had left his regular haunts and I could not find him. I said, "I hold a warrant for your arrest for being concerned with a man not in custody in wounding Police-constable Waterton on the 3rd of this month." He said, "All right, I will go quiet." On the way to the station he said, "He ought to have been killed interfering with people. I rolled over with him, but did not assault him, somebody else got me away." I took him to Battersea Police-Station and read the warrane to him; he was charged and made no reply.

CHARLES HOWELL (prisoner, on oath). On November 3, between half-past twelve and a quarter to one, I was standing at the corner of Stainforth Road with Hardy. The constable came up and said of Hardy. "That is enough of that filthy language." Hardy said, "I am not using no language, you hare made a mistake." The constable shoved Hardy into the gutter and they both fell. Hardy said, "Pick my hat up." I went to pick his hat up when I got knocked over the constable's head. The people round there know I have assisted the police and thought I was doing so then. As I fell over I kicked the constable. I admitted at the police court that I kicked him once, but not intentionally. I got up and went home. I deny altogether the statements which the inspector said I made.

Cross-examined. I was asleep when the inspector came to my lodging When I woke up I said, "You have made a mistake. I have never assaulted a policeman intentionally." I did not say, "He was wrestling on the footway and I propped him one." I told the inspector that I had kicked him accidentally. There was no blood on my boots. I am in the painting trade, and the mark the inspector showed me was red ochre. I told him so.

ELI HARDY (prisoner, on oath). On November 3 between half-past 12 and a quarter to one I was talking to a young friend at the top of Stainforth Road, when the constable accused me of using filthy language. I said, "I am not using no filthy language." With that he started pushing me. I said, "Don't you bleeding well pull me about" I tried to pet out of his way. I fell over, and the constable fell on top of me. I rolled on the ground with the constable, and somebody got me away.

Cross-examined. I did not strike the constable at all. I did not plead guilty to the indictment against me for assaulting a constable. (To the Court.) I went to get out of the constables way, and slid over as I got over the kerb, and he fell on top of me.

Verdict. Both prisoners guilty of wounding with intent to do grievous bodily harm.

Detective-sergeant Purkiis proved previous convictions against both prisoners.

Police-constable Cox, 257 V. I was present when prisoner was convicted at the North-Western Police Court on June 29. 1900. He was bound over in £5 or a month's imprisonment.

Sentence, Howell, two years' hard labour; Hardy, 20 months' hard labour.

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-47
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

ATTEHBURY. Joseph Henry . Stealing one box containing two cheeses and other articles, the goods of Isaac Bidwell and another.

Mr. John O'Connor prosecuted. Mr. Purcell defended.

CHARLES PARKIN , 5, Talbot Road, Forest Gate, cart minder at the Central West Market. On November 1, about a quarter past eight in the morning, I saw prisoner go between the horses of Messrs. Crowson'svans at the marker. I walked up and saw him making water against one of the fore wheels of the van. Then he came to the frost of the van and went away up the road. About a quarter of an hour later I was standing on the footway on the market-side, looking across the road, when I again saw him walk in between the same two horses and walk up to the front of the van. He put his right hand into the van and pulled the box out. He was putting it on to his shoulder when I slipped through between the wheels of the van. He saw me coming and turned sharp round to the left again. Taking the box off his shoulder, he his the horse, on his right-hand side. The boys was knocked out of his hand, and the contents spilt on to the ground. I saw no boys about. (Witness identified the box produced.) The box contained some bottles of fish paste and two Dutch cheeses. I do not know the weight of the box. The front part of the van would be 38 inches from the ground. It was a one-horse van. We have no uniform; we wear a badge. I have been employed at the market 15 years. When the box fell I went up to prisoner, he tried to push past me, I seized him, and we had a struggle. He eventually broke away from me and ran across the road into the market. I ran after him. He went into the door. turned sharp to the left, then to the right, then to the right again. I blew my whistle and caused a crowd to assemble. He ran into the crowd. I seized him by the wrist, and held him till the market constable came, to whom I banded him over.

Cross-examined. I have no recollection of prisoner before this time. He had got his blue smock on and his waistcoat outside it. It was a foggy rooming. After I saw him making water I lost sight of him, and thought no more about it. I am continually moving up and down my rank, which extends about 30 yards. There were carts

no fetch's de of the pavement. When I saw him the second time I was standing on the footway on the market-side. I saw him walk up to the front of the van and pull out the box. In the morning boys come to the market with bags and pick up bits of fat and refuse, but there were no boys near at this time. I would not swear there had been no boys there within five minutes or three minutes of that time. When I got near prisoner I said, "Stop a minute, old man," and he began to push past me and shout. He made no reply, but kept shouting something. I do not know what. I had hold of him when I told the market constable what he had done. He kept saying, "It is a mistake." That it all I heard him say. I have no distinct recollection of what he said. He might have said, "I have done nothing; you have made a mistake"

Re-examined. If he had said anything I should have heard it. I did he did him say, "It is all a mistake." The boys that come range from seven or eight to about 15 or 16 years of age. They pack up anything they can get hold of. I have never known them to take box like this one. They might be able to. The box was on the floor of the van, under the seat board. (To the Court.) It was the same cart that he was making water at. At the time he was making water he had his face toward the inside of the heart. He could see the content's of the van. (To the Jury.) The box was taken from the near side of the van. Prisoner was carrying the box on his left shoulder. I do not think a boy could take the box out of the van without getting on to the wheel.

HERBERT PAVELEY , van salesman, 53. Princess Hay Roid, Stoke Newington. At a quarter-past eight on November 1 I was loading my van outside the warehouse, 61, Charterthouse Street. I saw defendant there making water beside a wheel between the vans. I next saw him in charge of the market obstacle at the back of the van. I did not see him come back the second time. I was called out of the ware-house, and the goods were on the ground.

JOSEPH BUCKLER , Market Constable 49. About 25 minutes to nine on the morning of November 1 I heard a whittle on the north side of the poultry market. I went acroat and saw a crowd assembled and prisoner struggling with Parkin. He told me the man had stolen tome goods from a van in Charterhouse Street. I took him across to Charterhouse Street, some good were shown to me and it was stated they were stolen from a van. I told him I should take him into custody for steeling goods. He said, "It it a mistake, I know nothing at all about it." I took him to Snow Hill Station, where he was charged. In answer to the charge he made no reply. I was told in his presence that he had stolen the goods. He did not say anything about boys at the time. It is a women practice for men to make water against vans there, but they are stopped; I believe some have been reported and summoned for committing a nuisance.

Cross-examined. When I first saw prisoner struggling with Parian, Parkin told me he had stolen goods from a van in Charterhouse Street. That was in prisoner's hearing. Prisoner said nothing. It it not

correct that he kept on saving, "it is a mistake." When I took him across to Messrs. Crowson's and told him he would be charged with stealing he said, "It is a mistake. I know nothing about." He did not say. "I have not taken it." There was a clerk there, but I do not know his name. The clerk did not say, "The prisoner has no right to touch the things. I am a constable, but not a police-constable. I took a note of what occurred. Prisoner has been licensed for 30 years; his badge was issued on May 4, 1877. Mr. Bagley is a market tenant. I know that be has known prisoner for 32 years, and gives him an excellent character.

Mr. O'Connor. If you want evidence of character you can call Mr. Bagley. What he told this witness is not evidence.

Witness (to the Court). There are about 40 constables in the market, employed by the Markets Committee.

FREDERICK STEVENSON , carman, 46, Creed Lane, Hanwell. At a quarter past eight on the morning of November 1 I was taking the bags off my horses, when I turned round and saw prisoner struggling with the market porter between the vans opposite. I put my notebags on the front of the van and went across the road. I saw prisoner running away and the cart minder after him. I followed. He ran in a zig-zag direction for about 100 yards. I was near the spot where they first struggled. There were no boys about. The box was on the ground, and the things had tumbled out of it.

ERNEST WRIGHT , carrier, Melforth House, Hanwell. I was standing on the pavement in the market. I saw Charley struggling with the defendant between a pair of horses opposite. Defendant tried to get away. Charley wat blowing his whistle, and he tried to strike it out of his mouth. He ran about 100 yards. I did not see any boys about.

Cross-examined. The market constable had not got hold of the prisoner when I first saw him. Afterwards the constable came up and took hold of him. I did not notice prisoner keep on saying, "It is a mistake."

CHARLES WHITEHOUSE assistant poulterer, 115, Carlyle Road, Manor Park. I saw defendant running through the market. I at tempted to stop him. He said, "Do not stop me."

GUSTAVE PHILP MOYSSON , 26, Remos Road, Southfields. I am clerk to Isaac Bidwell and another person who trade under the name of Messrs. Crowson, provision merchants, Central Meat Market. I identify the box produced as the property of the firm. It contained 18 pots of potted fish and two round Edam cheeses. The whole of them would weigh about 12 Ib. to 14 lb. I should think two small boys could easily lift it out of the front of the van. Constable 49 brought prisoner to me on the morning in question. The cart minder was there also. The cart minder accused prisoner of taking this box from the front of our van. He had no right whatever to touch the box. I did not hear prisoner say anything in reply.

Cross-examined. The value of the box was about 12s. When the constable and the cart minder brought the man to me they said they

had seen him take the box from the front of the van and asked if we would charge him. The cart minder said that I said, "Yes." I do not think anything else was said at the moment. He was at once taken away. I knew he had been in the market for years. I have a fairly good memory. I do not remember saying when I gave evidence on November 1, "The box produced contained" so and so. "The accused had no right to touch it. The accused said he had not taken it" I heard my deposition read and signed it. Mr. Purcell read the deposition as follows: "The accused had no right to touch it. Accused said he had not taken it. The box was was on one of our vans. G. P. Moysson."

Witness. I have no recollection of the accused saying those words, now. I do not remember that that is what I told the magististe about it. what I told the magistrate was true.

Witness identified the depositions which were pot in.

Prisoner's statement was read.


JOSEPH HENRY ATTERBURY (prisoner, on oath). I live at 7, King and Queen Street, Walworth. I have been licensed over 30 years and have been working in the market all those years. On the morning of November 1, after I had made water against the wheel, I saw two boys coming along with the box. I took the box away from there and gave them a clout aside the ear. One of the boys bad the box on his shoulder when I first saw them. They were between the wheels of the the carts and were going in the direction of the road. When I gave them a cloat they hopped it away pretty quick. We are continually taking things away from the boys in the market. When I had got the box away from them I went to put it into the van and the cart minder came across and claimed my shoulder. I said, "You have made a mistake. Leave go, it is nothing to do with me." I wanted to get out of trouble; I Went into the market and started running. I thought I was getting out of trouble, instead of that I have got into it. I was taken over to Messrs. Crowson's and the cart minder said, "He is charged with taking a box out of the van." I said, "It is quite a mistake." I heard the clerk when before the Alderman say, "The accused said he had not taken it." That was within an hour or an hour and a half of the occurrence. The evidence of the constable, the cart minder, and the clerk was taken, and I was remanded to November 6. Then the evidence of the other witnesses was taken and I made the statement which was read out just now. I then went into the witness-box and said, "I am a licensed porter. I have been licensed for 32 years. I have never had a complaint against me. The account I have just given to the magistrate is correct. I admit running away, but it is not true that I took the box off the van." I had no chance to call any witnesses that day.

Cross-examined. It is an everyday occurrence to take things away from the boys in the market, even the constables take the bags from

them and give them a clout. I might deserve praise for restoring the box to the owner, but when the cart minder accused me of stealing it I hardly knew what I was doing; I ran away because I was afraid of getting into trouble. I ought to have told the cart minder and the constable that I had taken it away from the boys, but I did not do so. I told Sergeant Newman at Snow Hill when he came to see me in the cell. I said, "It is quite a mistake. I took this case off two boys and the constable took hold of me." I went back to the van the second time to make water again. I am subject to my water. We porters work very hard; we drink a lot of tea and coffee, and, perhaps, a drop of beer in between, and we cannot hold our water very long. The boys were just going away as I went to make water the second time. They were boys of 11 to 13 yearn old, I should think, about 3 ft. 10 in. or 4 ft. in height. Boys of that age would find some way of getting at it if they could not reach it. I have caught them picking up aitch bones of beef and knobs of suet in the shop. The constables turn them out of the market as fact as they can. I did not hand them over to the cart minder because, as the father of a big family myself, I have some feeling for others, so I gave them a clout and they slung off. I did not notice how the boys were dressed.

Re-examined. I have not seen Sergeant Newman in this court at all. he has known me all my lifetime. I asked him to come up to the police court that very morning. I said, "Sergeant Newman, will you come up to the station, please. I have taken this box off two boys." (To the Court.) I first told Sergeant Newman about the boys at Snow Hill when he came down to recognise who was in the cell. (To counsel.) Sergeant Newman was not at the Guildhall. I asked him to come. Mr. Fryer has known me over 20 years. He has been here each afternoon to get me released on bail. (To the Court.) I had a tussle with the caretaker because I did not what to get into trouble. I did not tell him anything about the two boys. I was confused. I found I had made a mistake and I wanted to get out of it. I ran away, and was eventually arrested in the market. Then I was taken to Crowson's and charged. I do not think I mentioned the boys there. At the police court I cross-questioned the cart minder about it.

FEEDERICK FRYER , licensed porter. I have known Mr. Atterbury ever since I have been in the market, about 18 or 20 years, and he has always borne a good character.

Cross-examined. Mr. Bagley is his employer. The reason he is not here to-day is that the case has been carried on so long, and he has to attend to his business.

Mr. Purcell objected to this witness being cross-examined as to Mr. Bagley's motive.

Judge Lumley Smith. I rule that to ask a licensed porter in the market what in the mind of sombody who it not here, is not evidence.

WILLIAM GOOD , porter hi the Cold Air Stores. Up to November 1 I did not know prisoner, buy I had seen the cart minder. I have been

about seven years in the employment of the Cold Air Stores. On November 1 was crossing from the market in Charterhouse Street, at about a quarter-past eight, to go to the Cold Air Stores, and I saw prisoner against a cart, making water. I also saw two boys there picking fat up. He clouten one in the ear, took a box away from the other, and went to put it on the van, when the cart minder ran over and got hold of him. Prisoner said it was a mistake, and walked across towards the market. He did not run in my presence. I then went away about my business. Later in the evening I heard a conversation in a public-house, in consequence of which I went to the Guildhall Police Court. Nobody asked me to go. On the second hearing I went into the witness-box and gave the account I have given now.

Cross-examined. It was about three or four o'clock on the same day that I heard the conversation in the public-house. When I first saw prisoner he was in the act of marking water against the wheel. The boys were close against the front of the van, and they had a box. I saw prisoner clout one in the ear-hole and take the box from the other. One boy took the box out of the van while the other took it away. I saw them with the box and saw prisoner take it away. I should say they took it whale he was there. He did not run away, but walked arose toward the market. He might have ran in the market. I was not there. I did not see any struggle. If half a dozen wit nesses swear the prisoner ran away I should say it vu false. I am speaking the truth.

Verdict, Not Guilty.

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-48
VerdictGuilty > unknown; Not Guilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

RATOUFF, Edward (or Racier) , GORDON, Henry Frederick (32, agent) ; both conspiring and agreeing together to obtain by false pretences, from Cyril Everyard Moor Sharp, the sum of £30 with intent to defraud.

Mr. Arthur Gill, Mr. R F. Graham Campbell, and Mr. Oddit prosecuted. Mr. David White defended Gordon. Mr. I. H. Coumbe defended Ratcliff.

HERMAN APEL , Clerk, 158, Pentonville Road. I Know Gordan, and I have met Ranier twice. The first time I met him was when the cheque was presented to me. I identify the cheque produced, dated july 20. It was shortly after that date I met Gordon and Ranier. Mr. Gordon asked me if I could obtain a small amount on a cheque and give him the balance when it was cashed. He said it was after banking hours. When I saw the cheque I asked if it was genuine, as I did not know Mr. Ranier. He amid, "Mr. Ranier is here, and he will tell you that it is absolutely good." I said to Ranier I would obtain it if I possibly could from a friend until the morning. Ranier said the cheque was absolutely good. I took the cheque the same nigh to Mr. Pearce, a friend of mine, and asked him to pass it through his bank the first thing in the morning. Next morning Mr. Pearce's son handed me back the cheque with the words" No account as signed" upon it. He gave me no money at all. I saw Gordon between 12

and one o'clock that same day, and told him the cheque had been re-turned. He said he could not understand it. It must have been a month or two after that when I next saw Ranier. I had the cheque in my possession when I saw Gordon. I did not show it to him. but simply told him what the answer was on the cheque. "No account as signed." (To the Judge). No money was obtained on that cheque at all.

Cross-examined by Mr. Coumbe. I have known Mr. Gordon for some years. He is in the habit of getting cheques cashed and charging a commission for doing so. I have known him on one occasion to obtain a small advance on a cheque and in a day or two when the cheque had not been honoured, pay the money and take the cheque back. I first saw Ranier at a public-house in High Holborn, called "The Napier." Gordon was with him. Gordon had not previously been to my house. I asked him whose the cheque was, and he said, "The drawer is here, I will introduce you." Gordon had not told me anything about the cheque before I met Ranier. (To Mr. White). I knew that Mr. Gordon was a financial agent I met him in "The Napier" at about five o'clock. I knew it was after banking hours He told me the cheque was perfectly good, and Ranier endorsed that opinion. The cheque was in Ranier's name. When the cheque was returned I went to Gordon. I told him the endorsement on the cheque "No account, as signed." It was a month or two afterwards that I saw Ranier. I made no remark to him about the cheque, nor he to me. In the transactions I have had with Gordon I have always found him straightforward.

Re-examined. Gordon had not been to my address before the meeting at the "Napier." It was an absolutely casual meeting. When I said that I had always found Gordon straightforward I meant that as far as I knew there was nothing against him. I may have heard things, but I did not know.

ARTHUR RUSSELL , financial agent I have known both defendants for about a couple of years. In January, 1907, I had some business transactions with Ranier, in consequence of which a joint account was opened at the London Joint Stock Bank, High Holborn branch. Ranier's name came first, "Ranier and Russell. "We both went to the bank and both signed the signature-book. The account was to be operated upon by the two signatures. The account was opened by the payment in of £25, which was really Ranter's. A cheque book was issued, as far as I remember four cheques were drawn between January and April, signed in our joint. names. By that time the account was slightly overdrawn and I paid in £3 for the purpose of meeting the overdraft. I think I communicated with Ranier about that payment in as soon as I saw him after wards, about a week later. Between April and August the account was not operated upon jointly at all. In August I received a communication from the bank, in consequence of which I closed the account on August 12. Ranier had no authority to draw cheques on that account solely.

Cross-examined by Mr. Coumbe. I was financing Ranier; the business was not successful and I ceased to finance him, therefore this particular account ceased to be in funds. I do not remember specifially telling Ranier that a small amount had to be paid in to put the account in balance. He might have thought, in August, that there was a small balance. Ranier is a splendid producer of plays, but he is one of the biggest fools, in business, I have ever come across. He had never had a banking account before to my knowledge. I filled up the body of the cheques drawn on the joint account. Ranier had only to add his signature. I had to tall him what to do. About June or July Gordon asked me to collect 12s. from Ranier for commission on some pervious transaction. He knew at that time that I was advancing money to Ranier. At the end of this particular transaction I absolutely refused to let Ranier have any more money.

Re-examined. As far as I knew this was Ranier first banking account. When he went to the bank ha was told to sign the book. I do not think anything else was explained to him as to what he should do with regard to the accounts; of course, he saw me filling up cheques. He knew that the cheques had to be signed by both. (Witness examined some cheques.) I should say that I signed my name to those in all cases first, emphatically. It is Quite possible that when he signed he must have seen my signature, because I should have finished dealing with the cheque before I handed it to him.

HENRY AUSTIN GROUT , chief clerk, London Joint Stock Bank, High Holborn branch. An account was opened in the joint names of Ranter and Russell on January 9 of this year. I produce a correct copy of that account, opened January 9 closed August 12. It was opened by the payment in of £25. Cheques were drawn on that account: January 18, 2 guineas; January 26, £15; February 23, £5; and April 3, £5. That would have slightly overdrawn the account, but for a credit of £3 on April 10, which left a balance of 15s. lid. Which remained until August 12. I also produce an extract from the returns book showing that, on July 23, a cheque drawn by E. Ranier was presented through the London and Booth-Western Bank, Commecial Street branch for £25, and returned with the endorsement, "No account as signed." On August 6 a cheque, also drawn by E. Ranier for £10, was presented through the London and South-Western Bank, Finsbury Pavement branch, which was returned with the same endorsement. On August 9 a cheque for £55 was presented through the London and South-Western Bank, London Road branch, which was endorsed, "Post dated, also requiring another signature." The £10 cheque was presented again on August 13, and marked "No account" The account being in the joint names a cheque drawn by either one alone would not be honoured. I should think the cheques are all signed in the handwriting of Ranier. (Witness identified the cheones.)

Cross-examined by Mr. Coumbe. There would be nothing on the cheque book to show that the account must be operated by two names. I should say that the cheques for £25 and £10 are filled up in a

different handwriting from the cheque for £55. I should say that the £55 cheque was filled up by a man familiar with filling up cheque the others are not filled up in a business-like way. Those two, I should think were filled up by Ranier.

Cross-examined by Mr. White. I have never seen a cheque book with a notification in it that the cheques must be signed by one, or two, person. If a cheque is made out in an unbusiness like way we should not refuse to cash it; we should point out that there is a risk in drawing cheques like that. I should not call that irregularly drown, but carelessly drawn.

Re-examined. It is a common thing for cheques to be drawn with a space in the left-hand side, but we take an early opportunity of drawing the customer's attention to it because there is a risk.

(Friday, November 29.)

HENRY ARUSTING GROUT , recalled. We received a letter on July 27 from Edward Ranier and another on August 10, both undated. I should think both are in Ranier's handwriting. (Witness identified the letters.)

Croat-examined. The letters were received by the bank by the ordinary morning post.

CHARLES ENTHOVEN , solicitor, practicing at 129, Fiasbury Pavement. I know Gordon. My firm has acted for him from time to time for a month or two before the date of this offence. He called on me on July 31, 1907. He said he had a cheque signed by one Ranier, a well-known music-hall artiste, and that he had cashed cheques for him several times before. He produced a letter, which he said was signed by Ranier, asking him to hold the cheque over till the Saturday and he asked me to give him a cheque against it. The cheque produced is the one he showed me, drawn on the London Joint Stock Bank, High Holborn, for £10, signed "Edward Ranier," in favour of Gordon. I gave him an open cheque for £9 10s. I identify the cheque produced. He said he had cashed cheques for Ranier before and they had always been met. The cheque was paid into the firm's bunk in the ordinary way and was returned bearing the words, "No account as signed." On August 7 we wrote to Gordon as follows: "We regret to inform you that Mr. Ranter's cheque for £10 has been returned this morning marked 'No account.' In accordance with conversation over telephone we expected you to call this afternoon. We must ask you to put the matter right before 12 o'clock to-morrow (Thursday)." On the 8th we received a letter card, "Dear Sir,—Ranier said he will forward cash to-morrow.—Yours faithfully, H. F. Gordon." On the 9th we wrote: "Dear Sir,—We are surprised that you have not called on us. As you have settled with Ranier the money should be paid to us at once. Unless the matter is settles to-morrow we shall have no alternative but to take the usual steps." The same day we received a letter: "Dear Sirs,—I am very sorry I could not see you to-day as arranged. Instructions have been gives.

to credit your account, London and South-Western Bank, with £10 in reference to Ranter's cheque. Apologizing for trouble.—Yours, H. F. Gordon." We were never credited with £10 in reference to that cheque. On August 12 we received a letter from Gordon, Douglas and Co., "Dear Sirs, £In reply to your telephonic communication instructions were given for £10 to be paid in to your bank and you have been credited with this amount." We paid the cheque to a second time, but it was not met. After that my partner sent a letter to "Ranier, care of Gordon Douglas "or" Gordon."

Cross-examined by Mr. David White. My firm bad made application on behalf of Gordon in one or two actions at law, but had got no further than that. If Gordon had come to us with any cheque for a small amount like £10 we would have cashed it for him. Gordon volunteerd the information that he had done business with Ranier. We had an action for Gordon against a man in Copenhagen for £200 and we recovered £25 in an action against a man named kish. I went on my vacation on August 9. When the cheque was presented and not met, it was I who wrote the letter to Gordon, in which I said the cheque was marked "No account." I simply meant to call he attention to the fact that the cheque had come back. There is to suggestion in that letter that there is no account in the name at all.

Cross-examined by Mr. Coumbe. That letter would be enclosed in an envelope bearing the stamp of the firm. Gordon would know the handwriting of my firm. When we referred to "usual proceedings" we had in mind a civil action. I have not got the letter of August 3 asking for the cheque to be held over. Gordon took good year to take it away again. I could not say whether it was in Ranter's handwriting. (To Mr. David White.) That letter had no influence my mind in came the cheque.

Re-examined. I would not have cashed the cheque if I had known it was signed by one man on an account which required two signatues.

CYRIL EVERARD MOOR SHARP , Redhill. At the beginning of August I called on Gordon on several occasions with a view to his borrowing money for me. He did not borrow any. I called on him on August 6 Mr. Law and Mr. Hall were present. I am not certain who her Ranier was present the first time I called. I met Ranier that day at Mr. Gordon's office. Ranier said he was willing to draw me a cheque for £55, post dated to August 10, and that I should receive £30 and be should have £25. I was to sign a bill at one month for £25, of which Gordon said he was to have £5 as commission. That was all said in the presence of each other. Mr. Law was present. I identify the cheque produced. I asked if the cheque would be met, and one of the prisoners informed me that there was no money then, in the bank to meet it, but there would be, as Mr. Ranier was expecting a remittance from his father, and Mr. Gordon said if I was not satisfied he would give me a guarantee for the amount of the cheque. I identify the guarantee produced. I gave a promissory note for £35

to Ranier. I took the cheque down to the New Vacuum Cleaning Company. Mr. Gordon and Mr. Law went with me. Mr. Law went in, Mr. Gordon remained outside. I saw the secretary of the company, Mr. White, who was a friend of mine. I gave him the cheque, and he gave me in exchange a cheque on the London and South-Western Bank, Brompton Road, drawn in my favour. I went outside to Gordon, who was waiting in the cab, and we went across to the London and South-Western Bank and got the cheque cashed. I put the £55 in my pocket. I then went down with Gordon and Law to the bar next to the Standard Music Hall, Victoria, and there I gave Mr. Gordon £25. Subsequently I gave him another £5. This all took place on August 7. I next saw Gordon on the Friday or Saturday. I think it was in "The Napier" public-house. He asked me if I was in need of any more money. I said, "Yes." He then suggested that we should put through another transaction on similar lines, but this time the cheque was to be for £60. I said I did not think I could get the cash, but I would try. I thought the matter over, and finally decided to ask at the bank whether the cheque was likely to be met. They informed me that the cheque could not be met. I saw the manager and showed him the cheque. I did not present it for payment. That was on Monday, the 12th. I saw both defendants the same day. I told Gordon the £55 cheque had not been met. I also told him I had taken the second cheque, to the bank, but I do not think I told him the manager's communication to me. He said he would do his best to get it met. I do not remember on what occasion it was, but I was told that Ranier's father had been seized with a paralytic stroke and was not able to sign cheques. I think I saw Ranier that day earlier than I saw Gordon. I told him the £55 had not been met. I returned him the £60 cheque, and I think he again said his father was too ill to sign cheques. Gordon was not present. I saw Gordon several times subsequently, and I saw Mr. Ranier, I believe, twice. I saw him at the Bedford Music Hall on the night he opened there. I cannot remember the date. On one occasion, when both were present, Mr. Gordon said he finished to go and see Mr. Ranier's uncle, as his father was still too ill to sign cheques, and he thought he could get a cheque from his uncle. The £55 was afterwards met by my mother, so I was £25 out of pocket.

Cross-examined by Mr. David White. I was very hard up at this time. I was entitled to some money under a reversion. I gave Gordon a charge upon it. I told him I had charged it to another man for £250. I had given another person a commission note for what they could raise on the reversion; that was not a charge. Mr. Gordon did his best to get money for me. He introduced me to Messrs. Tiddeman and Enthoven. He did not introduce me to anyone else with the object of getting money. I was introduced to Brown and Co. to get some money, but that was subsequent to Gordon's arrest. Ranier was not with Gordon the first time I met Gordon. I will not swear who first suggested the transaction; it certainly was not me. I knew Mr. Gordon as a financial agent and that it would be his living to get

people to do these transactions perfectly bona fide for a payment on commission. When the £5 commission was mentioned Mr. Gordon, Mr. Law, Mr. Ranier, and myself were all present in Gordon's office. When the cheque was discussed I was not quite satisfied. I consulted my solicitor and went back with Mr. Law to Gordon's office in Great James Street; we went into the inner office and saw Mr. Ranier. I think I had been introduced to him an hour or so previously. Mr. Ranier made some mistake in writing out the cheque; to the best of my knowledge it was in the spelling of my name, and Mr. Law wrote out the cheque. Then we went to Mr. White and got the cheque for £55 from him. Mr. Gordon was not with me either in Mr. White's office or in the bank. We then went to the "Royal Standard" and then to the "Golden Cross." I did not see Ranier again until the cheque had been dishonoured. When I told Gordon it had been dishonoured he seemed to be annoyed, and said he would try and get it put right. He went with me, I believe, twice to see Ranier about it. He may have gone at other times. With regard to the £60 cheque, Mr. Gordon was arranging a loan for me, and he came to me and asked me if I wanted some money. When I told Gordon I did not get the money I asked his advice; he said, "You had better garnishee his salary." I said, "I do not know how to do it." He said, "Leave it to me and I will tell you." I believe he did all he could to get the money back.

Cross-examined by Mr. Coumbe. With regard to the £55 cheque, I and Mr. Law first saw Gordon by himself in the general office; he took us in to Ranier. It was put to Ranier that he should sign the cheque, that I should get something, and he get something, and it was to be covered by Gordon's guarantee. I gave a promissory note to Ranier. Ranier did not hand that note to Gordon in my presence. Ranier afterwards told me he had sent it to Gordon. I think the reason Mr. Law filled in the cheque was because a mistake was made. The first cheque was not torn up. I do not know which of the prisoners said there was no money in the bank. It was said in the presence of both. When I saw Mr. White I told him the cheque was post-dated, and asked him to cash it. I will not swear that I told him there was no money in the bank. The cheque was not met. I next saw Ranier on the 12th. I cannot say where it was. He was alone. He said he did not like the look of the thing, or something to that effect. I think it was on the occasion of drawing the cheque that Mr. Ranier's father's illness was mentioned. That was at the second interview, in the presence of everyone, before the cheque was signed. It was said so that everybody could hear it. That was the only occasion on which anything was said before the cheque was signed about Mr. Ranier being too ill to sign cheques. Something to that effect was repeated afterwards. With regard to the £60 cheque, Mr. Gordon, Mr. Law, and myself met Ranier in "The Napier." I believe, casually. Mr. Law was a solicitor. Gordon knew he was a solicitor. I do not know that Ranier did. Ranier was to draw the £60 cheque to oblige me, but he was to have part of it. I do not think he expressed any doubt as to the transaction. The torn

letter is not in my handwriting; it is my signature. I think it is Mr. Gordon's writing; I am not certain. I do not understand the letter. I thought the meaning of the letter was that the cheque should not be presented till Monday, because there was no money to meet it. After I had been to the bank and had the communication from the manager I gave the cheque back to Ranier, and I believe he tore it up. Ranier afterwards asked me to go with him to see Mr. White. I was present at the interview, but I do not remember the conversation.

Re-examined. The £55 cheque is signed by Ranier alone. At the time I believed that he had an account in his sole name and that he had power to draw a cheque in that way. I should not have touched the cheque if I had not so believed. At the time of the drawing of the cheque it was arranged that the extra £5 on the £35 bill was to go to Mr. Gordon. Subsequently I gave him £5 cash. The torn letter refers to the £60 cheque.

MARKHAM CREMER LAW , solicitor, practising at Great James Street Mr. Sharp is a client of the firm for which I was acting as managing clerk. On August 7 he came and told me he had met a Mr. Gordon. On the 8th we went to Mr. Gordon's office, and he told me that a friend of his—a Mr. Ranier—could draw a cheque post-dated till the following Saturday, and if Mr. Sharp could get the cash he could arrange for Sharp to get a loan out of the amount he received for the cheque. Later on I saw Ranier at Gordon's office. First of all Ranier and someone else went out and left Sharp and myself with Gordon. We discussed the matter, and I advised Sharp not to do this, as it was a post-dated cheque. When Sharp decided to do it Ranier and the other man came back, and arrangements were entered into for a cheque for £55 to be drawn by Ranier, and that Sharp should cash it. Sharp was to receive £30 and give a bill to Ranier for £35. First of all Ranier drew the cheque, and he spoilt it. Then I wrote out the cheque. Whilst Ranier and the other man were out I asked Gordon who Ranier was. He said, "I have known him for years; he is quite all right." He produced some letters purporting to be signed by Ranier, but I did not go into them. I just glanced at them. Ranier said the cheque was not to be presented till the Saturday, as it would not be met till then. After that Sharp, Gordon, and I went in a taximeter cab to the offices of the New Vacuum Cleaning Company; Sharp and I went inside, and I was introduced to the manager. Sharp went into an inner room with someone else, and when he came back he had got a cheque in exchange for this one of £55. We then proceeded to the London and South-Western Bank in Brompton Road. Gordon and I remained outside, while Sharp and the manager went in and cashed the cheque. Whilst Gordon and I were waiting outside he said, "I want £5 out of this." I said, "Well, you are receiving £5 in a month's time as commission." He then said, "Well, if you can get me £5 I will share it with you." I said, "I will speak to Sharp about it." Then we drove to the bar next to the "Standard" in Victoria Street. We all went in there for refreshments, and there it was that Sharp handed £20, I think it was, to Gordon. I then

went into the lavatory and beckoned Sharp to follow me. When he came in I told him what Gordon had said. At this time Sharp owed me a little money, and I said, "We will consider this as satisfaction of what you owe me." He agreed to give Gordon the money, and he gave him the £5 afterwards. Gordon and I left Sharp and went to the "Golden Cross," and there he paid me the £2 10s. We met Ranier at the "Crown," Leicester Square. Ranier asked me if Sharp had received his money. I said, "With the exception of a little he has had to pay away." I saw Gordon and Ranier again that afternoon at the "Queen's Head," Theobald's Road. Ranier asked me if Gordon had got his money, and I said, "Yes." I saw Gordon again a few days later and I told him this cheque had not been met. He said that it would be all right. I saw Ranier on the following Monday. He said: "You told me that Gordon had not got the money." I said, "No, you asked me whether Sharp had had the money and I said 'With the exception of a portion that he had to pay away.'" When Ranier was informed about the cheque he said it would have been met, only his father had been very ill and could not pay the money into the bank.

Cross-examined by Mr. David White. My firm were doing business for Sharp and he was constantly in and out. I had raised money for him on behalf of the firm. He gave a charge on the reversion for the money he had. I advised him to have nothing to do with this cheque, as it was post dated. I did not tell Sharp to go and tell Mr. White the cheque was all right. There was a commission of £5 arranged to be paid to Gordon at the end of a month. I did not say to Gordon, "I will advise Sharp to give you £5 if you give me £2 10s." Ranier told me on two or three occasions that he had not received any money. I do not recollect his saying he had been to Gordon's office that same afternoon to settle some business with him. I saw Gordon a few days after the £55 cheque had been dishonoured. I did not understand him to express surprise. He said he would see that it was met all right. He may have expressed surprise. Ranier gave me to understand that the money was not there owing to his father's illness.

Cross-examined by Mr. Coumbe. From beginning to end of this transaction I was acting more as a friend of Sharp's than anything else. I do not think the fact of a managing clerk to a solicitor being present would convey to Ranier's mind that the thing was all right. I think it was arranged, as between Ranier and Gordon, before I saw him. I did not get £2 10s. for my services; it was money Sharp owed me. I did not regard these proceedings as in any way likely to give rise to a criminal prosecution. I advised Sharp to have nothing to do with it. Beyond that I could do nothing if Sharp chose to go on with it. I was perfectly justified in thinking it was all straightforward. When a man tells you the money will not be there till Saturday it looks all right. I do not remember making any suggestion that Ranier should get the money from his father.

Re-examined. Until we took the £60 cheque to the bank I did not know that Ranier had not an account in his sole name.

FRANCIS SAXBY WHITE , secretary of the New Vacuum Cleaning Company. On August 8 Sharp came to me and handed me a cheque for £55 and asked me to give him one of our cheques, which I did, I identify the cheques produced. The cheque which he gave me was returned from the bank marked "Post dated. Also requires another drawer's signature."

Cross-examined by Mr. White. I do not know Gordon; I met him a week after the cheque was drawn; I told him the cheque had not been met; he said that would be all right. He said that when he advised Sharp to get that cheque cashed he was under the belief that it would be be met.

Cross-examined by Mr. Coumbe. I had never spoke to Ranier before this time. I cashed the cheque because Mr. Sharp was a friend of mine.

Detective-sergeant WILLIAM STEPHENS , E Division. I arrested Gordon on August 30. I found in his possession an address card of Ranier's, a letter from Ranier dated August 29, and Ranier's cheque book, in which the counterfoils of the cheques which have been, produced appear. On October 30 I saw Ranier at the Clerkenwell Police Station. I told him I had caused inquiries to be made at Nottingham and there was no trace that his father ever kept a public-house; he had been an actor, his name was Mr. George, and he was residing at No. 2. Halliwell Road. Clapham Junction.

Cross-examined by Mr. White. When I found these letters on Gordon I did not tell him they were no use. I have had them ever since until I handed them over to the Treasury a day or two ago. When this charge was first mentioned to Gordon he made a long statement to Sergeant Bissell and myself. I was told by Ranier's stepmother that Gordon did go do down to see Ranier's father about this cheque, but I do not think he saw him.

Cross-examined by Mr. Coumbe. The date of the letter may be the 24th; it is not very clear.

Police-sergeant JOHN BISSELL , C Division. I arrested Ranier on October 18 upon the charge of conspiring with Gordon. I read the warrant and thoroughly explained it to him. He said, "I know I have been a fool, but I had none of the money. I done it to oblige Gordon, who asked me to take the cheque out and give it to Sharp to cash, and he would see there was money in the bank to meet it by Monday. Gordon knew I had no money in the bank, because I told him so." On October 30 I saw Gordon, at his request, at Clerkenwell Police Station. He said, "I wish to make a full, voluntary statement respecting the transaction." I took the statement down in writing; he read it over and initialled every page. I produce the statement.

Cross-examined by Mr. David White. Gordon sent for me immediately he knew that this charge would be brought, and made this statement.

Cross-examined by Mr. Coumbe. The notes are some of the notes which Gordon received as the proceeds of the £55 cheque. Some of

the notes we cannot trace. About £10 has been traced to Power; I have traced some paid to public-houses. Ranier has been out on bail all the time.

WILLIAM REYNOLDS , warder, Brixton Prison. I was present at the Old Court on December 16, 1901, when a man named Gordon Fletcher Hewitt was convicted of felony. I recognise him to be the same person as prisoner Gordon. He was convicted of forgery. I produce the certificate.

Cross-examined by Mr. White. I do not know what the nature of the forgery was.

Cross-examined by Mr. Coumbe. I have no record of convictions against Ranier.

Sergeant BISSELL, recalled. (To Mr. David White.) It was not on account of Ranier's statement that Gordon was arrested. We had other evidence.


EDWARD GEORGE RANIER (prisoner, on oath). Ranier is my stage name. My father's surname is Rat. My father was an actor and my grandfather a well-known tragedian, Charles Dillon. I have been in the music-hall profession for eight years, and 24 years in the theatrical business. During that time I have had a number of business transactions. During the last few months my contracts have averaged from £14 to £55 per week. I am engaged for 18 months ahead. I am running the sketches. "The Son's Devotion" and "The Bank Robbery." I have never done anything which would be brought against me in a criminal court, and never even been charged with intoxication. I have known Gordon since 1904, and had various financial transactions with him, which have always been straightforward and satisfactory until, through misfortunes in bookings and other misfortunes, I was unable to pay my instalments, when the people who advanced Gordon the money took steps to obtain their money, and as I could not pay they served me with a writ. In the end it was arranged between us. After this I closed my dealings with Gordon in January, 1907. I then went to Mr. Russell and he advanced money on my contracts. The first loan was successful, the further advance was not successful. In consequence of that Russell ceased to do business with me. Russell and I had had a joint banking account, and I had the cheque-book in my possession. I met Gordon in July, I think it was on a Friday. I was out with Mr. Russell's clerk. He said, "Will you come up to the office to-morrow?" We went. He said to me, "Have you got any money?" I said, "I have not, a matter of a few shillings, that is all." He said, "Well, you have got a cheque-book, have not you?" I said, "I have a cheque-book"; he said, "Where is it?" I said, "At Mr. Russell's office": he said, "That is your cheque-book"; I said, "Yes, it is mine, and Mr. Russell's, a joint cheque-book"; he said, "Can you get that cheque-book?" I said, "Well, no, I cannot; it is in Mr. Russell's

office." Then Mr. Milward (Russell's clerk) said, "I know where it is"; I said, "You do?" he said, "Yes"; I said, "Will you get it me?" he said, "I think I can, I know where it is?" He ultimately got the cheque-book. The first cheque was drawn on the day we got the cheque-book; that was a cheque for £25. After Milward got the cheque-book he and I went to Sandown Park. We took the cheque-book with us. That was about 12 O'clock. We came back at about half-past six. We went to the "Lamb," and saw Gordon there. We all came out of the "Lamb" and went across to the hotel opposite the Holborn Music Hall. Gordon said, "Have you got that cheque-book?" I said, "Yes." He said, "Well now, look here, will you write me out a cheque?" I said, "Write you out a cheque? You understand there is no money in this bank, and also that it is a joint account book." He then said, "Well, I think I know somebody in Pentonville that will lend me a few pounds on a cheque, and if you will just give me this cheque, on Monday morning I will see that the money is in the bank, or I will pick up the cheque." I understood that to mean that he would have got two or three pounds on the cheque from some friend of his, and on the Monday morning he would pay the three or four pounds and get back the cheque and tear it up, or give it back to me. I had never had a cheque-book before this. I said, "What will be the amount, what shall I write the cheque out for?" Gordon said, "£25," and I wrote the cheque out for £25. Then Gordon said, "You had better give me another one, a smaller one," and I am not quite certain, but I think I wrote another for £10 at the same time. Then we all went in a taximeter to some address in Pentonville Road. Gordon could not not remember the house he wanted, but finally, but running up and down the road in a taximeter, we came across Mr. Apel, I should say about nine o'clock. Mr. Gordon went into a house with him, and told me to go along to the first public-house a little way up the street. The Gordon came into the public-house, and about four minutes after Apel came in. Mr. Gordon introduced me, and they went off together and had a conversation which I did not hear. Mr. Apel said that this meeting was at four o'clock in the afternoon at the "Napier" in Holborn, but at that time I was at Sandown Park race-course. After they had had this conversation, Gordon said, "Well, come along, we had better get off now," and he said "Good-night" to Mr. Apel. We came out and joined Milward, and we all strolled up towards the "Angel" at Islington, when Gordon said, "I have got £4 or £5 on that cheque." I said, "I suppose you will pick it up and see that it is all right on Monday, will not you?" He said, "Yes." Nothing else was said about the cheque at that time. The next day I was at Gordon's office, and Mr. Apel telephoned to say that the cheque was not endorsed. Two or three days after, in the "Napier," Gordon said. "Oh, it is all right, Apel; Ranier will see that the cheque is all right, he will see the money there." After wards Apel said to me. "Oh, about that cheque?" I said, "What cheque?" He said, "That cheque that Gordon has had a few pounds

on." I said, "I do not know what you mean, you bad better see Gordon and tell him." Gordon was present and said. "That is all right; I will see to that, Ranier; it will be all right." Then, with regard to the £10 cheque, about a fortnight after I drew it I had a message sent round to me at the Bedford Music Hall that Gordon wanted to see me. I went round to the front and saw Gordon, Sharp, and a man named Seager. Gordon said, "I want to speak to you about that £10 cheque you gave me." I said, "You told me you had destroyed it. He said, "There is a young man here, and I want you to tell him that the £10 will be all right, that you will see it will be paid." I said, "Gordon, nothing of the sort; you told me you had destroyed the cheque, and I will say nothing at all to anybody." I then left him. I knew nothing more of the £10 cheque until I heard about it in the police court. I knew nothing about the letters which passed between Gordon and Messrs. Tiddeman and Enthoven. With regard to the £55 cheque, on August 7, before we all met at Gordon's office, I received a telegram from Gordon, "Come to the office at once; important." I was out when it arrived, but I came across Mr. Gordon's clerk. He said, "Mr. Gordon wants to see you most important; he sent you a telegram." I went to the office and saw Gordon by himself. He said, "Look here, Teddy, I want some money very badly; in fact, I want £25. I have got to pay up to Mr. Power, the gentleman I get my money from to lend to music-hall artistes, and if I do not pay there will be trouble. Will you lend it and do me a favour?" I said I had no money, and he asked me to give him another cheque. My own conscience seemed to tell me there was something wrong about it, and I said. "What do you mean?" He said, "Well, I know a young fellow named Sharp who wants some money babdly, and if you can give me a post-dated cheque he can get it discounted with a friend of his. He wants £25; I will take the balance. I give you my solemn promise that I will see the money is there to meet it." I said, "You are are quite certain you will see the money is there, because you know I have not got any money in the bank at all." He said, "I tell you I will; not only that, I will give Sharp a letter saying that if the cheque is not met I am absolutely responsible for the money." I said. "Very well, Gordon, I will leave it to you." His clerk and Mr. Law, Mr. Sharp and Mr. Hall, then all came into the office. Gordon said, "Mr. Sharp, this is Mr. Ranier. Now let me have the cheque." I started to write the cheque which Mr. Gordon said was to be for £55; I must have made some mistake in writing out the cheque, because when handing the cheque to Mr. Law he said, "Oh, this is wrong." He them sat down and wrote the cheque out, and I signed it; but before I parted with the cheque I said, "Gentlemen, you understand there is not enough money in the bank to meet this cheque of £55, but I expect or I hope, that by the date the cheque is made out for the money will be there." On that day I can swear my father's name was not mentioned. I made that statement because Gordon had said the money would be there. After that Gordon,

Sharp and Law went out. It was part of the bargain when I signed the cheque that I was to have part of the money. I have never had any of it. I have given I.O.U.'s for all the money I have had Mr. Gordon made the total up one day, and it came to £2 11s. Gordon came back about three hours later with Mr. Law, and when I asked if he had got the money he said most distinctly, in the presence of Mr. Law, that he never got the money, that Mr. Sharp owed a bit of money to the firm where he went to cash the cheque, and that he only got a few pounds on the cheque. As Gordon and I were going in a cab to his office I said, "It seems very strange you did not get that money; why did not you give me the cheque back." He said, "Do not worry about that, it will be all right in the morning, you will get it all to-morrow. I suppose you have got no money on you, have you?" I said, "No, I have not." He then said, "Well, there is 10s. for you." When we got to his office he said, "I think I can spare you a sovereign." I gave him an I.O.U. for that money. Then we went to an hotel in Theobald's Road and saw Mr. Law. I asked him if Gordon had got the money, and he said, "Well, look here, Ranier, old chap, it is no business of mine, Mr. Sharp is the only client of mine; you do your business with Gordon." After that I was not satisfied, and saw Gordon again, when he seemed to be rather bad tempered over it, and said, "For goodness sake, do not interfere with my business." The next day I went to Gordon and he said, "Now, you understand, Ranier, I told you I wanted £25 to pay Mr. Power; you are nothing in the matter; I guaranteed the money, and I will see the money is there." Two or three days after I saw, first Sharp, then Law, and then Gordon, and they all kept harping on this £55 cheque, until I got very nervous and frightened, and I said to Gordon. "I do not like this business at all, I shall have to try and get the money somewhere and pay it." He said, "Well, where can you get it?" I" said, "Well, if my father was only well, I am sure he would give me it in a moment, for we have been for the past ten years more like brothers than father and son. When he has been out of employment and I have been doing well. I have engaged him; when I have been doing bad and in want of money I have gone to him and told him so, and he has always given it me, but I have a step-mother, and we do not agree. The best thing is for me to write to my father, and for you to go and see him." That was done. Gordon returned and said he could not see my father as he was dangerously ill, and my stepmother would not let him sign a cheque. I am quite willing to pay the £55 cheque myself out of my contracts. When I said my sketches produced £55 a week I did not mean that I was that in pocket myself; there are travelling and other expenses. I have never received any part of the proceeds of the £10, the £25, and the £55 cheques. When I saw Gordon about the £55 cheque and told him I did not like it and so on, he said. "This is my business, I will see to it." He said, "Young Sharp wants some more money. I want you to give me another cheque. I shall be able to go to Mr. Power after paying him back the instalments

which are due to him, and get a large sum, and I can let you have a nice loan out of it." He said, "You see, it is perfectly genuine, because I gave Sharp a letter the other day guaranteeing the money, and he is perfectly satisfied to take that guarantee." I made out the cheque for £60 to Mr. Sharp. I did not see Sharp again till the Monday, and knowing from Mr. Gordon's own lips that the cheque for £55 had not been met, I asked him for the £60 cheque back. He gave it me, and I tore it up. When the £60 cheque was written, Gordon gave a guarantee in regard to it, the torn letter. The letter was not given to me. It was on the table in Gordon's office. I picked it up and put it in my pocket. It has been amongst my papers, contracts and so on, and I suppose it has got torn. I took it before I got the cheque back. When Gordon was arrested my cheque-book was found on him and a letter. I could not swear to the date of the letter, it looks like the "24th." The reason I gave him the cheque-book was because he said he knew two or three young fellows who could give me a substantial sum if I would let them take some part in my sketches, but he must let them know I was a man of substantial means, and if he had my cheque-book that would show that I had a banking account; and the reason I addressed the letter "Dear Pal" was simply that these young fellows should think he was a bosom friend of mine. Gordon was to have a commission on what they paid. Since these proceedings I have had to give up my other engagements. Gordon's statement that I owed him about £15 is not true. I did not tell him that within a few days my father was going to pay a large sum of money into my banking account. When I wrote the letter to the Bank (Exhibit 3) I had an idea of opening an account in my own name.

Cross-examined by Mr. White. Gordon obtained two loans for me in 1904. Everything was satisfactory. I knew that he was a financial agent and charged commission for transacting business of this kind.

Cross-examined by Mr. Campbell. I knew that the account with the Joint Stock Bank was a joint account—I told Gordon so. He said, "Well only sign in the one name; it does not matter." It had been drawn to my attention that the cheques had to be signed by both Russell and myself. I knew when I signed the £25 cheque that there was no money in my account. I understood that the cheque was an order upon the bank to pay Mr. Gordon £25. I do not know that it was not met. I wrote to the bank on July 27 asking them to stop payment. At that time I did not know that Gordon had not paid in money to meet it. I never meant him to get £25 for the cheque in money to meet it. I never meant him to get £25 for the cheque back so that it would never go to the bank. I did not know that the cheque had been presented when I wrote that letter. I told a friend of mine what I had done, and he said, "In case the cheque should be presented you had better write to the bank and stop it, and see Mr. Gordon and tell him how it is." I knew that cheques had to be signed with two names. I drew them in my own name because Gordon emphatically told me he would see the money was

there. Mr. Apel's statement that I said the cheque was good is not correct. I did not say a word about the cheque. I thought the trouble about the cheque was that Mr. Gordon had not paid the few pounds back for it. I am not quite certain whether I wrote both the £10 and the £25 cheque out on the same day, or whether I wrote the £10 afterwards. I know that Gordon was going to raise money on the cheque. I did not know the cheque was worthless, because I thought Gordon was going to pay the money in. My own idea was, that having a banking account in a joint name, if I went to the bank and said, "There is the money; if a cheque is presented will you meet it? I have signed it alone," it would be all right. At the time I signed the £55 cheque I did not know that the £10 had not been paid. Mr. Gordon told me he had torn the cheque up, but he must have presented the £10 cheque two or three days after he told me that. I knew there was no money in the bank to meet it. I also knew Gordon had no money, but I unders cod that he could pay his instalments he could get a further loan from Mr. Power. The reason I got nervous was because there was a lot of bother because he had not paid the £4 £ 5 back on the £55 cheque, and I knew the money would not be paid out of my banking account because I had got none The cheque was drawn solely to enable Gordon to pay his instalments and enable him to get another loan. The money from the £60 cheque was to go to Gordon and Sharp. I simply signed it to oblige Gordon. I never opened an account in my sole name. When I told Mr. Sharp and Mr. Law that there was no money in the bank I did not also tell them that the cheque required two signatures.

JAMES MCCARTHY , manager of the Britannia Theatre, Horton I have known Mr. Ranier five years. In my business relations with him I have always found him honest, respectable and upright His general reputation is good.

ADDERLEY HOWARD , the atrical manager. I have known Mr. Ranier about 23 years, and have had business transactions with him for some years. His general reputation is very, very good.

CECIL DASHWOOD , actor. I am not engaged at present. My last engagement was with Mr. Renier. I have known him over ten years. His reputation is very good. He always pays regularly without any trouble.

JOHN HART , music-hall proprietor. I have known Mr. Ranier. And employed him on and off for seven or eight years. Hit reputation is very good indeed. He is a most respectable man.

(Saturday, November 30.)

EDWARD RANIER recalled (further cross-examined). It is my cast that the £55 which was to be got from Law was to pay the instalment due to Mr. Sharp Gordon was in urgent need of that money. I understood from Gordon that the money to meet the cheque which had been given to Mr. Law was to come from Mr. Power, or wherever else he might be able to obtain it. I do not know whether the effect of that was that Sharp was to find the money to pay Power or

Gordon had to find the money to pay Power. Gordon wanted money from Sharp to pay the instalment, and if Sharp could discount the cheque he was to receive the £25, and Gordon would take the remainder, and he would pay the instalment. I thought the money to pay Sharp back to meet the cheque was coming from Gordon, who was to get it from Mr. Power. It was going round again in a circle. (To the Judge.) As to the amount that was due from Gordon to Power, say £25, if Gordon paid that to Power, Power would let him have a very much larger sum as a new loan. (To Mr. Graham Campbell.) It would be large enough to take up this cheque and to give Gordon also a considerable amount. The £60 according to my belief was a further accommodation cheque of mini for Sharp, and it was for Sharp and Gordon to arrange between themelves what that was to be for. At I was obliging Gordon by giving an accommodation cheque, he would oblige me by obtaining a loan for me. I had already obliged him the day before by giving him a cheque for £55. As to the £60, what I understood from Gordon was that Sharp, in fact, wanted the whole amount. I asked Gordon where the money was coming from to meet the £60 cheque, and he informed me from the same source—Mr. Power. Gordon has been a financial agent, and I imagined he could raise £700 or £800 if he wished. Counterfoil No. 012543 (Exhibit No. 1) is in my handwriting. The cheque belonging to that counterfoil was a post dated cheque given to a music-hall artiste, named Bracombe, which he (Gordon) asked me for, which he wanted to show to somebody, and that he himself would find the money to pay the cheque. Gordon asked me for it, and it was given to a music-hall artists. That cheque was returned to me; I asked for it. All the three counterfoils of July 6 cheques are not in my writing. One, £60, was the first cheque drawn for Mr. Sharp—it was a mistake in the wiring. That was cancelled. The next £60 cheque was the cheque which you have mentioned, and the other £60 is a cheque for Mr. Russell in connection with some business that he had. I stated yesterday in cross-examination that I bad sent Mr. Russell's clerk to his office for the purpose of getting the cheque from Mr. Russell's office on July 20, the day when the first cheque was drawn. The cheque-book never went back into Mr. Russell's possession after that. I am wrong about that. All three counterfoils are dated August 9. I must have written two cheques wrongly—made a mistake in two of them. Only one has been given to Sharp. All the counterfoils are in my handwriting. To the best of my knowledge I do not remember writing any such letter as was referred to about the £10 cheque. The letter beginning "Doss Pal" was given to Gordon for the purpose of facilitating his getting people who wanted to "walk on" the stage or to speculate in my sketches. I think it was written on August 24, but I cannot swear to that. I think it was written at my house in Gordon's presence. Now that it comes back to me, Gordon md I went down to see the proprietor of the Queen's Music Hall, Poplar. We had to wait a

long time, and we had a conversation with young fellows speculating in my sketches. I think I wrote it out there in the music-hall. It would help Gordon to get people to speculate in my productions in this way. As a financial agent he meets a great many people, and naturally he would have conversation with them and mention my name, and say "You know Edward Ranier, the music-hall artiste and sketch proprietor; would you like to finance him in a sketch?' They might very likely say, "Well, I do not know Edward Ranier; he may be a very good man; suppose I put £100 into his sketch, how do I know that he will be a substantial man or run on well?" and Gordon might say, "He has bad a bulking account; he is a sequential man." (To the Judge.) My belief was that the possession of a cheque-book would lead them to believe that I was a man of substences. (To Mr. Graham Campbell.) That was my belief, coupled with my letter asking him to take care of my cheque-book, instead of my taking care of it myself, because I should not be present when he made the arrangement with these young people.

Re-examined. When I wrote that letter I had not in view his making an improper use of my chequebook. When I wrote the letter of August 9 to the bank I intended to open an account in my own name at the bank. I could then sign cheques in my own name on that account. I honestly believed with regard to any cheques I might have drawn that Gordon was going to find the money to meet those cheques if they were presented. (To the Judge.) I do not remember whether they were all crossed cheques. I believe the cheque to Sharp was a crossed cheque. I believed Sharp's young friend had a banking account of some sort As to how it could be honoured by my bankers if my account was closed, and there was only one signature required, I understood Gordon would have gone down to this Mr. White with the money. I have only known during the last few days what a "crossed" cheque means, because I asked a publican to cash a cheque for £4 (which had been given to me by a relation), and he said he had not a banking account. Then I went to the bank, and they said they could not cash it unless the drawer put on "pay cash."

Detective-sergeant STEPHENS. I have made certain inquiries from people with whom Gordon has had business transactions, and they have made no complaints against him.

Verdict, Gordon, Guilty of false pretences.

Ranier, Not guilty.

The jury also found that it was proved that Gordon had been previously convicted at this Court on December 16. 1901. Sentence. six months' hard labour, commencing on the expiration of his present sentences of 18 months, of which about one month had already expired. of which about one month had already expired.


(Saturday, November 30.)

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-49
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

JONES. Arthur (27, musician) ; unlawfully taking Winifred Birrell, otherwise Winnie Johnson, out of the possession and against the will of her mother, with intent to carnally know the said Winifred Birrell.

Sir Charles Mathews and Mr. Arnold Ward prosecuted; Mr. Huntley Jenkins defended.

WINNIE JOHNSON . I am living with my mother and Mr. Johnson at 13, Temple Street, Southwark. I first met prisoner last August in Kennington Park Road. He asked me what my age was, and I told him I was 15, and should be 16 on November 21. From August, 1906, I kept company with the prisoner. I did not know he was married. He told me he was unmarried. On July 18 of this year prisoner asked me if I would marry him, and if I would go away with him. I consented to go. I did not consult my mother before I went. He took me to a public-house in Newington Causeway, where, at his dictation, I wrote the following letter to my mother: "I hope you will forgive me for not letting you know before, but I was married the week before last to Arthur, and we are going away to-night. Why I did it secretly was because I knew you would not let me. We will be back in London in a month, and we will come and see you. I hope you will forgive me. I hardly like writing this letter. Do not be anxious about me as I know I will be very happy. Your loving daughter, Winnie." It was not true that I was married the weak before last Prisoner posted the letter. He then took me to a house in the Clapham Road, where we, spent the night. Next morning he took me to an address in Ladbroke Grove, Notting Hill, where we lived as man and wife for three weeks. At the end of that time I asked him if he would keep his promise to marry me, and he said he was already married. I went away the next day. He used to ask me to give him money. He told me he had been getting money from his wife, but did not tell me how the got the money. When I left him I took a room for myself. I obtained a situation at Earl's Court Exhibition. Prisoner called to see me there and asked me if I had any money, and I gave him 2s. or 3s. Later on I met Mr. Johnson, the man I believed to be my father, who took me home.

Witness was cross-examined by Mr. Huntley Jenkins with a view to showing that she was when she met prisoner already a woman of loose character, and was confronted with two alleged brothel keepers, of whom she denied having any knowledge. She admitted, however, having stayed with prisoner at an hotel in Camberwell Green, and also that she had been told by prisoner's wife that he was married, but discredited the statement on prisoner's own assurance. She had been employed on several occasions on the stage.

Detective-sergeant WILLIAM STEEL , B Division. On September 17 "I suppose you will see the Johnsons when you get back. I must "I suppose you will see the Johnsons' when you get back. I must have been a fool to take her away. I was drunk, otherwise I should not have done it."

Mr. Huntly Jenkins submitted that upon the evidence of the prosecutrix it would be absolutely unsafe to convict, but Judge Rontoul declined to withdraw the case from the jury.

ARTHUR JONES (prisoner, on oach) stated in July, 1906, he was talking to prosecutrix in the Kennington Park Road when his wife came up and told her to have nothing to do with him as he was married. Meeting prosecutrix about half an hour afterwards he told her that was the truth. In cross-examination he stated that the charge on which he was arrested on September 17 was that of living wholly or partly on the earnings of a prostitute. He had, as a matter of fact, received money from his wife which he knew to be derived from that source.

Verdict, Guilty. Sentence, 12 months' hard labour.

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-50
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceMiscellaneous > sureties

Related Material

WORTHINGTON, John (formerly supervisor of Inland Revenue in Hull); unlawfully publishing a certain false and defamatory libel of and concerning Sir Frederick Lacey Robinson, a former Commissioner of Inland Revenue.

Mr. Claughton Scott appeared to prosecute.

Prisoner stating that he desired to enter a plea of justification, was informed by Judge Rentoul that in that case he must consult a solicitor, as a plea of justification must be technically drawn. Ultimately at the suggestion of the Judge, prisoner decided to plead guilty and threw himself upon the mercy of the Court. The libels were written on postcards, and Sir Frederick Robinson has been subjected to the annoyance for five years.

Sir Frederick Robinson, in answer to Judge Rentoul, said he did not wish in the least to be hard on the prisoner, who had a fancied grevience against him which was totally unfounded. His sole object was to stop what was really a most serious annoyance at the residence near a country village that he had recently taken.

Judge Rentoul said that Sir Frederick Robinson was bound to take notice of these letters, but he seemed to have acted with extraordinary leniency in not taking proceedings long ago. There was, of course, not a shadow of foundation for any of the charges made in the letters, and as Sir Frederick was willing that prisoner should be dealt with in the most lenient way, he would himself agree to that.

Prisoner was then released on his recognisances in £50 to come up for judgment if called upon.


19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-51
VerdictsGuilty > pleaded part guilty
SentencesImprisonment > hard labour; Imprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

BROOKES, William (39, dealer), and PAIN, Philip Frederick (31, dealer) ; both conspiring and agreeing together to obtain by false pretences from John George Wilkinson six horses with intent to defraud; both obtaining by false pretences from John George Wilkinson six horses with intent to defraud; both stealing six horses, the goods of Mary Ann Wilkinson.

Mr. W. Frampton prosecuted; Mr. Wilfrid Fordham appeared for Brookes, and Mr. Huntly Jenkins for Pain.

Evidence was given by Mr. Wilkinson, who carries on the business of J. G. Wilkinson and Co., horse dealers, at 25, Lyell Street, Leicester Square, on behalf of hit wife, that on September 5 Pain introduced him to Brookes at Barnet Fair at a fanner of 600 acres at Coventry, and on the strength of that representation he sold the horses to Brookes, the total amount of the purchase money being £235, which was to be paid in cash. They went to Euston Station and the horses having been boxed Wilkinson asked Brookes to settle for them, and whilst Wilkinson was talking to Dunnscombe, an assistant in the business, prisoners suddenly disappeared. Having communicated with the police, Wilkinson and Dunscombe proceeded to Birmingham by the 12.10 train, and walking down the platform espied prisoners asleep in a third-class compartment, which they also entered. At Birmingham the property was recovered. Evidence of the above facts having been given, prisoners on the advice of their counsel pleaded guilty to obtaining the property by found other than false pretences, and the jury found acoordingly.

Defective-sergeant GEORGE MEECER stated that Brookes, who has not been charged before, was foreman to a firm of contractors in the Blackfriars Road at a wage of 30s. per week, is an undischarged bankrupt, and has been concerned in several shady transactions. Pain has been convicted of fraudulently converting £424, the proceeds of the sale of horses.

sentences: Brookes, six months' hard labour; Pain, nine months' hard labour.


(Monday, December 2.)

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-52
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

SHEPHERD, Frederick (35, clerk) ; conspiring and agreeing with one Jones to defraud Wladimir de Wer Blotsky of divers of his moneys and obtaining from the said Wladimir de War Blotsky the sum of £20, with intent to defraud.

Mr. W. H. Thorne prosecuted; Mr. Harold Morris defended.

WLADIMIR DE WEB BLOTSKY journalist, 19, King's Place, Portland Square. I am a Russian subject and have resided in England for seven years. On August 24, at five o'clock, I saw Shepherd and another man in the bar of the "Porters" public-house in Baker Street, and got into conversation with them. They were both Strangers to me. Shepherd told me his name was Watson, the other man gave me his card, which bore the name of "Doyle." The conversation turned on racing, and they spoke of giving me a tip. By arrangement I met them both again on August 26 at the "Manchester Arms" in Baker Street. Prisoner offered to introduce me to other turf accountants, as I was losing money heavily lately. He

said he would do me a bit of good. He mentioned a bookmaker named Levine. He laid Levine's clerk had been a friend of his for years, and he took ready cash bets on the Stock Exchange and paid every day about £3,000 in bets. I said, "If you give me a horse I can telegraph to some of my turf accountants." He said, "It it no use, because they will pay after Monday, whilst my turf accountant will pay the same night." He said there would be a horse running shortly at very long odds; he did not mention the name. We met again the next day at the "New Inn." Marylebone lane. Shepherd and I went from there to the Princes Buffet in Copthall Avenue. There prisoner introduced me to a bookmaker Named Jones. He said Jones had been for 15 years with his boss as clerk, and was as safe as the Bank England. Jones said that Shepherd. was "in the know, and could do me a bit of good." He said by appointment the bets could be paid at six o'clock, but if I called at the office it would be at seven o'clock. The next day he told me there was a horse named "High Flyer" running at York Races. Later, Jonas came along and prisoner said to him, "I bet with you for £10" on some horse and gave him three postal orders of a sovereign each. I made out a betting slip, "Highflyer, £10 to win, £10 for a place." I handed it to the prisoner, but he insisted on my giving it to the clerk. That was outside the London and Westminster Bank at Lothbury. I gave him at the same time a £10 note and £10 in gold. I stopped the note afterwards at the Bank of England. We made an appointment to meet that same evening at Frusscati's in Oxford Street if the horse won. The horse did win and I went to Frascati's at seven o'clock, and waited there until 10 past 12; neither defendant nor Jones turned up. When I got back to my rooms at about half-past 12 I received. Exhibit 62 by special messenger. I do not know whose handwriting it is; I cannot decipher the signature. I thought it was a blackmailing letter. I now understand it means that I am supposed to have written out slips for every horse, so that whatever horse was the winner the clerk would put it on the winning file to show his governor that the horse had won and must be paid out. That letter was produced at the police court. I next saw Shepherd and Doyle on October 2 in Oxford Street. I stopped them and asked what this conduct meant. Shepherd blustered and said. "The horse lost, what do you want?" I said, "The horse won." Then he said. "Old cbap. let us go and have a drink." I said. "I never drink with thieves. He said, "You had better clear off, because if anybody sees you with me, especially the police, it will not do you any good, because I am a black sheep." They then tried to entice me into small public-houses in small streets and alleys. I followed them, but there was not a single constable. They stopped at a corner public with two exits and implored me again to have a drink and talk over the matter. I would not go. They entered by one door and went out by the other. There happened to be a detective there, and he stopped them, but they showed two pairs of clean heels.

Cross-examined. I am the Russian correspondent of the "St. Petersburgh Daily." I have lost a good deal of money by betting. I do not attend the racecourses. I do not study form. I have done betting with about ten bookmaker during several years. This year I have made but wish four. I owed money to one named Pocock, but I declined to pay at the time I met Shepherd. I owed a man named Bessant £10. I had not much money at that time, but I can always get £20 or £30. I was not actually in want of money. The reason I went to a fresh booktmaker was not because I owed them money, but because they assured me like money would be paid—and it was very long odds and the horse sure to win. These men were strangers to me; I was introduced to Jones as a bookmaker's clerk who would pay. I did not take him for a titter—I took him for a gentleman, and was mistaken. I have friends who give me tips, but they are not tipsters. I have seen the documents put in. All the horses in the three races are included in those slips but they are all a pretence, to pretend that I wrote out the programme. Those slips are not in my handwriting, The are a forgery. It is very similar to my handwriting, but it is not mine.

Re-examined. The reason I did not pay Mr. Pocock was that he sent me a statement intending to cheat me.

RICHARD HENRY KIRK , expert in handwriting. I have examined the slips that have been put in by the prosecutor and also the exhibits which are admittedly in prosecutor's handwritting. I made a report on them, and was afterwards called by the prosecution. (The learned counsel read witness's report.)

Cross-examined. When a man writes his signature 50 times over will be many differences in it. If a person was reading out a number of names and another person was writing such name on a different slip you would expect differences.

Detective EDWARD MARRIOTT , City Police. I went to the Tottenham Court Road Police Station on October 2 last and saw defendant. I told him I was a police officer from the City, where he would be taken to be charged with another man not in custody wish stealing £20 by means of a trick. He made no reply. I brought him to the City. When he was charged he said, "It was the other man you gave it to, not me."

Cross-examined. This was case that had arisen in the City. I am in charge of the case. Prosecutor had been to the Moor Lane station about a week before and complained of the offence being committed. No warrant had been applied for to my knowledge.

Verdict, Guilty.

Prisoner confessed to being convicted of felony at this Court on June 26, 1903.

Police-constable CHARLES BOWLER said that prisoner was sentenced to four years' penal servitude for burglary on June 26, 1903.

Cross-examined. Evidence was produced on that occasion that he had been 12 years in the Marine service.

Detective-sergeant HENRY BOARD , City Police. I have made inquiries as regards prisoner since the expiration of this sentence, and I believe that during the greater part of the time he has been trying to get an honest living. This is the only conviction against him.

WILLIAM DAVID , electro plater, said that he had known prisoner 15 or 16 years. He had been working for different people, and witness had so much confidence in him that he was willing to give him a berth as soon as this affair was over.

Sentence, Three months' hard labour.


(Tuesday, November 26.)

MILLOT, Charles Paul, who was before the Court on November 21 (page 5), was again brought up, and on his undertaking to leave the country in 24 hours, was released on his own recognisances in £100; a report to be made by the sergeant at next Session.



(Tuesday, November 19.)

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-53
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty; Not Guilty > unknown
SentenceMiscellaneous > sureties

Related Material

SPORTON, Henry William (31, manager), and HAWKINS, Robert Vincent (general dealer) , stealing twelve bonzaline pool or billiard balls, the property of William John Golding. Sporton pleaded guilty.

Mr. W. W. Grantham and Mr. C. J. Salkeld Green prosecuted; Mr. Wildey Wright defended Hawkins.

WILLIAM JOHN GOLDING . I manage the "Three Blackbirds," High Road, Leyton, which is the property of my mother. I believe the billiard balls produced to be my property. I bought then for £4 16s., being at the rate of 8s. per ball. I last saw them safe on September 17. When I had them they were quite new, and they have been in use about nine months.

Cross-examined. I did not get any rebate on the money I paid. I bought them of a man named Latham.

BENJAMIN JOHN ARMSTRONG , billiard marker, identified the balls as the property of Mr. Golding.

CHARLES JACOBY , secretary of the Bonzaline Manufacturing Company, 34, Queen Street, Cheapside, valued the balls in their present condition at five guineas.

Cross-examined. I do not recognise the existence of secondhand billiard balls, as the balls manufactured by my company do not wear out. Ivory balls are more expensive.

Inspector THOMAS DIVALL , J Division, proved serving notice on Hawkins.

Detective Sergeant CHARLES TOBUTT, stationed at Leyton. On september 25 I saw Hawkins at Walthamstow, and told him I was making inquiries about a set of stolen pyramid balls, and had been informed that he had bought a set. In reply he said, "Yes, I went to a man's house to look at some stuff. He told me he had been in business at Leyton. He had a lot of tools there. I bad not seen him before. I own I bought them. I gave 10s. for them. I do not know what they are worth. I asked him if they were 'straight.' He said, 'Yes,' and seeing the other stuff at his house I thought they were all right." At 71, Borstall Road, where he lives, prisoner handed me two balls. I then went to the shop he occupies in Willow Walk, and he handed me the other ten. He said, "I could see they were nearly now. If they had been knocked about I shouldn't have bought them."

Cross-examined. Hawkins has from time to time given the police information about stolen goods.

JAMES THOMAS SCOTT , Sunnyside Road, Leyton, mangle and general dealer, gave evidence as to Sporton showing him some billiard balls for which he said he had been offered 25s. Witness also gave evidence as to selling 25 ivory balls for 22s., and stated that he asked the opinion of a man named Wyatt as to the value of the bonsaline balls, and he said they were only worth about 8s.


ROBERT VINCENT HAWKINS (prisoner, on oath). I have been in business as a dealer at Walthamstow for 23 years. It is true that I have undergone a term of imprisonment for stealing 20 sacks of cement. Mrs. Sporton came to me and asked me to go and look at some balls st. 58, Exmouth Road, Walthamstow. When I got there I saw a lot of fire irons, stair rods, carpenters' tools, engineers' tools, and padJocks, all perfectly new. There were also some second-hand goods. Sporton showed me the goods and told me he had got a set of balls in the front room. He afterwards showed me two of them. He said he had been in business and had lost £200. He told me he had got two paraffin tanks—one to contain 80 gallons and the other 100 gallons. I asked him where his shop was, and he gave me a card with the name of Attersall on. I had never bought any billiard balls before and did not know the value of them, so I took the two balls into Fisher's, the pawnbroker's, and asked the assistant if he had any idea of the value of the 12 balls. He told me from 6s. to 8s. I asked him if he would lend 10s. on them in pledge. He said "No; he would not take them in because they were only bonialine." I afterwards went back to Sporton, who said he wanted about 25s. for them. I told him I had asked a friend What they were worth, and if he liked to have half a sovereign he could have them back at the same price. I finally gave him half a sovereign for them, which I honestly believed was their fair value. I sent a man named Nelson, who is in my employ, to ascertain the value of the balls. I took two of the balls

to the landlord of the "Duke of Cambridge." From first to last there wm no concealment in anything I did.

Cross-examined. I am a general dealer, but I do not deal in ship's goods. As to whether it is a business in which a good deal of stolen stuff is brought to us, it is a haphazard business, I own, and people have to be careful. I have been in the business for 23 years, and, in spite of my carefulness, I have had one mishap. I know nothing at all about billiard balls. The card Sporton handed to me had on it the name of Attersall, and he told me he had had a shop which he had given up. I made inquiries and found that was true. The card described Attersall as a builder's furnishing and general ironmonger, and I thought that accounted for the ironmongery in the house. At first I thought it strange that he should have all this stuff there. I did not buy any of the ironmongery. As the pawnbrokers said the balls were worth from 6s. to 8s., I thought I could give 10s. for them, are the pawnbrokers do not offer too much.

Mr. Wildey Wright pointed oat on the authority of Regina v. Davis that the fast of a previous conviction did not relieve the prosecution from the obligation of proving that prisoner had knowledge that these balls were stolen.

Judge Lumley Smith said there must be some circumstances from which the jury might infer that prisoner knew that the goods were stolen. Mere carelessness was not enough.

FREDERICK ARTHUR LAMB , assistant to Messrs. Fish Brothers, pawnbrokers, Leyton, gave evidence as to Hawkins coming to the shop with two billiard balls and asking the value of a set of 12. Witness told him they were bonzaline balls, and then prisoner asked if he should be doing wrong in giving half a sovereign for them. Witness said he thought he would have priced them at about half a dozen shillings.

HENRY WELLS , formerly manager to a pawnbroker and now carrying on a miscellaneous business as clothier, outfitter, furniture dealer, dealer in antiques, curios, pianos, and bicycles at 30, Median Road. Clapton, put the value of a set of second-hand bonzaline balls at 8s., which he thought was the most he was likely to get for them. He would not himself care to buy them, as he regarded second-hand bonzaline balls as unsaleable.

JOHN WIXLEY , jeweller, having examined the balls, thought that under the hammer they would not fetch more than 10b. at the outside.

At this stage the Jury intimated that they had heard enough of the case and returned a verdict of Not guilty against Hawkins.

Sporton pleaded guilty of a previous conviction, and police evidence was given to the effect that he had been in the Army eight years and his character was very good. He had also a good character at the North-Western Fever Hospital, where he was employed for four years. Prisoner himself explained that he took the balls away in a drunken freak.

Mr. Wildey Wright having pointed out that prisoner's pension, in respect of his Army service, might be affected by the sentence, Judge Lumley Smith allowed prisoner to be released on his own recognisances in the sum of £5 to come up for judgment if called upon.


(Wednesday, November 20.)

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-54
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

SPELLER, Bertha Alice Maud (39, dealer) ; manslaughter of Albert Chittick, the like on Coroner's Inquisition.

Mr. E. Perceval Clarke prosecuted. Mr. Daniel Warde defended.

Mrs. ANNIE HENMAN , 101, Percy Road, Canning Town. Prisoner and Albert Chittick live next door to me, at 103. They had a child there also. On Sunday night, August 18, I saw Mr. Chittick outside his door about 11. I left him sitting there when I went indoors. About 12 o'clock I heard the smashing of glass and a child scream. Prisoner and Chittick had been living there about three or four months and at first seemed very happy, and this was the first sign of quarrelling I had noticed. I think Mr. Chittick used to drink a lot. After the smashing incident I saw the child run out and knock at 105, but I do not think she got any answer. The quarrelling continued, and another great smashing took place, but I never saw anyone again that night. I then heard a woman's voice saying, "Take that, and take that"; and then a man moaned and said, "Oh, my head." I heard that distinctly when I was in my front room. At the same time there were sounds like blows being struck—dull thuds. The quarrelling continued for some time after that, but it was not so violent. Next morning about 9.30 I saw prisoner at her door, and she asked if they had disturbed me last night. I said, "No, I wm not in bed." Later, about 11, I saw Mr. Chittick, who had a muffler behind his neck; on which there was blood. He told me he was going to the hospital. On the next day, Tuesday, I saw him being taken in a cab to the hospital; his head was still bandaged. Mrs. Speller was with him. On September 2 I saw him again, and also on the 3rd, in the morning, when he came to my door. He still had a bandage, and there looked to be fresh blood on it.

Cross-examined. I could not say whether deceased had been drinking when I saw him on the Sunday night. I can hear pretty well through the walls of the house. I did not hear the woman's voice till the smashing had been going on for some time. I am sure the words said were at I have given them. I did not say anything about this affair till alter the man's death, about two months later. Both voices that I heard were loud; the man did not speak as though he had been very much hurt. The woman had always been quiet until this affair.

To Mr. Justice Ridley. I didn't say anything to Chittick the next morning because I didn't think it concerned me; I didn't know the man was hurt.

MARGARET DEMPSEY , 133, Percy Road, Canning Town. On Sunday night, August 18, I was sitting in my kitchen. The street door was open, and I heard a great smashing of glass and a child screaming, upon which I came to the street door to see what was the matter and

saw a little child standing at 103. She was crying, and when I asked what was the matter she said, "Go for a policeman." The child ran to the next door and knocked at it—that was 105—but she did not get any answer. When she came back Mrs. Speller came through the passage with a cloth round the side of her head. She asked me was I a neighbour and said she was seriously hurt and asked me if I would go inside. I said "No." I did not notice any marks on the cloth. As the child was screaming, Mrs. Speller told her not to make so much noise. She then went into the house. After that I heard her say, "Look what you have done," and some other voice like a man's said, "Yes, look what you have done to me." This was about midnight.

EMILY CHITTICK , 2, Percy Road, Canning Town. The deceased was my uncle. He lived at 103 with the prisoner as his wife. They seemed to get on all right while I was there. Deceased used to take a drop of drink now and then. On August 20 I saw him in a cab about half-past one, when he passed my door. His head was bandaged. The cab was coming from Barking Road to No. 103. Prisoner was also in the cab, and I asked her what was the matter. She said, "An accident." The cab went on to 103 and stopped. Shortly after I went there. Deceased was lying on the bed resting his head on it, but I did not see him till the evening. I saw prisoner, who took me into the parlour and showed me the glass, telling me he had done it with the glass shade. There was broken glass and china lying about the place. I went home and came back again in the evening, when I saw my uncle sitting in the chair in the kitchen with his head bandaged. I did not speak to him. Prisoner was there, but she did not say anything about the affair. On September 2 my uncle came to the house where I live at 9.30 in the evening. His head was bandaged and bleeding freely—streaming down. I took a handkerchief out of his pocket and, tying it round his head, told him to go to the Poplar Hospital. He was perfectly sober. I saw him again on September 5 (Thursday). He was very bad and also on the Friday he was very weak. I then arranged to take him to the Whip's Cross Infirmary.

Cross-examined. At the beginning of the week deceased was better than he was later in the week. I have never seen him intoxicated in all my life and have not heard he was a man given much to drink. I never used to see very much of him till he came to live at 103—that was three months before.

Dr. McDERMOTT , Barking Road, Canning Town. On August 19 Chittick came to see me between five and six p.m. Blood was streaming down the back of his neck—the hair was matted on his head. I stopped the blood, which seemed to be coming from a wound on the top of the head. This wound was very serious, I thought, and I advised him to go off at once to the hospital; he said he would. He came in I think the next morning or the morning after, and I asked if he had not been to the hospital, because I thought they would have kept him in. He said, "No." I bandaged his head, on which

there seemed some fresh bleeding. He wat in a state of collapse. I think he had a little girl with him, and I sent her out for a cab. When I saw him on the 19th he was certainly in a dated condition, which I ascribed partly to the loss of blood and partly to drinking.

Cross-examined. I formed a superficial opinion that the man was an habitual drunkard; he had that footed, penetrating odour that one notices from the breath arising from gaatric disturbance. I did not investigate to see if that opinion was correct.

Dr. MARCHANT , house surgeon, Poplar Hospital. On August 24 Chittick came in a cab to the hospital, when I saw him. He had a lacerated wound at the back of his head. One might say it would be caused by any blunt instrument. It is possible the axe produced could have caused it. Chittick did not come for the next four days. When he did come the wound was commencing to suppurate. I attended him again, but the inflammation got worse. I saw him twice a day for the next few days; he then went at in-patient to the Whip's Cross Infirmary.

Cross-examined. If he had attended regularly it is probable he would not have got into the condition he did. I thought deceased was a man given to drink; in that case he would be less likely to heal.

Dr. SIDNEY TUCKER , late house surgeon at Whip's Cross Infirmary, said that Chittick was brought to the infirmary on September 6, and he attended him till October 3, when he died, death being due to meningitis.

Cross-examined. I made a post-mortem. He was not a healthy man at all; I should think he was given to drink.

Detective J. EDWARDS , K Division, said he visited the house where prisoner was living on October 26 and found a hatchet. (Produced.)

Detective-inspector GODLEY . I saw prisoner at the inquest on Albert Chittick, after which I received a warrant to arrest prisoner, which I did, and told her the charge. She said, "I perfectly understand." I took her to the West Ham Police Station. When charged she said she was innocent.


BERTHA ALICE MAUD SPELLER (prisoner, on oath). For some nine months before Chittick'e death I had been living with him at his wife. My own little girl lived in the house too. Deceased was thoroughly mad when in drink, but out of drink he wat a gentleman. He drank very excessively. While I lived with him we were very unhappy all through my speaking to him about the drink and trying to persuade him to eat food, as I knew the man was in a shocking state. There was no other cause for the unhappiness. On August 18 (Sunday) I called Chittick at about a quarter to 12, and he refused to get up. He finally got up about 10 to two, but ate no breakfast and would not eat his dinner. He went out after getting up and returned about 20 past six in the evening; he had been drinking. He then had some of his dinner and went into the parlour, taking with him a quart bottle

of bitter, a glass, and a newspaper. At his dinner he had had three glasses of bitter. I prepared tea and asked him if he would have any; he said, "No." After that I went for a walk with the child and came back about a quarter to 12. Deceased was then lying on the bed fully dressed in the back parlour. We crept through so that we should not, disturb him, because we had been kept so long awake, and I went through to the child's bedroom. I had been occupying her room for some weeks poet. Just as we began to undress Chittick came to the door and said, "I have heard you come in," and accused me of being about with somebody, as I had previously told him in the morning that I would have to leave him as I could not put up with his nonsense. He said he supposed I had made arrangements to live with somebody. I said. "No, to-morrow I was going to get apartments, and take myself and the child out of it." I had a box against the door so that he could not get in. He said if that was the game he would smash all his b——lot up, as he should not require any more home. He should pack up and go to Australia. Part of the home was his and part mine. Then we heard a smashing very heavily of glass and things, and I thought probably the overmantel had fallen down. The child was very frightened, and ran through quickly into the street crying, and knocked at the next door. I went to go after the child, and in passing the door I received a blow on the head. I could not tell you what it was; it was something flying or something being thrown. It made a slight end and I held pretty freely; it was something sharp. The deceased was then smashing up a lot of lustress and ornaments. I picked up a small cloth from the table and held it to my head. I then went into the road and saw Mrs. Dempey, asking her if she was a neighbour. She said, "Yes," and I said. "If you will step inside he will no doubt be quiet as he is very nervous of anyone visiting. He thinks I have a police officer here." She refused. After some little time I returned and we sat under the porch of the doorway. We then passed through the kitchen. He was sitting on a night commode at the side of the dressing table. I never spoke to him and he never spoke to me. He still continued to break several articles. What Mrs. Henman says about our voices is not true. Chittick would talk sometimes to himself when in drink. From first to last on that evening I did not touch Chittick. The axe (produced) was what we used in Burdett Road. It had not been unpacked art 103, Percy Road. Nothing else took place that night. Next morning I told him he should go to a doctor or I would fetch him. He said, "You do not want to do that; I have had a cut before and it has healed up all right." He went to Dr. McDermott, and I hastily dressed myself to follow. On the night before when I went into the passage I said, "This is a nice thing; look what you have done and look what you have done to me; I am in a fine state." The man never answered me.

Cross-examined. While I was out on the Sunday night till a quarter to 12 I was wandering about with the child waiting for him to go to bed and get quiet. We had been upset so often at night, and

I did not want to show myself up by the neighbours knowing I was not his wife. That is the reason I kept quiet. I ought to have left the man before. What I said before the coroner is true. The blow I received on the head has only been seen by the child. It was a very slight cut. I told the coroner I had received a blow on the head. I first saw deceased was bleeding when he came into the kitchen alter breaking a glass and other art ides, and the child said, "Mother, look, he is bleeding; he has cut himself." I said, "Well, I do not wonder at it." I never heard anyone say, "Take that," nor heard a man's voice say, "Oh, my head," nor say, "Look what you have done to me." I do not know how he came by the wound on the back of his head. I was too frightened to go in to prevent him smashing the things. On going through the passage to run out I said I would fetch a policeman; he left off then. When Emily Chitticl asked me as the cab was passing what was the matter, the deceased said to me, "Say an accident; I do not want them to know nothing about it," and I answered, "It it an accident." I suppose he meant them to know nothing about getting drunk and breaking up the place in such a disgraceful manner.

To Mr. Justice Ridley. I did ask deceased how he got the wound; he said he did not know. He only knew about breaking the glass shade. He said he did it with a glass shade Off shells; that he smashed them and he thought he got the out by that; he did not know. I could not tell you whether that would have caused it. That was on the next morning when I asked him. But it did not satisfy me. He said, "What is the use of asking me what I have done.?" Of course, I thought it mm an accident. I thought he had fallen amongst the smith. There was some heavy glass and some heavy, china ornaments which were broken. Mrs. Henman could not have heard the voices which she says she did. She heard my voice probably as I went through the passage, "Look what you have done," but I heard no man speaking and never heard the deceased speak. I do not know Mrs. Henman or Mrs. Dempsey, only to pass the time of the day, and have never had any row with them.

Verdict, Not guilty.

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-55
VerdictGuilty > with recommendation
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

YOUNG, Henry Alfred (17, baker) ; feloniously shooting at Nikolous Wilbert, with intent to murder him, and maliciously inflicting upon the said Nikolous Wilbert grievous bodily harm.

Mr. Metcalfe prosecuted.

NIKOLOUS WILBERT , baker, Pelly Road, Plaistow. Prisoner entered my employ in the beginning of June last. He was employed to serve customers on a round and to assist in clearing up the bakehouse. Before November 9, when I finally discharged him, I had twice discharged him. I had no words with him. On November 16 I was in the bakehouse with my assistant, Walter Reynolds. From the street only my legs could be seen through the window, unless I get near the window. I heard a scratching at the window, but took no notice of it. Then I heard the report of a revolver, and felt

I was shot in the right thigh. The shot passed through into a drawer about an half-inch. I picked up a coal shovel and ran into flit street, but saw no one. I was bleeding, and sent for a doctor. Prisoner was in custody about three-quarters of an hour after.

Police-sergeant BREBNER (K 69). I was on duty at West Ham Police Station shortly before 2 a.m. on November 16 when prisoner came in with this revolver in his hand. He said, "I have just shot a man in Pelly Road." I said, "What have you done that for?" He replied, "We had a little difference." I said, "Where did you shoot him?" He replied, "I don't know; I only saw his legs in the bakehouse." I said, "Is he dead?" He said, "I don't know." I examined the revolver and found these two live cartridges. One cartridge had been discharged. The other three chambers were empty. I did not think his statement was true, when prosecutor came to the station and charged him. In reply to the charge he said, "Yes." He has given no reason for his act. I searched him, but found nothing on him.

SIDNEY BROWN (Assists at Divisional Surgeon of Police). I went to prosecutor's house at 2 a.m. on November 16, where I found him suffering from a bullet wound on the inside of the right thigh pretty close to the femoral artery. I think he will get on all right now. The shot went right through—about 4 1/2 inches.

GEORGE WALEY , K 176. I was present when prisoner came into the police-station. Just before his removal to the cells he said, "The first two missed. If the third had I should not have had a shot."

Prisoner. I was only excited.

Verdict, Guilty. Recommended to mercy on account of his youth. Sentence, Twelve months' hard labour.


(Wednesday, November 20.)

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-56
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceMiscellaneous > sureties

Related Material

HAYHEN, Benjamin (41, shipbuilder), pleaded guilty of having published a false and defamatory libel of and concerning Walter Sturton.

The defendant was released on his own recognisances in £20 to come up for judgment if called upon.


(Wednesday, November 20.)

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-57
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

CONDON, Michael (53, labourer), pleaded guilty of stealing one quilt, the goods of Thomas Goodman.

Sentence, Six months' hard labour.


(Thursday, November 21.)

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-58
VerdictsGuilty > unknown
SentencesImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

KNIGHT, Ernest (45, Caterer) ; obtaining by false pretences from Frederick Roberton the sum of £30, with intent to defraud; obtaining by false pretences from Ellen Tooley the sum of £30, with intent to defraud; obtaining by false pretences from Albert James Smith the sum of £150, with intent to defraud.

Mr. W. A. Metcalfe prosecuted. Mr. Penry Oliver defended.

FREDERICK ROBERTON , 29, Cannon Road, Plaistow, caterer. In July, 1906, I advertised in the "Daily Chronicle" for a situation as manager of a dining-room. Prisoner called on me and said he wanted a manager, he was opening up new premises, and that he had several good going businesses in the provinces and in London. He showed me the lease of 25, White Rock, Hastings, which he said he was going to open as tea and refreshment-rooms and boarding house, and proposed that I should undertake the management for 50 per cent of the profits. He showed me proposed agreement (produced), and at my request altered the deposit from £50 to £30, which I paid him by cheque. He said I was not to take my household furniture down as he had a lot ready to go down, and the working utensils would he sent down, that he had spent £120 on the place, and that the furniture had all been paid for. I believed all that or I should not have parted with my £30. I went down the next day, July 24, with my wife and children and remained on the premises till September 15, 1906. We opened on August 5 (Bank Holiday), and did a fair trade. Prisoner called about three times and took what little cash I had. I told him I had paid the bills out, and he said, "Could not you 1st the tradespeople wait?" I said I did not do business like that, I had paid them, and gave him the balance, which amounted to about £12. I lived on the premises. Up to that time I did not know debts were owing by the Business. About a week alter I arrived bills came in for the working utensils, which I paid out of the takings. Plummer, Roddis, and Co., sent in a claim for instalments on the furniture on the hire purchase System, which I did not pay, and they put a man in possession. I wrote to prisoner at the address he had given me—Sinclair Gardens—and had the letter returned through the post. I have had no part of my £30 returned, which were my savings. I had to send to London to borrow money to get back.

Cross-examined. I prepared and wrote the agreement. I knew it was to be a new business. I went down and saw the place was being fitted up as dining rooms. Prisoner said the business should be worked up, and if sold I should hart half-share of what it fetched—that was put in the agreement. The business started well. We took £31 in the first eight days, and it showed a fair profit throughout, the receipts for the lowest week being £10. The gross profit is usually 75 per cent. I took in all £111. I paid all bills for butcher's meat. Prisoner did not pay for any. He told me to engage a large

staff and not to study the profits the first month. None of the money I paid him was for goods supplied to the business. There was no mention of any furniture on the hire system, or I should not have parted with my money. He told me the furniture and utensils were all paid for. Nothing was said about paying the rent out of the takings. All the outgoings were to be paid out of the takings. My brother-in-law came down. I never told prisoner he would buy the business for £100—such a suggestion is untrue.

Re-examined. The takings were £111, out of which I paid £93 and gave prisoner £12. Nothing was said about paying the rent. I knew by the lease he showed me it was £180 a year without rates and taxes.

CAMPBELL MCINTYRE , secretary to Lockhart's, Limited. My company are owners of 25, White Rock, Hastings, of which we granted lease to prisoner at £180 a year for three years from July 24, 1906. We took possession, as we have received no rent.

HARRY THOMAS MOORE , managing clerk to Plummer, Roddis, and Co., Limited, house furnishers. On Tuesday, July 24, 1906, prisoner called and said he wanted about £40 worth furniture for opening a cafe in White Rock on the hire-purchase system. We gave him particulars. He called and selected furniture amounting to £41 7s., and gave references to Keen, 43, New Oxford Street, and to the general manager of the London and North-Western Railway. He gave the name of Walter Waller. He said he had two or three other cafe's, including The Creamery, Windsor. He paid £6 deposit. On July 30 the furniture was sent in to 25, White Rock. On August 27 the first payment was due, and, not being paid on August 30, we put a man in possession. We sent a telegram to the address given as that of the prisoner, which was returned.

ROBERT HENRY PATTENDEN , manager, Bruce and Co., house decoraters and shop fitters, Hastings. On July 27 I received a telephonic message, and to see prisoner at 25, White Rock. He said he desired some internal repairs done promptly, which we did to the amount of £20 5s. 6d. We received no payment.

JAMES CHAMPKIN , owner of 12, Sinclair Gardens, Kensington. In March, 1906, prisoner took over an agreement of those premises at £75 a year for three years. The previous tenant paid the first quarter's rent. The premises were vacated in July, and I have taken possession, and re-let them. I received no notice from the prisoner that he was giving them up, nor did he return the key. I found them empty, and flooded with water.

ELLEN TOOLEY , 55, Huntingdon Street, Barnsbury, widow. On July 6, 1907, I replied to an advertisement in "The Daily Chronicle" for a manageress of a coffee and dining rooms. On July 23 a man not the prisoner called, and took me to 207, Westminster Bridht Road, where the workmen were fitting up premises. I then saw the prisoner at Gray's Inn Road. He said he had rented the place, and he wanted me to take the management, and to pay £40 deposit At my request he agreed to take £30, which I paid. We signed

agreement produced. He told me he was a caterer. I told him I had the furniture for my own rooms. I was there about two months and left. I received £5 back from prisoner.

Cross-examined. I found the business was too much for me, and he suggested I should take charge of a boarding-house. I left because I found everything so unpleasant. A woman came in, and superseded me.

ALFRED JAMES SMITH , 38, Dunster Gardens, Brondesbury. In July I was introduced to prisoner at 207, Westminster Bridge Road. He ssid he had a business there, and also one in Mile End Road, and he wished me to advance a sum of £150. He said 207, Westminster Bridge Road was doing a very good business, that there was no debt owing upon any of the businesses, he wished me to take charge of the Westminster business, supervise it, and also to control the three different branches—Westminster, St. John Street, and Mile End, that I was to reside on the premises, and he would have every accommodation made for me. I advanced the £150, and have had none of it back. (To the Judge.) He did not tell me there was another manageress in the place. If I had known, that, I certainly should not have parted with my money. I did not see Mrs. Tooley until at the police-court—he did not tell me she had paid him £30. I believe he had these prosperous businesses.

Cross-examined. I met him on August 11, about the date the business opened. He showed me the three businesses, and he afterwards purchased a business in Moorfields. He took me to see it, and I said I thought it would cell for £100. He told me be had been offered £80 for the St. John Street business. I told him I thought that was the best of the lot. I paid him £150 down on August 21. He did first suggest that I should advance £75. I signed an agreement that I was to have an equal share of the three business, to reside at 207, Westminster Bridge Road, and to have my £150 returned to me in full on a month's notice. Ten days after I saw it, the Westminster business was opened I made no suggestion to take it ever. His son suggested that I should take over the lease and goodwill of 207, Westminster Bridge Road, but the matter was then in my solicitor's hands, to whom I referred him. I have never had any of my money back.

CECIL CULVERHOUSE , of Messrs. Cluttons, agents of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners. On September 3, 1907, we granted to the prisoner three years agreement for 207, Westminster Bridge Road, it £120 a year. We have received no rent. The premises are vacant—we have not taken possession.

Cross-examined. The rent is payable is advance, but it is conditional on certain repairs being done. There is about £3 worth of work to be done. Prisoner has expended money on the premises.

Detective-sergeant WEILLIAM EUSTACE , K Division. On October 20, at 6.30 p.m., I saw prisoner at 207, Westminster Bridge Road. I said, "I am police officer and hold a warrant for your arrest." I read the warrant; he made no reply. When charged he made no

reply. On November 5 I made a further charge against him in reference to the £30 and £150. He made no reply. I found amongst his documents those which had been read to-day. I have been since to 207, Westminster Bridge Road—the premises are closed.

ERNEST KNIGHT (prisoner, on oath). I called to see Roberton in answer to his advertisement. I have been a caterer for the last 20 years and have been in the habit of buying or starting coffee and tea businesses for resale. As a rule, I have found them shut up, and have opened and sold them. In July, 1906, I took the Creamery at Windsor, worked it up, and sold it; then took 25, White Rock, Hastings. I knew the premises well and that there was a good opportunity for a dining and refreshment rooms, as they were opposite the bandstand. I took them for a friend of mine, who disappointed me. I said to prosecutor, "Do you think you could manage a firstclass place?" He said he and his wife could. I told him I was only taking the place to resell it, that if he went as manager he was to have a half-share of all the profit and of the sale price. They had been used as dining rooms and had been shut up for six months. He went to look at them, and agreed to be manager under the agreement read. I suggested to him that as he was only going down to work the place up and sell it it would not be worth while moving his furniture, and that two rooms should be furnished on the hire system, the hire being paid out of the profits. The place was opened. The first month I was at Hastings nearly all the time, but I gave him to understand he would hare to take entire charge, that he was to look on it as his business. I sent in the first week's stuff. The first night he took about £7 and said, "Do you want any of this money?" I said, "No, keep it and pay the bills." On the Saturday he said, "We have taken £31—do you want any money?" I said, "Give me £2 of it to pay for what I have sent in," which he did. Altogether I received about £12. According to the takings, I ought to have had about £30 or £40. I had sent in the first week's butcher's meat and several other things. I had a half-share interest in Sinclair Gardens as a boarding house from Christmas, 1906. The rent to March was paid out of money due to me. The furniture was removed without my knowledge and in my absence in August by my partner. The landlord took forcible possession of the premises before any further rent was due. I received £30 from Mrs. Tooley. I told her I was buying a place in Westminster Bridge Road; she was taken to see the premises, and consented to go there and went in. The first Sunday we were rather busy and she said she thought it would be too much for her; there were three in the kitchen, and she said she could not get on with the girl. She did not give me formal notice till the next Saturday. I then suggested she should take the management of a place I was negotiating for in Endsleigh Gardens, which she agreed to do. The business fell through and she then told me she was going to live with her sister and store her furniture. She moved out at seven a.m., before I got there, and saw me at 10 a.m. and asked if I could give her the money back. I said it was

not convenient, but would give her £5, which I did, that I was negotiating to sell the St. John Street business, and as soon as I got rid of it the should have the remainder of her money. She seemed quite satisfied, and said she did not want to press me—that the wiaa going to live with her sister. I was offered £60 for St. John Street, but Smith advised me not to take £60—it was worth £100. Smith was introduced to me at Westminster Bridge Road. The first suggestion was for him to put £75 into that business. I showed him the St. John Street and Mile End Road business, and he then asked me what I would take for a half-share in the three businesses. I suggested £150, which he agreed to. He gave me £5 deposit. John Street was opened the week alter, and Mile End the same week. They were both carried on at a profit. I took him to see the business at Moorfields. The man had had it eight yean, and wanted to go abroad. Smith said, "Certainly, buy it at the price offered—it is worth £100"—which H certainly is. He was entitled to a half-share of everything. I said, "As the businesses are opening out, you cannot expect a lot of profit till they are well stabilished, but if you prefer to have a set sum a profit on your investment, we will make a new agreement, and you shall have £6 a month for the loan of your £150, and 10 per cent, on all moneys the businesses fetch when sold. An agreement was drawn up to that effect and signed. Shortly alter that he had a little disagreement. I said, "I will give you your £150 back and £10 for the Man of it." I had had it a month. He said, "No, you are not entitled to give me notice." Finally, he gave me notice to withdraw.

Cross-examined. Smith would have had the whole of his money beck if I had not been arrested. I told Robertson I should not give him a shilling. I had had his £30, and he had had £100, of which £75 is profit, of which I have only had £12. He only took these proceedings because he knew he could not get what he claims in a civil court. When I got the £30 from Roberton, I had the Creamery at Windsor, of which I had negotiated the sale for £200. It was a prosperous business. I have received £100, but the purchase has not been completed. My other business was Sinclair Gardens. I suppose the telegram was sent back because I was not there—they ought to have sent ft on to me at Hastings. I did not say I was carrying on a number of successful businesses in London and the provinces. In April, 1907, I was managing a business in Grays Inn Road for a friend. At Christmas I took she business in Clerkenwell Road, sold it at Easter, and then took charge of Gray's Inn Road without wages. I have not borrowed money on that by representing that as my business. They did not turn me out. I have bad a lease granted me of 148, St. John Street—it was not refused because my references were unsatisfactory.

(Friday, November 22.)

I did not try to obtain £50 from Astram or Gardiner. As Smith was not going 13 take charge of Westminster Bridge Road, I wanted

another manager. The business was taking £50 a week. Mrs. Tooley agreed to wait till I sold St. John Street. I say these were perfectly bona fide negotiations on my part. I know a man named Salter, an estate agent—he sold a business for me. I witnessed an agreement between Slater and Mrs. Bolter. I told her the business she was taking was in a good position, and, if carried on properly, would be all right. I do not know that Salter and Perry have been convicted in recpect of that matter—I know Salter was not convicted. I heard he was charged. I saw Mrs. Astram and Mrs. Gardiner and Mrs. Osborne with regard to being manageress of 70, Westminster Bridge Road.

Re-examined. I have had an offer for Westminster Bridge Road of £200, and but for being arrested should have sold it. It was a valuable business—£800 was refused for it four years ago. The names mentioned are people who have answered my advertisement. Mrs. Gardiner came with her son and decided to take it, and I was going to the solicitor's to see about the lease. I said the half-quarter's rent in advance, and I was allowed £32 for repairs out of the next £60 rent to Christmas. The work has been done. With regard to White Rock, Hastings, I was allowed two months' rent for repairs, and there would be a month's rent due on September 29. With regard to Sinclair Gardens, I entered into possession in February, taking the liabilities from Christmas. I paid the March rent and the June quarter was paid out of my money. While I was away the furniture was removed without my knowledge or consent, and the landlord took forcible possession when there was no rent due till September. I saw my agents, and we returned the agreement and got a clear acknowledgment for the rent.

Verdict, Guilty.

Sentence, 15 months' hard labour.


(Friday, November 22.)

19th November 1907
Reference Numbert19071119-59
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour; Imprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

STOWE, Henry (22, labourer), HAYES, Ernest (25, horsekeeper), HILL, Thomas (24, labourer) ; all robbery with violence on Herbert Thomas and stealing from him the sum of 13s.

HERBERT THOMSAS , Chrichton Avenue, East Ham, insurance agent. On the night of October 2 last I was travelling from Aldgate to Upton Park Station by the last train but one. I had in my left trousers pocket £52 in gold, on top of which I placed a tobacco pouch, cigarettes, and matchbox to prevent it from rattling. In my right-hand pocket I had about 13s. or 14s. out of a sovereign I had changed at Aldgate. When I got out of the train I went into the lavatory. The three prisoners then came in behind me. I turned round to walk out, and just as I got outside the lavatory Stowe came to the side of me and put his hand in my right-hand waistcoat pocket

saying, "What have you got for us to-night, governor?" I, knowing the class of men in front of me, was careful what I did. I was looking after the £52 and said, "It is no good you touching that, it is only a knife at that end of the chain." I said, "The clock is at the other end." I thought I had better talk to them in their own vernacular. Stowe took the watch out and handed it to Hayes, who looked at it and said, "That is no f—g good, give it to him back, it is not worth a tanner. Don't get pinched for that." While that was going on Hill put his hand in my right-hand trousers pocket and got out what he could. Then, as Hayes handed me back the watch he took out the remainder. We then walked up the platform, because the porter was turning the lights out. As I walked in front I heard one say, "We have made a bloomer to-night it is not in his ski" (pocket). They pushed and hustled me all the way up the staircase. When we got to the top where they take the tickets I stopped and spoke to the ticket collector and explained to him how they took my watch and chain and gave it to me back again. Stowe came up and said, "What is the master, governor? Hasn't he got his ticket? We will pay for him." I said, "Go away and let me go home, you have had enough of it to-night. I went to go oat of the station, the ticket collector went away, and as I went out of the door Stowe and Hayes got hold of me by the arm and pulled me back as I went to get on the motor-bus. Before that Hayes fetched me a blow on the side of the fate. As they pulled me back I felt a prick in my left leg, and I thought it was a knife coming into me. (Trousers produced.) At that time Hill had gone away round the corner. Then the porter came up and I ran for the door again. They went out to wait for me. Then the porter shut the door and shut me in, keeping me there till he got a policeman, who saw me home. I was in a state of collapse; they knocked me about so my arm was all bleeding. I identified the prisoners at the police station three weeks afterwards amongst a crowd; my leg has been bleeding since where I was kicked.

Cross-examined by Stowe. In the first instance I did not identify. you because you did not take your cap off before I came in; directly you took your cap off I did identify you. You were dressed differently from what I had known you. When asked at the police court if I saw the ticket collector I had a hazy idea I had spoken about the watch. I cannot tell how you knew I was carrying the money. I know you as hanging about Queen's Road and selling tips, etc. I had heard your character before. I heard that you had been convicted of assaulting the police.

Cross-examined by Hayes. I am an insurance agent for the Union in Cornhill. I am my own employer. I am a public man; I have made speeches which no doubt you have exaggerated. I have not incited people to break windows and things like that. I waited half an hour in the porters' room for the policeman to come.

Cross-examined by Hill. I did not say at the police court that I changed the sovereign at the Aldgate booking office. I said I

changed it at a public-house. I have only known you about Upton Park the last 12 months. I do not know if you have been convicted. I have seen you several times since the affair, but I left it to the detectives to take you in charge.

To Mr. Justice Ridley. I was to pay the £52 the same day; I had £23 for one man and the rest for the solicitor. I had to pay in the money the next day, but I did not do so; I went to the detective and showed him it, and then went to the bank. It was a claim I had to settle; I settled it by cheque instead of cash. It was for a burglary in Barking Road; I sometimes have these large sums in my pockets, but it won't occur again. I will do it by cheque. The prisoners know wel