Old Bailey Proceedings.
22nd June 1909
Reference Number: t19090622

ActionsCite this text | Print-friendly version | Report an error
Old Bailey Proceedings front matter.
22nd June 1909
Reference Numberf19090622

Related Material

1909, JUNE.

Vol. CLI.] Part 897.


Sessions Paper.







Shorthand Writer to the Court.





[Published by Annual Subscription.]









On the King's Commission of



The City of London,





Held on Tuesday, June 22nd, 1909, and following days.

Before the Right Hon. Sir GEORGE WYATT TRUSCOTT , Baronet, Alderman, LORD MAYOR of the City of London; the Hon. Sir ARTHUR RICHARD JELF , one of the Justices of His Majesty's High Court; Sir WALTER H. WILKIN, K. C. M. G.; Sir MARCUS SAMUEL , Bart.; Sir WILLIAM PURDIE TRELOAR, Bart.; Sir J. C. BELL, Bart.; Sir THOS. B. CROSBY, and F. HOWSE, Esq., Aldermen of the said City; Sir FORREST FULTON , Knight, K. C., Recorder of the said City; Sir FK. ALBERT BOSANQUET, K. C., Common Serjeant of the said City; His Honour JUDGE LUMLEY SMITH, K. C., Commissioner; and His Honour Judge RENTOUL, 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.


Sir JOHN JAMES BADDELEY , Knight, Deputy



H. W. CAPPER, Esq.






(Tuesday, June 22.)

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-1
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

TAVENER, Christopher (39, carpenter) , pleaded guilty of feloniously and violently assaulting, ravishing and carnally knowing Olive Lilian Tavener; unlawfully and carnally knowing the said Olive Lilian Tavener, his daughter; unlawfully and carnally knowing the said Olive Lilian Tavener, a girl over the age of 13 years and under the age of 16 years.

Sentence, Seven years' penal servitude.

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-2
VerdictsGuilty > unknown
SentencesImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

WILSON, Albert Edward (22, seaman) ; feloniously sending to Mabel Stopford, knowing the contents thereof, a certain letter threatening to kill and murder her; feloniously sending to the said Mabel Stopford, knowing the contents thereof, a certain letter, demanding with menaces of the said Mabel Stopford certain money.

Mr. Ricardo prosecuted.

Inspector FREDERICK GUYATT proved the receipt by the police of a letter from prisoner stating that he had written a certain letter to Miss Stopford.

Miss MABEL STOPFORD, Warwick Square, W. I partly occupy my time by philanthropic work in East London, and in course of that have come into contact with the prisoner. On May 22 I received the letter produced. I had always found prisoner well-behaved; so far as I can judge he has all his wits about him.

Sergeant GEORGE COLE, B Division. On May 24 I saw prisoner at Medland Hall, Ratcliffe, E. I showed him the two letters. He said, "I wrote the letters, but I did it for a man named Green, who knows Miss Stopford better than I do. She did something through which Green has lost a situation which he was trying to get. He said he had already written one letter to Miss Stopford, and did not want to write any more as his handwriting would be known. I was going to see Green in a day or two about what we were going to do. The lady comes down here on Thursdays and Fridays; she gets out at Victoria Station and makes a call before she goes home. Then Green, I, and perhaps another man would follow her. We

were not going to injure her but frighten her, and get some money from her if we could. Green said she could be easily frightened. "On being formally charged prisoner made no reply.

Verdict, Guilty. Prisoner confessed to having been convicted of felony at Lambeth Police Court on March 25, 1905.

Sergeant COLE. Prisoner described himself as a seaman; he has, I think, been only one voyage. I am unable to ascertain that, apart from that, he has done any work. He seems quite rational; I do not think he is mentally deficient.

Sentence, 18 months' hard labour.

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-3
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

CHAPPLE, Alfred George (36, labourer) ; unlawfully and carnally knowing Bertha Ellen Louise Angliss, a girl under the age of 13 years.

Verdict, Guilty. An indictment in respect of a similar offence on another young girl was not proceeded with, but remains on the file.

Sentence, Three years' penal servitude.

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-4
VerdictGuilty > lesser offence
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

MARTIN, Henry (21, housekeeper) ; feloniously wounding Alice Rouse with intent to kill and murder her; second count, with intent to do her grievous bodily harm.

Mr. St. John Macdonald prosecuted.

Police-constable SIDNEY ALBERT, 57 G. On May 13, about 1.45 p.m., I was on duty in Bath Street, City Road, when I saw prisoner running away, chased by the witness Watkins. I caught prisoner; Watkins told me prisoner had stabbed a girl in Galway Street. I took prisoner back to Galway Street; there I saw Alice Rouse supported by some friends, bleeding from the right side. I asked prisoner why he had done it; he replied, "That is my business"; I asked him for the knife, and he took from one of his pockets the knife produced. On being taken to the station, after the usual caution, he said, "I wish I had killed her; we had a row on Saturday night previous to the Thursday, and I have had the headache ever since, but now I have done it it has gone; if she don't die I will do her in when I come out; I have no other pals but her, and she has tried to leave me, but she cannot. "Prisoner was quite sober.

ALICE ROUSE . Prisoner has been my young man. On Saturday, May 10, we had a quarrel. On the 12th I met him as I was out walking. He said, "Alice, will you be friends with me?" I said, "No, Harry"; he said, "Well, you will see trouble. "On May 13, at a quarter to two, I saw him in Galway Street. He said, "Alice, where is this paper?"—referring to a protection paper I had told him I was going to get. I said, "I have not got one; my brother shall get me one; let me go to work." He said, "Go on, go to work, Alice"; I saw in his hand something that looked like a knife; I said, "Oh, Harry, put that away. "He frightened me so that I fell down and became unconscious; I do not remember his striking at me; there was blood on my blouse where he stabbed me in the chest. I was two days in hospital.

SIDNEY WATKINS , railway carman. On May 13 I was in Galway Street on my van; I saw prisoner and Rouse walking towards me;

they appeared to be having an altercation; on getting up to me they stopped; I saw prisoner raise his hand with a knife opened and stab the woman in the right breast. I jumped off the van and gave chase till prisoner was arrested.

Dr. ADOLTH ABRAHAMS, house surgeon at St. Bartholomew's Hospital. On May 13 Rouse was brought to the hospital; her clothing was saturated with blood; she had an incised wound about an inch and a half long on the right side of the chest, and a small wound on the left side of the neck; these could have been caused by the knife produced. Neither wound was directly dangerous.

Prisoner's statement before the magistrate, "When we meet again I hope we shall be better friends than what we are now. "


PRISONER (not on oath) said he had had a quarrel with Rouse; he met her on the 13th and asked her to forgive him; she would not speak, and treated him like a dog. He did not remember striking her or using any knife on her at all.

Verdict, Guilty of unlawfully wounding, without any serious intent.

Three previous convictions were proved.

Sentence, Six months' hard labour.

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-5
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

STABLER, Charles (20, carman) ; committing an abominable crime. Verdict, Not guilty .


(Tuesday, June 22.)

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-6
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceNo Punishment > sentence respited

Related Material

TURNER, George (29, porter) , who pleaded guilty last Session (see page 113) of breaking and entering the shop of the Non-Tread over Boot Company and stealing therein one boot and one shoe, their goods, and unlawfully and maliciously damaging by night a glass window, the property of the Non-Tread-over Boot Company, to an amount exceeding £5, came up for judgment.

SIDNEY REGINALD DYER , medical officer, Brixton, said that prisoner had been in the prison hospital since April 10, being treated for consumption. He had very much improved and had gained a stone in weight, but there was no prospect of him being able to undergo hard labour.

The Recorder postponed sentence until next Session, when there will probably be a further postponement until September. Prisoner, it is understood, will return to hospital.

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-7
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty

Related Material

BONNETT, Alfred (60, secretary) , who pleaded guilty at the April Session (see page 14, also page 158) of frauds in connection with the Third Royal Liver Benefit Building Society, and sentence upon whom was postponed in order that he might have the opportunity of making restitution, came up for judgment.

Mr. Cecil Fitch, for the prosecution, said he was instructed to bring forward two matters. In the first place, the Director of Public Prosecutions asked that an order for the payment of the costs of prosecution should be made upon defendant. Secondly, it appeared that he had in his possession or in his power, a collecting book of one of the large friendly societies, which was admittedly of a capital value of £400, though the trustees of the society were of opinion that it was worth £1, 000.

Mr. Curtis Bennett said he was instructed that defendant had made restitution of absolutely everything he had and now had not one penny in the world. The collecting book referred to had been purchased for £300 by Mrs. Bennett and made over to a third party, partly for the purposes of the defence. He would remind the Court that defendant bad been in custody since last Sessions. With regard to the document signed by defendant in April transferring all his property to the society, he would suggest that should be cancelled, as otherwise it might create some trouble later on. The Recorder said he had no power to order cancellation.

Sentence postponed until Monday, defendant in the meantime to make affidavit that his freehold interest in the collecting book has been disposed of for valuable consideration. On the matter coming before the Court on Monday, an affidavit by prisoner that he had transferred his interest in the collecting book was produced.

The Recorder, in sentencing prisoner to twelve months' imprisonment, said it was impossible to regard this case except as one of great gravity, owing to prisoner's systematic frauds extending over a long period and involving a loss of no less than £5, 315. His Lordship declined to make an order on prisoner for payment of the costs of the prosecution, such an order would he feared affect other persons than the prisoner himself. There was no reason to believe, so far as he could make out, that he was a man who had put money away. In 99 cases out of 100 an order to pay the costs of a prosecution would fall upon the innocent wife and children, though, of course, there were cases in which, such an order might properly be made.

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-8
VerdictsGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentencesNo Punishment > sentence respited

Related Material

REBOUL, Eliza Lavinia (24) , who pleaded guilty at the May Session (see page 114) of forging and uttering, knowing the same to be forged, a certain authority and request for the payment of £10, with intent to defraud, and stealing a Post Office Savings Bank deposit book, the property of His Majesty's Postmaster-General, was further respited for sentence until next Session.

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-9
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty

Related Material

MCKAY, William Rowland , retired major of the Army , who pleaded guilty at the April Session (see page 15, also page 113) of libel upon Alexander Munkettrick, came up for judgment. It was stated that prisoner had, as agreed, advertised his apology and retraction in "The Times" and "Glasgow Herald."

Mr. Lionel Benson, for the prosecutor, complained that prisoner had not paid the costs of the prosecution and stated that prosecutor could not get any satisfaction at all.

The Recorder said he had considered the question of costs. The words of the Statute were: "The Court before which a prisoner is convicted of an indictable offence may, if they think fit, in addition to any other lawful punishment, order the person convicted to pay the whole or any part of the costs incurred. "The difficulty which arose was, whether, if defendant was merely bound over that amounted to conviction and punishment. He thought that, in order to bring prisoner within the Act, the best course would be to pass a nominal sentence of one day's imprisonment, directing the defendant to pay the costs of the prosecution.

Mr. Lionel Benson said he was instructed that prisoner had means to pay these costs, and asked that the case should stand out for three days to enable him to pay them.

The Recorder said if the costs were not paid at once they could be recovered in the same way as anything else, by execution. He had no power to direct that Major McKay should be imprisoned if the costs were not paid.

Mr. Lionel Benson. I am instructed that he will never pay the costs at all.

The Recorder. I cannot help that. I have nothing to do with the drawing of the Act of Parliament. I have only got to administer it.

Sentence, One day's imprisonment, entitling prisoner to immediate discharge.

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-10
VerdictGuilty > pleaded part guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

VINCENT, Horace Samuel (29, agent) ; indicted for forging and uttering, knowing the same to be forged, divers orders for the payment of money, to wit, cheques and orders for the several sums of £90 15s. 5d., £90 18s. 4d., £90 18s. 4d., and £77 12s. 6d., in each case with intent to defraud; and forging and uttering, knowing the same to be forged, the several endorsements on the said orders for the payment of money and feloniously stealing the said cheques, the goods of Robert Schult and another, his masters; pleaded guilty to stealing three cheques amounting together to £259 6s. 3d. Mr. Cecil Fitch, for the prosecution, accepted the plea.

Prisoner was employed by a firm of West India merchants and was encrusted with the duty of drawing cheques to corresponding invoices. These cheques had to be signed either by a partner of the firm or two head clerks. Prisoner drew a cheque for, say, £9 18s. 4d., and, after he had got it signed, altered the "nine" in the written amount to "ninety" and added "0" after the "9." He disposed of the cheques by opening an account in the name of one of the firm's customers, at the Birkbeck Bank. After the cheques were returned he abstracted them so that they could not be traced. Altogether the defalcations amounted to £533. When he found in November, 1908, that the game was up he absconded, and on April 29 was sentenced to six months' hard labour at Nottingham for attempting to obtain £100 by false pretences. Upon his identity being discovered a warrant was sent down from the Home Office.

Sentence, Nine months' hard labour, to run concurrently with the Nottingham sentence.

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-11
VerdictGuilty > lesser offence
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

WILLIAMS, John (45, clerk) ; forging and uttering, knowing the same to be forged, certain orders for the payment of money, to wit, bankers' cheques for £500, £500, £500, £549 4s. 3d., £500, £825 13s. 5d., £2, 000, £1, 500, and £850 respectively, in each case with intent to defraud; forging and uttering, knowing the same to be forged, a certain order for the payment of money, to wit, a bankers' cheque for the payment of £700, with intent to defraud.

Mr. Muir prosecuted; Mr. George Elliott, K. C., appeared for prisoner.

Prisoner pleaded guilty to three indictments out of ten, charging him with forging a cheque for £1, 500 on November 9, 1908, a cheque for £850 on May 1, 1909, and a cheque for £700 on May 4, 1909.

Mr. Muir observed that he did not know the grounds of distinction which caused prisoner to plead not guilty to the other indictments, but he did not feel justified in taking up the time of the Court by trying them, but would ask that they should remain on the file. In 1888 prisoner was a tradesman in a small way of business in Wales and became bankrupt, and disappeared from Wales an undischarged bankrupt. Thence he went to America, and in 1892 left the service he was in there with good testimonials. In 1896 he entered the service of Messrs. Raphael Tuck and Sons, Limited, as clerk at a salary of £2 a week, and in 1899 entered the counting-house of the American branch of the house in London as bookkeeper and cashier at a salary of £260. He then proceeded to use his position of trust for the purpose of committing these extensive forgeries, amounting, so far as could be discovered, to £29, 243, the loss being, however, reduced to £24, 700 by a loan of £4, 500 obtained by prisoner from a bank in Wales. Prisoner posed as a man of wealth, and the destination of a good deal of the stolen money was the development of a colliery in Wales which he had acquired. In 1908, being ambitious of the political representation of that part of Wales in which he had lived, it was necessary for him to get rid of his old bankruptcy, and it was accordingly annulled by the payment of the liabilities.

The Recorder suggested an adjournment for the purpose of enabling prisoner to make an assignment to Messrs. Raphael Tuck, but it was stated that this was not feasible, as fresh bankruptcy proceedings had been instituted.

Sentence, Three years' penal servitude.

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-12
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

CLARKE, Ellen (36, married) ; forging the receipt of a Post Office money order for the payment of £7 9s. 6d., with intent to defraud; obtaining by means of false pretences from the Commissioners of Inland Revenue the sum of £7 9s. 6d., with intent to defraud.

Mr. Kendrick prosecuted; Mr. Huntly Jenkins defended.

JOHN WALDEN PHILLIPS , surveyor of taxes for the Holloway district. On November 12 certain claims for the repayment of incometax were received from Helen McCarthy, 15, Springdale Road,

Stoke Newington, N. Those claims were examined, certified in the usual way, and transmitted to Somerset House for payment.

HENRY GOSDEN , Examiner, Claims Department, Somerset House. In November last I received the claims spoken to by last witness and passed them for payment, the amount being £7 9s. 6d.

WILLIAM BELL JOHNSTON , in charge of the Money Order Department, Claims Branch, Somerset House. The claims referred to were received by me, and I prepared the money order for the sum payable, numbered 18516, issued on December 12, 1908, in favour of Miss Helen McCarthy, and it was forwarded with a letter of advice to 15, Springdale Road, Stoke Newington, payable at the Green Lanes office. There are three errors in the signature. Helen is misspelt "Hellen," McCarthy is misspelt "NcCarthey."

Cross-examined. I heard that the signature to the order had been forged about two months ago.

To a Juror. If the signature on the order had been compared at the post office with the letter of advice the errors would have been detected.

ADA MARY PERRY , assistant at the Green Lanes Post Office. I cannot say that I positively recollect the money order produced being presented to me for payment. I paid it on December 14. I seem to recollect paying it to a boy who I thought was Mrs. Clarke's son, but I could not swear positively. I do not know Mrs. Clarke personally, but I should have known her if I had seen her. I knew where she lived. Before the order was paid a letter of advice had been received in the usual course from the Inland Revenue Department. I do not know Miss Helen McCarthy. I have no recollection of making inquiry of the person presenting the order. In the case of an ordinary money order I should ask the name of the sender, but not in the case of the Inland Revenue. I am not aware of any Post Office regulations requiring the payee to sign such an order in my presence. The order was signed when presented. I did not notice the spelling at all.

Cross-examined. I pledge my oath it was not signed in my presence. When I was first asked about this matter in January I could not recollect anything about it whatever.

Miss HELEN MCCARTHY, 137, Cornwall Road, Bayswater. Last November I was living at my sister's house, 15, Springdale Road, Stoke Newington. I sent in the three claims to the district collector, Highbury. I left Springdale Road on November 19. At that time prisoner was living in the same house, occupying three rooms with her husband and family. Other people were living in the house. It is a tenement house. Having sent in the claims I was expecting to receive payment. The signature on the order is not my writing, and I never received the money. The official at Somerset House showed me the order on my application. I never gave authority to anyone to sign it on my behalf. After I had left Springdale Road I received this letter from Mrs. Clarke: "15, Springdale Road, Green Lanes. Dear Miss McCarthy,—I have sent you a letter that your sister opened.—Yours sincerely, E. CLARKE.

I hope you are straight. "In the letter the "Miss" is spelt "Nis" and the "McCarthy". "I know prisoners handwriting from that letter only. In the month of January I called at Springdale Road to see Mrs. Clarke upon receipt of the letter from Somerset House, telling me that the money had been sent.

ALFRED WILLIAM COPE , inspector in the Customs and Excise Department, and formerly employed by the Inland Revenue Department. In the course of my duties on April 23 I called at 15, Springdale Road, and interviewed prisoner. I showed her the money order, and told her I was an inspector of Customs and Excise. She said, "I admit the writing is very much like mine, but I did not sign it. On the Saturday the letter came here I was out shopping. On the Sunday morning I went with a friend's baby to the hospital, and I slept with my friend that night. "She said she had written a letter to Miss McCarthy.

HELEN MCCARTHY , further examined. I am familiar with my sister's handwriting. The signature on the order bears no resemblance to it.

Cross-examined. The first person I complained to that I had not received the order was the official at Somerset House. Mrs. Clarke strenuously denied that she had received the order. I saw her before I saw my sister, who had made a claim similar to mine. I left Springdale Road because of a quarrel with my sister about money matters. I have never cashed any orders at this post office. At Springdale Road there is a letter-box on the outer door, but I cannot say whether there is a box on the other doors. I suppose there would be 12 or 13 people living in the house, perhaps more than that.

ALFRED WILLIAM COPE , further examined. Mrs. Clarke told me on April 23 that the name of the person with whom she had been staying on December 13 was Mrs. Palmer, who lives at 59, Park Lane, close by. She stated that she stayed with Mrs. Palmer on the Sunday night, and did not return home till the Monday evening, so that she could not have cashed the order. She also said, "I have offered to pay Miss McCarthy back. I will pay it back, but I never took it. The neighbours think I did. "Miss Jane McCarthy was residing in the house at the time I was there. I took a specimen of handwriting from another lady present, and was about to take that of Miss Jane McCarthy, when prisoner said, "Miss Jane McCarthy could not have signed the order as at the time it arrived she was staying with her sister. "I then asked Mrs. Clarke to write down some words which I mentioned to her. She agreed that she would do so, and I dictated to her the writing on Exhibit 7, "Helen McCarthy," spelling it correctly. I also asked her to write "Ellen Clarke. "She also wrote "Hellen NcCarthey," and the words, "horse, Hilda Helen," showing a similarity in the writing of the "H. "I found the document produced (Exhibit 8) on the mantelshelf in prisoner's room. In that "Miss" is spelt "Niss." Prisoner stated that it was the address of one of the Misses McCarthy who lived at Chigwell Road, Essex. I compared the various exhibits with the handwriting on the money order. I also called upon Mrs.

Palmer, who made a statement, which I read to prisoner, who denied the accuracy of it.

Cross-examined. It was true that prisoner had been staying with Mrs. Palmer, but Mrs. Palmer stated that prisoner returned home on the Monday morning, not in the evening, as prisoner stated. The forgery of the signature to the order was only brought to my notice between April 20 and 23. Prisoner did not make the slightest objection to giving me specimens of her writing. It seemed to upset her that the neighbours should think that she had committed the forgery. I had conversation with several of the tenants about the matter in prisoner's presence. I observed that the peculiar part of the case was that I had in my possession a letter addressed to Miss McCarthy in which her name was spelt "NcCarthey" as it was spelt on the order.

MARTHA JANE PALMER , wife of James Charles Palmer, 59, Park Lane, N, gave evidence as to prisoner staying with her on the night of December 13. She returned home between half past seven and eight o'clock, and came back to Park Lane about 12 o'clock. In the meantime witness had seen prisoner between 10 and 11, when she called at 15, Springdale Road with a telephone message.

THOMAS HENRY GURRIN , handwriting expert, Holborn Viaduct, expressed the opinion that the writings on Exhibits 4, 5, 7, 8, and part of 10 were by the same person who signed the order, and pointed out various points of resemblance.

(Wednesday, June 23.)


ELLEN CLARKE (prisoner, on oath). I am the wife of Frederick Clarke. We have six children and have lived at 15, Springdale Road for nine years. My husband is a billiard marker. No charge of any sort has ever been brought against me. Miss Jane McCarthy, sister of the prosecutrix, is my landlady, and there are several families living in the house; I should think there are 10 or 11 grown-up people without the children. About a fortnight after Miss Helen McCarthy had left the house there came by post a notice addressed to her. I gave it to Miss Jane McCarthy and she opened it in my kitchen. She said, "I will keep her waiting as she has stolen my home." There was a dispute about some furniture which Miss Helen McCarthy took with her when she left. Miss Jane McCarthy read the notice out to me and other people besides. She dropped the notice in my kitchen and I sent it on to Miss Helen. Everybody comes into my kitchen; it is practically a public place. The notice lay in the kitchen all night. Next morning I said to Miss Jane, "Are you going to send this notice to your sister?" "No," she said, so I wrote a note to Miss Helen McCarthy and enclosed the notice with it. I left the note on the table in the kitchen quite an hour before I posted it. The

address that the inspector found on the mantelpiece I copied from a letter sent to Miss Jane, so that I might forward any letters. The address had been on the mantelpiece between two and three months. The next I heard about this matter was in January, when Miss Helen McCarthy came to the house. She first saw another lodger in the house as I was out marketing. When I came in she said, "Mrs. Clarke, have you seen a letter?" I said, "No; if there had been a letter it would have been forwarded like the others to you. "Then she said, "My money has been sent from Somerset House. My sister must have taken it. "She also said, "I have lost sufficient money now and I intend to wake up for the future. "Her sister was not at home then and she went away. About a month afterwards she came again. Another tenant opened the door. She said to me, "I have come to see about this money. A letter has been sent here." I said, "No." She said, "I have a letter in my possession very similar to the writing on the money order." So I said, "Who are you alluding to? I wrote a note to you, Miss McCarthy. Do you think I have had your money?" 'Well," she said, "I did not say so. "No," I said, "you cannot. That has got to be proved. "She said, "I will have them now, man, woman, or child. "It became common property among the neighbours that this money had been stolen. When Mr. Cope, the inspector, came I wrote as he asked me to do. What I said to Mr. Cope about paying the money back was, "Why should I pay money back what I have not had. If I was a rich woman I would pay her her money back. "I agree that my writing and the writing on the Post Office Order are very similar. I did not write the signature on the Post Office Order, and know nothing at all about it. I have two sons, Frank and Frederick, and am in the habit of sending them to the post office to cash postal orders. I have a postal order for £1 sent to me every month, that being an allowance made to me by a relative. The post mistress at Green Lanes would only know the boys by sight. On December 12, between eight and half past in the evening, I went out marketing with a friend. On Sunday I slept at Mrs. Palmer's, and on Monday, between half-past seven and eight o'clock, I went home to get the breakfast and send the children off to school, and I went back to Mrs. Palmer's between 12 and one. What I said about not returning home till Monday evening was a mistake.

Cross-examined. I told the inspector I never saw the letter containing the money. That is the fact. I was out when it came. I never do much writing. I admit that the signature on the order is like my writing.

Mrs. CAROLINE TOOMEY, 10, Springdale Road; Mrs. VICTORIA WOOLLARD, 15, Springdale Road; and Mr. HENRY STRONG, electro plater and gilder, gave prisoner the character of a hard working and respectable woman.

Verdict, Not guilty.


(Tuesday, June 22.)

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-13
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty; Guilty > pleaded part guilty
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude; No Punishment > sentence respited

Related Material

TURNER, John (62, sawyer), and KROMM, Charles (48, traveller) ; both feloniously having in their possession, without lawful excuse, four several moulds in and upon which was made and impressed the apparent resemblance of both sides of pieces of the King's current silver coins called florins, shillings, and sixpences; both having in their possession a quantity of grain, tin, antimony, and other articles, intended to be used for and in order to the counterfeiting of the King's current silver coin; both unlawfully having in their possession 54 pieces of counterfeit coin, with intent to utter the same.

Mr. Wilkinson prosecuted; Mr. Purcell appeared for Kromm. Turner pleaded guilty to all charges. Kromm pleaded guilty to possessing the mould, which plea was accepted by the Crown. Six previous convictions were proved against Turner: June, 1872, 18 months'; 1874, five years' penal servitude and one year police supervision; 1880, seven years' penal servitude; 1891, five years' penal servitude; 1897, seven years' penal servitude; 1904, five years' penal servitude, all for coinage offences. Kromm was stated to have been in regular and respectable employment, and to have been led by Turner into taking charge of some coining implements.

Sentence: Turner, Five years' penal servitude; Kromm, judgment respited to next Sessions.

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-14
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

BROWN, Thomas (33, gardener) , pleaded guilty of unlawfully having in his possession 27 pieces of counterfeit coin, with intent to utter the same.

Mr. Wilkinson prosecuted.

Previous convictions proved: March 20, 1907, Eccles Police Court, six months' for larceny; September 30, 1907, six months' for stealing £75 9s. 8d. as a servant; April 22, 1909, six weeks' hard labour for indecent assault. The coins were stated to be very well made.

Sentence, 12 months' hard labour.

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-15
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

SAGE, Francis (44, bricklayer) ; having in his possession three pieces of counterfeit coin, with intent to utter the same.

Mr. Wilkinson prosecuted.

Police-constable PERCY WELLS, 29 H. On Saturday, May 29, 1909, I was on duty with another officer near Fashion Street, Spitalfields, when I arrested prisoner, took him to the station, and searched him. The prisoner put his hand in his right trouser pocket, pulled out something, which he tried to put in his breast, when two coins dropped, which I picked up, and found a third upon him. They were counterfeit half-crowns. I said, "What about these coins; they are counterfeit." He said, "I know that. If you come to my place I will tell you how to make them."

Cross-examined. As soon as I had finished searching prisoner I found the coins were counterfeit. Prisoner did not say they had been given to him for a bet.

Police-constable DAVID CHRISTOPHER, 481 H. I saw prisoner searched at the station when the coins fell to the ground, which were picked up by the last witness. Wells said, "Do you see these—they are counterfeit?" Prisoner said, "Yes, I know all about that—come to my place I will show you how to make them. "At the police court prisoner said he had received them for a bet—he did not say that when searched.

Detective-sergeant HENRY DESSENT, Criminal Investigation Department. On May 29 I saw prisoner at the police station. I said, "Sage, I am going to charge you with having in your possession three counterfeit half-crowns, with intent to utter them at Lozelle Street." He replied, "You are getting this up for me properly. Cannot you find anything else?" I had the coins in front of me.

Cross-examined. Prisoner had been arrested some time before I charged him, which I did at 8.30 p.m.

WILLIAM JOHN WEBSTER , inspector of His Majesty's Mint. The three half-crowns produced are counterfeit, all made from one mould, pretty well made.

Prisoner's statement before the magistrate: There are three witnesses can prove they were given to me—they were there when they were given to me.


FRANCIS SAGE (prisoner, not on oath). On the Saturday afternoon when I was arrested there were about 12 or 14 of us in a public-house drinking. There was a bit of a row and one man wanted to fight another and offered to bet 7s. 6d. The three half-crowns were given to me to hold as the stake. I was arrested on another charge, and I did not know the coins were bad until I was told so at the station.

Verdict, Guilty.

Convictions proved: September 25, 1875, Worship Street, three days' stealing an inkstand; August 16, 1876, six weeks', stealing; October 13, 1881, six weeks'; May 22, 1882, Middlesex Sessions, eight months', stealing; March 27, 1883, 15 months' for housebreaking; June 28, 1884, Bow Street, two months', stealing a chain; September 15, 1884, at this Court, five years' penal servitude, robbery with violence; June 3, 1889, Worship Street, three months' and license revoked; March 3, 1890, at this Court, 12 months', robbery with violence; December 14, 1891, at this Court, seven years' penal servitude, shop breaking; June 19, 1897, Mansion House, four months' and license revoked; May 29, 1899, at this Court, three years' penal servitude, shop breaking; June 2, 1902, at this Court, 18 months', attempted burglary; February 7, 1905, North London Sessions, 24 months', stealing a bicycle; October 22, 1906, Guildhall, 12 months', under the Prevention of Crimes Act; October 14, 1907, Lam-beth,

12 months', Prevention of Crimes Act. As other indictments were pending against prisoner, sentence was postponed. (For the further trial, see page 349.)

(Tuesday, July 6.)

Sentence, Two years' hard labour, to run concurrently with the sentence on the other indictments.


(June 23, 24, and 25, 1909.)

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-16
VerdictsGuilty > unknown; Guilty > with recommendation
SentencesImprisonment > penal servitude; Imprisonment; Miscellaneous > sureties

Related Material

JONES, William Arthur (48, doctor), LIDSTONE, William John (43, agent), and FARMER, Caroline (30, no occupation) . Jones, feloniously causing a certain instrument, with intent to procure the miscarriage of Beatrice Dean ; Lidstone and Farmer, feloniously aiding and abetting and procuring Jones to do and commit the miscarriage of Beatrice Dean.

Mr. Bodkin and Mr. Leycester prosecuted; Mr. Symmons and Mr. Stanley Packer defended Lid stone; Mr. Daniel Warde defended Farmer.

Verdict, Guilty, Farmer being recommended to mercy.

Sentences: Jones (who had been struck off the Medical Register by the General Medical Council in 1902 for "infamous conduct in a professional respect," namely, the procuring of abortion), Ten years' penal servitude; Lidstone, three months' imprisonment, second division; Farmer was released on her own recognisances in £10 to come up for judgment if called upon.


(Wednesday, June 23.)

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-17
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceMiscellaneous > sureties

Related Material

FOXLEE, Charles (43, leather worker) , who was convicted at the March Session, 1906 (see Vol. CXLIV., page 26), of libel, and bound over to appear and bear judgment when called upon, came up for judgment on the allegation by the prosecution that he had forfeited his recognisance.

Mr. Leycester, for the prosecution, stated that this application for defendant to come up for judgment was made upon affidavit. Defendant was convicted in March, 1906, on his own confession of publishing a defamatory libel on Dr. Waddell, who at that time was practising at Potter's Bar. Defendant pleaded not guilty to another count charging him with threatening to publish a libel with intent to extort money, and that charge was not tried. His Lordship said at the time that it was merciful conduct on the part of the prosecutor

not to proceed with that charge, as the circumstances justified the preferring of it. Defendant was then bound over in the sum of £100, with two sureties of £50, to come up for judgment if called upon, and in the meantime to keep the peace, Mr. Percival Hughes, who then appeared for him, stating that he sincerely apologised for having published these libels, and admitted that he never could have substantiated his accusations against Dr. Waddell. The case had been adjourned from the previous Sessions, and there had been talk of a plea of justification, but no plea of justification was put in. Defendant had been told over and over again that his proper course was to bring an action for damages against Dr. Waddell. Since the former trial defendant had sent a number of letters to Dr. Waddell, who had now retired from the medical profession, and was living in Cornwall, and to Mr. Hodgkinson, his solicitor, and to the solicitors for the prosecution, alleging that Mr. Percival Hughes and Mr. Hodgkinson were acting at the trial in collusion with those who appeared for the prosecution, in having a plea of guilty entered, in apologising and promising not to repeat the libels. No steps had been taken upon these communications which, though annoying, did not do anybody any harm, but this application was made upon a long document in which the oringinal accusations against Dr. Waddell were repeated with much bitterness. Accompanying it was a statement that it was going to be printed and published, and would have a much larger circulation than that of the original pamphlet, for which defendant was prosecuted in 1906.

ARTHUR ROBERT WADDELL , medical practitioner, temporarily residing at Potter's Bar, deposed to receiving letters from the defendant repeating the libellous charges which led to the prosecution of 1906.

FRANCIS WILLIAM HENRY DURRANT , solicitor, managing clerk to Mr. Hodgkinson, 124, Chancery Lane, proved the receipt of a libellous document on May 5, 1909, in the handwriting of the defendant. He wrote to Dr. Waddell's solicitors informing them of its receipt.

Prisoner, asked if he had anything to say, said that this was the most cruel business, if his Lordship only knew the rights of it, that ever was inflicted upon a man, but eventually agreed to enter into further recognisances, and with his two sureties was accordingly bound over.

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-18
VerdictsGuilty > pleaded guilty; Guilty > unknown
SentencesImprisonment > penal servitude; Imprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

KING, Francis Reginald (29, cashier), and ROBERT, Isaac Robert, otherwise Windell, Davitt Stanley (23, journalist) ; both obtaining by false pretences from the London and South-Western Bank, Limited, the sum of £290 at each of the Vauxhall, Clapham, Balham, Streatham, Tulse Hill, Dulwich, Forest Hill, and Catford branches of the said bank, in each case with intent to defraud; both forging and uttering, knowing the same to be forged, eight authorities for the payment of money, to wit, eight credit slips, purporting to be signed by Edwin Leopold Cox, and addressed to the eight said branches of the said bank respectively; King conspiring with the said Bernard Isaac Robert to commit the said offences; King unlawfully receiving six £5 Bank of England notes, knowing the same to have been obtained from the London and South-Western Bank, Limited, by false pretences. Robert pleaded guilty.

Mr. Bodkin and Mr. Travers Humphreys prosecuted; Mr. Lever and Mr. Kerr defended King; Mr. George Elliott, K. C.; and Mr. Curtis Bennett appeared for Robert.

JOSEPH ADOLF SERVAIS , stockbroker and banker, Antwerp. Sometime before December 26 I had received from England, and then had in my possession, a list of banknotes said to be the proceeds of frauds upon the London and South-Western Bank. On that day, at about half past one, prisoner King came to my bank and presented six banknotes of £5 each. I compared them with the list and found they corresponded with some of the notes lost by the London and Southwestern Bank. I asked King where he got the notes from. He answered, "I got them from a bank in London. "Then I said to him, patting the notes away, "You can get them back from the police." He went away, leaving the notes with me, and through a little window I have on the counter I saw him running off as fast as he could. I handed the six £5 notes to the Belgium police. I noticed that they had upon them the stamp of the London and South-Western Bank. (Three notes, Nos. 01765, 01766, and 01794, stamped Tulse Hill branch, and three numbered 01929-30-31 from the Forest Hill branch were exhibited as those handed to witness.) On April 24 I was in Leicester Square, having arrived in England the same morning. I had arranged with the English police to go there to see if I could identify the man who handed me the notes. I saw prisoner King enter the square (witness, being handed a plan, marked a spot at the south-eastern corner of the square where he was standing, and a place at the north-west corner, opposite the Empire, where the police were waiting, and indicated that King entered the square from the direction of Daly's Theatre). I recognised him as he entered the square, but not distinctly enough, so I walked towards him to get a better view of his face, and when within 10 yards or 15 yards, I had no doubt at all of his identity. The same day I gave evidence against him at Bow Street.

Cross-examined. My business in Antwerp is a fairly large one. My two sons are employed in the business, but on this occasion they were away for a holiday. My wife first spoke to prisoner; she assists in conducting the business of the bank. I was myself in my private office upstairs and she sent my daughter to fetch me down. As I entered the front office my wife said to me, "I have here six notes presented by that gentleman." Prisoner could hear what my wife said. She had already verified the numbers. I then saw for myself that the notes were in the prohibited list which is kept in the office. There is a counter in the office almost like the counter in a bank in this country. It has a grille, a sort of cagework made of brass. I saw prisoner in the bank for perhaps about ten minutes. We spoke in English. It was three months before I was called upon to identify prisoner, but I am not likely to forget him, as this was a very remarkable occurrence, such as does not happen every day. I may tell you

my youngest son has some likeness to this man (King), and therefore I could keep the memory of him in my mind. It was Mr. Calcutt (an official of the Bank) who came over to Belgium to bring me hack, and he naturally told me something about the circumstances of the case. I gave him an exact assignment or description of the prisoner. Mr. Calcutt did not describe him to me. I had previously given a description to the Belgian police, and it was just by this description that there were suspicions of the man. Mr. Calcutt told me they Were suspecting a clerk in the bank, so I knew that the person I was expected to pick out was in the position of a bank clerk. I had been waiting in the square about 25 minutes before prisoner King arrived. Mr. Calcutt told me it was probable the suspected man would come to Leicester Square. I "made attention if I saw anybody resembling to the person I expected to see there." I had not been told that he would probably come from a particular direction. I saw prisoner wave his hand to some persons in the square. He had a bag in his hand. I knew the person I was going to pick out had an appointment with some one in the square, but I did not recollect that at the time. I did not know the police officer or the inspector of the bank. I first knew that they were connected with the matter at the police court. I did not notice that the two men standing at the little gate at the north-west comer of the square looked like policemen. I had some doubt at first whether prisoner was the man, so I went round the monument to get somewhat nearer. When I gave the signal of recognition agreed upon by raising my hat I was about 20 yards from prisoner. I wear glasses because I am short-sighted. The man who came into my bank was wearing a grey surtout, or travelling overcoat. He had on a travelling cap, I think, of a dark grey colour, such as one wears in travelling When I saw him in the square he had on a little felt hat of a greenish colour and brown clothes. I am not so sure about that as about his appearance, his figure; I did not analyse his clothing. I cannot say if he was then wearing the blue suit foe has on now.

Re-examined. Before I went to the square I had not met Mr. Anderson, and had seen no other official of the bank except Mr. Calcutt.

(Thursday, June 24.)

HUGH BASSANO HUTCHINS , first cashier, Forest Hill branch of the London and South-Western Bank. I was acting in that capacity on September 23 last year. On the morning of that day the Exhibits 22, 23, and 24 reached the bank. No. 22, the envelope is an official envelope of the bank and is correctly addressed. No. 23 is a transfer advice note from the Harlesden branch of the Forest Hill branch, transferring the account of "D. Stanley Windell," 93, Craven Park Road, Harlesden, the amount of the account being stated to be £726 18s. 4d. Then there are the words, "Pass book will follow." At the bottom of the advice note there are the words, "Opened May, 1905, average balance £500 to £600," and in place of "signature

attached "there is "Mr. Windell will call to sign the book." That advice note purports to be signed by Edwin L. Cox, manager of the Harlesden branch. No. 24 is a specimen signature, "Stanley Windell. "All these documents were absolutely in order. "Tack," the code word for the day, was on the transfer advice note or I would sot have acted upon it. In the course of the morning Windell or Robert called at the branch. I attended to him. He signed his name in the signature book, and I compared his signature with the specimen signature (Exhibit 24). At his request I gave him a cheque book containing 25 cheques to bearer, of which the cheque produced (Exhibit 25) is one. He filled the cheque up there and then for £290, signing it "D. Stanley Windell." At his request I cashed the cheque, giving him £200 in bank notes and £90 in gold. He had 32 five pound notes, including numbers 1929-30-31, which were presented to M. Servais in Antwerp. At Windell's request I sent the cheque book by post to 93, Craven Park Road; it came back through the returned letter office. In April of this year I went to Madrid in company with Chief Inspector Bower. I there saw prisoner Robert, and recognised him as the customer who called at the bank in respect of this transaction. The transfer advice note received, being in proper order, was authority to my branch to honour cheques of such an amount.

Cross-examined. If a specimen of your signature had been attached to the advice form we should request you to sign the signature book. I do not admit that anybody could walk into the bank with a forged signature and clear out your banking account. Letters with the code word attached are copied in the press copybooks of the branch. That is usually done by the junior in the office, so that the code word would leak out later in the day. The head office send the code words on the Saturday in sealed envelopes and they arrive at the different branches on the Monday morning. The code words are selected at the head office. Nobody knows what is going to be the code word for the several days of the week except the official who sends them out and the directors. The envelope containing the code words is opened at the branches by the managers. If the manager is away the first cashier will open it. The list of code words for the week is supposed to be kept locked up. I have never seen it in a letter basket on the manager's desk. The clerks would not go into the manager's room unless they had some special business there. The bank has 13 branches in London.

Re-examined. For a person to forge a signature and get money out of a customer's account the forgery would have to be an excellent one. We acted upon the signature enclosed in the advice note. The forged signature of Mr. Cox I believed to be the signature of that gentleman.

Similar evidence as to the receipt of transfer advice notes, etc., purporting to be signed by Mr. Cox, as to the visit of the customer D. Stanley Windell, and as to the drawing and cashing of a cheque at each branch for £290, and the request to forward the passbook to 93, Craven Park Road, the passbook being subsequently returned through

the Dead Letter Office, was given by the following officials: FREDERICK ORMSBY INNES, cashier, Tulse Hill branch (from which branch the other notes tendered to M. Servais, Nos. 01765, 01766, and 01794, were issued); SIDNEY HERBERT JARRETT, manager, Vauxhall; CECIL RALPH LOCK, chief cashier, Clapham branch; STANLEY LASSAM, cashier, Balham branch; CHARLES BURGESS WOOD, manager, Streatham Branch; CHARLES FREDERICK BISGOOD, manager, Dulwich branch; and GEORGE FREDERICK RYDER, manager, Catford branch.

MARTIN JEFFREY BUTLER , manager, Bayswater branch of the London and Westminster Bank. On February 11 an account was opened at the Bayswater branch by the prisoner Robert in the name of Bernard Isaac Robert. I produce a certified copy of the account. The cheque produced (Exhibit 46a) is one of the cheques drawn upon that account on February 24, 1909, in favour of prisoner King, payable to bearer, the amount being £3 10s. The stamp shows that that cheque has been passed through the West Kensington branch of the London and South-Western Bank, through the defendant King's account. Roberts' account was opened with a payment in of £275. The account was last operated on on March 6, the balance left being £4 17s. 5d.

Cross-examined. The cheque drawn in favour of King had been altered from order to bearer and initialled by the prisoner Robert, so that the cheque might have been paid over the counter.

EDWIN LEOPOLD Cox, manager, Harlesden branch, London and South-Western Bank. I have held the position of manager six and a half years. I saw both prisoners at Bow Street. I did not know either of them and had had no dealings with either of them. "D. Stanley Windell," had no account at my branch. There is no such number as 93, Craven Park Road, Harlesden. The eight documents produced purporting to be transfer advice notes were not signed by me; they are forgeries. Each of them bears the word "Harlesden" impressed with a rubber stamp. It is not the stamp in use at my office, and is also a forgery. Each of them bears the word "Tack," the code word for September 22, 1908. That word is in no case in my handwriting. The whole of the eight documents is a complete concoction. In the case of such documents being genuinely sent out I should myself write in the code word. On all these documents the word "Tack" appears to have been written by the same person. It bears a certain resemblance to my writing; it certainly is not a copy of my writing, but it is like my style of writing. I do not make my "T" in that way. The "T" on these documents has more a resemblance to a capital "Y." The signatures to these eight documents are very fair imitations of my signature; I should describe them as good freehand imitations. I cannot find a signature exactly like them. They would deceive even a person familiar with my writing, and in fact did do so. In the course of last year I was asked to search to see what communications had passed from my branch to the West Kensington branch, where prisoner King was employed, during a period of a little over two years, and I found five letters of advice bearing my signature. The forged signatures bear a resemblance to the signatures in Exhibit 39, and they have all the

characteristics of that signature. I keep the list of code words for the week locked up in a drawer. Having got the code word for the day I should not have occasion to refer to the list until the following day. I do not think anything bearing the code word would be copied. The code word would be known among the higher clerks as soon as these transfer forms were signed. There is no particular practice with regard to posting, but it is usual to post such documents in the afternoon. That is a way in which the code word might become known. The code word for any future day would not, or at any rate should not, become known before the proper day for its use arrives. The chief clerk, as a rule, has a key of the managers' drawer, and would go to it if necessary in his absence. That is so in my branch, but not at all branches. The code word might appear in the Press Copy Book at other branches, but it would not appear there at our branch. Telegrams, however, bearing the code word are copied in the letter book.

Cross-examined. The documents I hare produced are all documents to which prisoner King could have had access. To the best of my knowledge I have never written a "T" like the "T" in "Tack" on the forged documents.

Re-examined. I find that people in writing or signing often vary their letters.

To the Recorder. It is a recognised fact that it is impossible for a person to sign even his own name twice exactly in the same way. We look at the general characteristics of the writing, and take the responsibility of paying a cheque upon that.

ERNEST PERCY COLEMAN , inspector of branches of the London and South-Western Bank. I have been engaged in investigating these frauds under Mr. Anderson, the chief inspector. In the course of my duties I went to the West Kensington branch to search for documents bearing Mr. Cox's signature, and I found the four produced (Exhibits 37, 36, 7, 37, 38, and 39) tied up in bundles with other documents in the bank's strong room. I have been in the service of the bank 24 years, and have been acquainted with handwriting all that time. Mr. Cox's signature on Exhibit 39 is very like the signature on the forgeries. I also examined the deposit ledger of the West Kensington branch, and found on folio 137 the entry of the account of a gentleman named Zackary Tahan, his name, written large, being in King's handwriting. The two names give a capital "T" and the letters "ack." The "T" I consider very like the "T" in the word "Tack"; it has a distinctive curl, and, comparing also the other letters, I am of opinion that the person who wrote the word "Tack" in the forgery is the same person who wrote "Zackary Tahan" in the ledger.

Cross-examined. There are other specimens of King's smaller handwriting in the ledger in which the T's are not made in the same way. The "T" in "Tack" in the forgery resembles the larger writing on the head of the account for what I consider is a good reason, namely, that when the word "Tack" was put on to the forged documents it was put on in a careful and slow manner. The forger would

naturally write in the same careful and slow manner as he would when heading a ledger; he would he anxious to produce handwriting in copybook form, in order to conceal his own handwriting. The documents I produce were found in their proper places at the bank, and there was no evidence that the bundles in which they were contained had been disturbed.

Re-examined. The bundles are made up, not in exact quarters, but every three months. At the time the forgeries were uttered the Michaelmas bundle would not, thereto, have been made up. The letter (Exhibit 47) produced is prisoner King's original letter of application to the bank, dated December 7, 1893. There is a "T" in that letter resembling the "T" in "Tahan," but the curve at the top is not so well developed. Mr. Tahan's account was only opened last year, so that there is a difference of 15 years between the date of the letter, and the entry in the ledger.

JOHN ALEXANDER ANDERSON , chief inspector, London and Southwestern Bank. Prisoner King entered the service of the Bank on January 1, 1894. After being at various branches, in December, 1907, he became second cashier at West Kensington. On March 8, 1909, he was removed to the Clapham Junction branch. On April 22 he sent in his resignation, which was not accepted, but he ceased to attend or to be in the service of the bank. By the terms of their appointments the clerks can give a month's notice, but the resignation has to be formally considered by the board. From the beginning of 1908 his address was registered in the bank books as Greyhound Mansions, Greyhound Road, Fulham, which is within easy walk of the West Kensington branch. Mr. Lee, the manager of the West Kensington branch, was absent on his holiday from September 7 to 28 last year and by the practice and rule of the bank the first cashier became for that period the acting manager and the second cashier became the acting first cashier, and during the absence of the first cashier the second cashier would be the responsible person in charge. The code word is selected by the chief correspondent and is sent out on Saturday night in letters marked "Private" to the various branches, and it is understood that it is to be kept strictly private. That appears in the printed book of directions. The present system of issuing the code word to the branch managers has been adopted for about six years. Previous to that there was a permanent code, which it was thought was not desirable. Up till recently we have had no occasion to find fault with the present system. I learned of these frauds on September 24. It is the practice for both the transferring branch and the branch to which an account is transferred to communicate with the head office on the day of the receipt of the advice, so that on the morning of September 24 the head office received 13 advices from the 13 branches, including the eight to which attention has been called. No advice, of course, was received from Harlesden, the supposed transferring branch, and that was how the affair became known. The correspondent called attention to that at once. The telephone was put in operation, and it was discovered that the banks

had been the victims of a forgery—about 24 hours after the money was obtained. The numbers of the notes, amounting to £1, 600, paid out in respect of the eight forged cheques, were circulated immediately amongst bankers and money changers in this country and abroad. About £1, 000 of them have come back to the Bank of England, and up to yesterday £610 was outstanding. The £1, 000 includes the six notes which were received by M. Servais. If necessary details can be given of the tracing of each one of the notes which have come back. I received from the police in England the six notes spoken to by M. Servais. It is part of the practice of our bank that bank clerks in the service should keep an account at the head office, but not at the branch to which they are attached. Prisoner King had an account at the head office and I produce a copy of it. On February 25 of this year a credit for £3 10s. appears in it. The cheque has been stamped by the West Kensington branch, at Which it was paid in, and credited through the head office. The credit slip is in the handwriting of King. By March 8 certain facts had come to the knowledge of the bank and King was removed to the Clapham Junction branch. On April 20 I went with Chief Inspector Bower and Sergeant Burton to see him at that branch, and prisoner King then made a statement which the sergeant wrote down, and which King signed, it having been read over to him. Before prisoner King made the statement Chief Inspector Bower cautioned him in general terms. I do not know that I could give the exact words, but it was to this effect, "We are police officers, and we have come here to make inquiries upon a matter of considerable importance which may have serious consequences for you. "The statement was made in reply to questions. After that interview it was thought right to communicate with M. Servais. That was done by Mr. Calcutt, the correspondent at the head office, and manager of the foreign department. As the result of that communication I was by appointment in Leicester Square on April 14 in company with Sergeant Burton. Up to that time I had never set eyes on M. Servais, but I knew he was coming. Mr. Calcutt was also there by himself. Sergeant Burton and I were close to the gate of the Empire on the north side of the square. We went there for the purpose of keeping an appointment made with prisoner King. After we had been there a few minutes King came to us diagonally across the street from the direction of Daly's Theatre. To the best of my belief he was dressed in a blue serge suit and a nondescript hat of no particular shape in tweed. He had a bag with him from which he produced a parcel of securities which (he had obtained from the Birkbeck Bank. After the lapse of a minute or two Sergeant Burton said to him, "You have been identified as the person who attempted to change some notes in Antwerp on December 26, and I am going to arrest you." The English banks, of course, are closed on December 26. Christmas Day last year was on a Friday, and prisoner was at business as usual on the following Monday morning. There would, of course, be plenty of time for anybody to go to Antwerp and back in the interval between Thursday night and Monday.

Cross-examined. King had been in no other employment. He came straight to the bank from school. At the interview of April 20 I was present as chief inspector of the bank, and there were also present Chief Inspector Bower and Sergeant Burton, of the detective police; Mr. S. F. Saunders, the manager of the Clapham Junction branch, and towards the close of the interview Mr. John Liscombe, the general manager of the bank, was also present, but unexpectedly, he having called to see the branch manager on another matter. The interview took place in the manager's private room, and the manager requested King to come into that room. At that time no warrant had been issued for King's arrest. The interview began at about four o'clock and lasted till nearly seven, with an interval for tea. The object of the interview was to give prisoner King an opportunity of explaining his innocence. I cannot say I went to the interview with quite an open mind, but practically with an open mind. It would be for the directors to determine whether criminal proceedings should be taken, but I cannot say I have ever known the directors act in the face of my report. As I said, so it would probably be, subject to legal advice. By April 20 the bank had before them all the evidence with regard to King's handwriting, and the financial transactions that he had had with Robert. We knew that King had been practically in charge of the bank at West Kensington at the time of the fraud, but I do not think at that time I knew of the statement which King's father had made against him. I had not then considered that these things amounted to evidence upon which a jury would act. I do not accept the statement on the deposition, but I had made up my mind on October 3 that King was guilty. I am under the impression that I was asked when I first suspected King. It was very much later that I made up my mind that King was guilty, I should think about the end of January. The police were not instructed until the first week in February. Of course, I laid before them the facts that were in my mind as against King, and told them what my views were, and from about that time King was watched. King, I think, knew he had been suspected for a long time, but he was still kept to his ordinary duties. I do not think that being kept to his ordinary duties while under a cloud of suspicion, would have an effect upon a man of his temperament, less upon a man of his temperament than upon many others; he has nerves of steel. I am not responsible for the theories advanced by the detective department; I have enough to do to mind my own business. The statement was really a series of answers to questions; that is to say, if something was not clear, Chief Inspector Bower put some questions to clear it up. Documents were produced, but not for the purpose of confuting King in his answers. I had nothing to do with the conduct of the inquiry, but was there simply as a spectator; it was a police inquiry, not my inquiry. I have no desire to shift the responsibility on to the police. Questions were asked him in order that he might explain certain things; no one would have been more pleased than I if he could have explained them. King was transferred to Clapham Junction in order that all these accounts and documents might be gone into in his absence. There

was afterwards an adjournment to King's flat, but I did not go there. He was perfectly willing that the officers should go to his flat, and, as far as I was concerned, he could have walked straight out of the bank after the interview if he had liked. I had nothing to do with the arrangement for M. Servais coming over to identify him. With regard to the cheque for £3 10s., it having been made to bearer and being uncrossed, King could have cashed it over the counter at the Bayswater branch of the London and Westminster Bank, but we knew nothing then of the name of Robert, the name in the warrant being "D. S. Windell." King being in control of the bank in September would have access to the papers which had been produced, and, of course, he was in actual charge of the—his own—till. The amount of cash in the second till would not be more than £400 or £500. Each cashier locks his own money up every night. It is checked once a week, but on any one of the other five days of the week he could walk out with it. You must trust somebody in a bank and he did not fail in his trust. Possibly the only thing that prevented him was that we should have known at once who it was. It would not have done him any good to have gone away. With regard to the clerks who left the bank about that time, we can account for every man that has left. It did not occur to us that the men who were leaving were going away with this money, but we did not want to leave any loophole. No one suggested that King should tender his resignation. On April 22 he was transferred to the head office, but he said he could not stand the monotony of the work. King had risen gradually in the service, and it may be taken, therefore, that he had given satisfaction. There was some little difficulty about a customer that he introduced to the bank whose overdraft was not satisfactory, but that was regarded merely as an error of judgment. There were some old cheques found in King's possession belonging to customers whose accounts had been transferred. These ought not to have been in King's possession, and I suggest he could have no honest reason for having them in his possession. The cheques should have been sent up to the head office, and it would have been the duty of the cashier to obtain the money from Somerset House for what are called spoilt stamps. I have seen annual reports from the managers with regard to King's conduct, but I have no personal knowledge of how he was regarded in the bank by his fellow employees and by his superiors. As to the identification, where M. Servais was sitting in Leicester Square I do not think he could see me. I did not see him raise his hat as I was tailing to King. I had an interview with King's father after he had made a statement to the police. I remember saying before a magistrate, "The list of code words then received is supposed to be locked up by the managers. That is the system, but like other systems I am afraid it sometimes goes a little wrong. "It is possible a clerk might see the list if it was lying about. I know the Miss Davidson connected with the case; she is a friend of prisoner's. I remember being with Inspector Bower and Sergeant Burton when they went to see her at Chestham. I could not give the date of the interview without my diary: It was before King made the statement. A number of

questions were put to her with a view to getting an explanation. The police stated that it was a serious thing they had come to inquire about, and it would be better for King if he made it all clear and also better possibly for Miss Davidson. There had been a number of financial transactions between the two. One of the points inquired about at the interview was a packet at the Birkbeck deposited by King in her name, which it was thought might contain a number of the stolen notes. This was the packet which King brought to Leicester Square. I have no recollection of Inspector Bower or Sergeant Burton telling Miss Davidson that Robert had been arrested. I certainly did not hear either of them say that King had said she was to tell all she knew, and not try to shield him, nor anything to that effect. Miss Davidson said she did not know anything about the packet. I did not hear Bower say: "If you do not answer me truthfully you will have to come with me to Bow Street and answer before a magistrate." I did not hear any threats. He did not talk of her having a guilty knowledge of the transaction. I did not hear him say to her more than once, "You are lying." The interview was not an angry one by any means. I remember Bower saying to her, "I want to be your friend. "I think he also said, "I want you to use your influence with King and to tell him he had better tell us." Burton was outside in the garden some of the time. This interview was, I think, a few days before the interview with King. I think I could fix the date with my diary. I was more than once at Chesham with Bower and Burton. I think about three times. We went in a car.

Re-examined. My memory does not enable me to say whether we had an interview with Miss Davidson on the same day that we interviewed prisoner King. On one occasion we motored direct from Chesham to Clapham Junction. I do not recollect that at the Clapham Junction interview any mention was made of Miss Davidson. King was very calm and collected, his usual "efficient" style, if one may so term it; the was in no way taken aback or confused. There are about 1, 300 employés of the bank. Very careful inquiries are made as to their honesty and respectability before they are accepted. Before the arrest of King we thought it right that every possible inquiry should be made. King voluntarily agreed to show us the contents of the parcel deposited at the Birkbeck, and himself suggested Leicester Square as the rendezvous. This is a private prosecution by the bank, who in every step were acting under the advice of their solicitors. Until prisoner was identified by M. Servais no information was prepared, no attempt made to obtain process from the magistrate.

FRANCIS EDWARD KINO , 91, Heythorpe Street, Wandsworth. Prisoner King is my son. He was 30 years of age on June 15 last. He has not lived with me since about 12 years ago, but he has been to see me from time to time. I remember him coming to see me about December, 1908. I think I had not seen him for about nine months previously. I think it was at that time he said he had sold a patent for £200, and he suggested that he should lend me £100. I was then

without occupation, and was contemplating going into business, and I said I thought that, my arrangements not being completed, it would be better to wait until I actually required it. I am not sure whether it was on that occasion, but on one occasion he gave me a £5 note for me to go away to the seaside. I received a postcard from him on February 1, January 31 being my birthday, and, in consequence of receiving that card, I met prisoner in a cafe in St. Martin's Lane. The matter of the loan was again referred to and, although I was still not at all anxious to have a loan, it was agreed that I should have £50. Ultimately I had £45, which, with the £5 I had had, made up £50. Prisoner gave me a cheque for the money at Greyhound Mansions. I there saw the lady who has been already referred to as Miss Davidson. The cheque for the £45 was on the Birkbeck Bank. It was drawn by my son and signed by Mary Davidson. I paid that cheque into my account and it was duly credited. I have had an account there for about 25 years. On March 6 I received another visit from my son at my private house. He said he wanted to see me alone and that he had something to tell me, which he thought would distress me very much. He said, "I engineered that 'D. S. Windell' business." I said, "You have told me so many lies that I never know when you are telling me the truth. If you have done that thing you must be mad. "I also said, "In that case the money you have lent me must be returned." He said, "You cannot." I said, "I can." I do not recollect anything further. I spoke to him of the serious nature of the matter, and he said, "Nonsense; that is my arrears of salary. "He came to see me again on the following day and said that the general manager had sent for him and he was satisfied that the matter had been found out. He went on to say, "They are getting at me in a roundabout way, and I shall be arrested on Monday. I am being transferred to the branch at Clapham Junction as clerk instead of cashier. I shall object to the position. There will be a bother and I shall be arrested." On the evening of Sunday, March 7, he brought me a promissory note for £50 to sign in favour of Mary Davidson. That was to repay the loan to her in six months' time. I signed it and gave it back to my son. I was told by my son that if I wished to return the money that would be between me and Mary Davidson, but as I had no dealings with Mary Davidson I was not clear how that was to be done. I decided, therefore, that it would be better for me to retain it so that the bank might get it back. I think my son said that the other man concerned in the "D. S. Windell" business was abroad.

Cross-examined. As to whether I am out of sympathy with my son, I am not against my son, if that is what you wish to suggest. I am not conscious that I have been failing in my duty to my son. For a short time I lived in a house occupied by him; he was not keeping me then. I am not a member of the Plymouth Brethren. My son and I are of a very different way of thinking upon many matters. He did not tell me he had stolen this money, but what he told me conveyed to my mind that he had done so. Perhaps I should have been wrong in jumping to the conclusion that the £50 I had was part

of the stolen money. I did not consider it my duty to hand the money over to the police, and if I had repaid it to the person I got it from I might have been told I had assisted in stealing it. I could not take it to the bank because I had no reason to suppose it belonged to the bank; I had no proof that it belonged to the bank. The impression formed upon my mind in a vague way was that there was something wrong about this thing. I cannot suggest any reason, having regard to my relations with him, why he should have come to me and made this confession. Prisoner's statement to me was, "I engineered the D. S. Windell business," not "they say that I have," etc. I take my oath that what I have said is what I heard. I approached the bank in the first instance. The police had been to me before I did so, but my approaching the bank had nothing to do with the police visit. I wrote to the bank apologising for my son's conduct. The object of the visit of the police was to see my wife about my son. I do not remember that they asked me about any monetary transactions. They did not mention £50 to me; I mentioned it to them. The officer who called was Sergeant Mitchell. I wrote to the bank because I thought my son had done a very serious thing, and it was my duty to apologise. I subsequently on two occasions saw the chief inspector of the bank, Mr. Anderson. Sergeant Mitchell did not tell me that I was in a rather difficult position, and I did not feel that I was. I did not know that my son was interested in any patents. I had never said to anybody that I would convict my son if I could; such a thing was farthest from my thoughts.

Re-examined. I said at the police court that I held the £50 at the disposal of the bank, and that is the position to-day. I was in doubt whether the £50 formed part of the proceeds of the bank robbery. I hold the money ready to repay on demand. Sergeant Mitchell wrote down what I told him in his pocket-book and I signed it, but I had no idea that it was going to be proclaimed on the house tops. I thought it was a private and confidential communication to the police, and I may have said one or two things I might have left out. I had then no idea that I was going to be called as a witness.

(Friday, June 25.)

Chief Detective-Inspector ELIAS BOWER, Scotland Yard. I went on April 20 with Mr. Anderson to the Clapham Junction branch of the London and South-Western Bank, where prisoner King was then employed. I had come the same day from Chesham from interviewing Miss Davidson, with Sergeant Burton and Mr. Anderson. At the bank at Clapham we had some conversation with King. I said to King, "We are police officers making inquiries respecting Bernard Robert, otherwise Davitt Stanley Windell, who has been arrested in Madrid for obtaining £2, 320 on September 23 last from the bank." He said, "Yes, I know all about it; his arrest is in the newspaper, and I have been expecting you for this last month or

so." I said, "From inquiries I have made I believe Robert is known to you. "He replied, "Robert is a friend of mine, and I shall not say a word to injure him." I said, "I propose to take statement from you as to your connection with Robert and other points. I caution you that what you gay may be used in evidence against you, as it is a serious matter. "I do not think he said anything in reply to that because we commenced to write at that time.

To the Recorder. I did not tell him that he was under no obligation to make a statement unless he chose to do so, but I said this, "Of course, if you decline to make a statement the bank must draw their own conclusions. No one can force you to make a statement." I took a note of what I said to prisoner, but it does not include, "No one can force you to make a statement." I did not take a note of that because I did not know that this question would, arise, and I did not think ii important. None of the following passage is in the note I made at the time:" I said, 'If you decline to make a statement the bank must draw their own conclusions. You are not obliged to make a statement unless you desire to do so. '" King said, "Am I obliged to make a statement?" I said, "No one can force you to make a statement."

Examination continued. After the statement had been taken down King read it over, signed it at the end, and initialled each page.

Cross-examined. I made an entry in my diary of the dates of the visits to Chesham. Miss Davidson lives at the Bernard McFadden Homes, near Chesham, which is a place people go to for the open air treatment. I cannot say whether there is a telephonic communication between the homes and London. Miss Davidson is clerk and typist. There is no telephone at the bank at Clapham, but there is a public call office close by.

Mr. Lever submitted that the statement was not receivable, on the well understood ground that this was not a free and voluntary statement on the part of the prisoner. The eases dealing with the point which had been before the courts divided themselves into two lines. There had been a number of cases which went to show that an answer given by a prisoner to a constable after the date of his arrest is not receivable in evidence. In R. v. Best, in the Court of Criminal Appeal (1909, 1 K. B., p. 692). it was decided (per the Lord Chief Justice) that the mere fact that a statement is made in answer to a question after the date of arrest should not in itself exclude the evidence of what was said by a prisoner; so that apparently the technical rule that used to exist that what was said after arrest is not evidence had been overruled R. v. Gavin (15 Cox, p. 656) being one of the leading cases on that point. If that technical rule did not exist, the root of the matter in cases of this kind was that the Court had to take into account all the circumstances under which a statement is made in answering the question, Yes or No; under all the circumstances was the statement made by a prisoner a free and voluntary statement. Counsel proceeded to cite R. v. Thompson (1893, 2 Q. B., p. 12); R v. Doherty (13 Cox, p. 23); R. v. Phayre (20 Cox, p. 711). As to the circumstances on which he relied, there was first of all the matter of Miss Davidson.

The Recorder observed that on the evidence before him he could come to no other conclusion than that the young woman had no opportunity of communicating with King. The evidence of the diary had been excluded, and although Mr. Lever's very ingenious question about the telephone might have thrown some doubt on the matter it seemed to be quite clear that there was no telephone at this place

where Miss Davidson was; therefore, she had no opportunity of communicating with prisoner. If she had had such an opportunity the evidence would clearly be inadmissible.

Mr. Lever, coming to the interview on the 20th, thought the outlying circumstances were not unimportant. The interview took place at the bank where prisoner was employed and he was requested to go into a private room at the bank for the purpose. Prisoner was practically a grown-up schoolboy, who, since he had left school had been a bank clerk, and at this interview he was in the presence of his general manager, the manager of his branch, Detective Inspector Bower of Scotland Yard, Detective Sergeant Burton, also of Scotland Yard, and Mr. Anderson, the chief Inspector of the bank, and he could not conceive of any audience more likely to oppress a man who was subsequently a prisoner or any entourage more likely to prevent him making a free and voluntary statement. What was conveyed to the prisoner's mind by the detective inspector, was this: "It may be a serious matter for you," later on elaborated into "It may have serious consequences for you." A threat need not be made by bad language; it was submitted that "it may have serious consequences for you" was a threat. Prisoner had been under suspicion from the end of October, and in January or February Mr. Anderson had made up his mind as to his guilt. The submission by the prosecution was that the caution given by Inspector Bower absolutely settled the question of the inadmissibility of prisoner's statement, for in answer to his Lordship Inspector Bower said, "I did not tell him he was under no obligation to make a statement." And then he added: "If you decline to make a statement the bank must draw their own conclusions." What was that but a paraphrase of the words, "It will be better for you to make a statement."

The Recorder: Before that he said in reply tome, "I did not say you are not obliged to make a statement unless you desire to do so." Prisoner then said, "Am I obliged to make a statement?" to which the officer replied, "No one can force you to make a statement." but that portion of it was unfortunately omitted from the memorandum which the officer had of the conversation. It might have been omitted by accident.

Mr. Lever contended that the word "statement" was really a euphemism for what was merely the result of a severe cross-examination; there was no other word for it.

Mr. Travers Humphreys, upon the point whether the statement was free and voluntary, submitted that it is not the fact that a statement is rendered inadmissible merely because no caution has been administered; that was specifically decided in Rogers v. Hawken (67 L. J. Q. B., p. 526.) Under what circumstances of a case the presiding judge might think a statement alleged to be a confession was voluntarily made was a matter entirely in the discretion of the Court, and such discretion might be exercised apart from any strict question of law. In other words, with regard to the admission of a statement which might be admissible in law, his lordship in his discretion might rule that it should not be put to the jury and not be given in evidence. That was the substance of Mr. Justice Channell's decision in R. v. Knight and Phayre, which was a Post Office case. Mr. Justice Channell there admitted the first part of the statement made by prisoner in the presence of officials and detectives, and rejected the latter part of that statement after there had been read to prisoner a statement made by his co-defendant which was held to be inadmissible. In R. v. Miller (18, Cox, p. 54) a detective inspector called upon a prisoner and said, "I am going to ask you some questions on a very serious matter, and you had better be careful how you answer them." Mr. Justice Hawkins admitted the evidence, holding that no inducement was held out to prisoner to make admissions, and no duress was exercised towards him. That was as strong a case as could be found; because there questions were put by the police officer without any caution at all, whereas in the present case there was upon the note without any question a very distinct caution by the inspector that answers might be used in evidence against the defendant and that this was a very serious matter. Counsel submitted, upon the cases cited, that this statement was perfectly free and voluntary, and was admissible in evidence. The dictum of Mr. Justice Hawkins that the "duty of a policeman was to keep his ears open and his mouth shut" was obviously meant to apply to the time when a prisoner was in

custody. The prisoner King was not in custody at the time the statement was trade, nor was there any evidence that it was proposed to take him into custody, and in fact he was a perfectly free agent for four days afterwards.

The Recorder: Any question put for the purpose of clearing up any ambiguity, although put by an officer, is quite proper.

Mr. Travers Humphreys submitted that, although it might have been desirable that the inspector should not have used the words he did, they did not render the statement inadmissible: but on behalf of the prosecution he would prefer, if his Lordship had any doubt at all about the matter, or thought the statement would introduce any sort of prejudice, that it should not go to the jury, although it might be technically admissible.

The Recorder was of opinion that the statement ought not to be admitted. The circumstances were peculiar, and whether a statement made by an accused person was admissible in evidence or not must, as Mr. Justice Hawkins had pointed out, depend upon the circumstances of each particular case. Here it was clear prisoner had been under suspicion for a long time, and had recently been removed from the branch where he had been employed for many years to the branch at Clapham Junction. There were present at the interview besides the police Mr. Anderson, of the private enquiry department, and two high officials of the bank, and the interview lasted nearly three hours, during which prisoner was making a statement and replying to questions put from time to time by the inspector. It was quite clear, therefore, that the statement must have been of an elaborate description, and, though the questions put might have been properly put by the inspector, he had to deal with the case upon the evidence before him, and Mr. Anderson, the first witness called on that part of the case, stated that although he could not remember the exact words of Inspector Bower, to the best of his belief and recollection the words he used were "We are police officers, and have come to make inquiries upon a very serious matter which may have serious consequences for you," and that brought home to the mind of the prisoner that his position might be affected by the answers which he gave. But the matter which weighed most with him was the answer which the Inspector himself had given, which, without his perhaps appreciating the effect of what was said, exceeded what he ought to have done, because he distinctly told prisoner "If you decline to make a statement the bank must draw their own conclusions." That, it seemed to him, was a very strong statement to make to a person who had been under suspicion for a long time. It was quite true, in answer to King's question, "Am I obliged to make a statement?" the inspector did say "No one can force you to make a statement," but that unfortunately had been omitted from the note. The observation "If you decline to make a statement the bank will draw their own conclusions," was in the nature of a threat, and held out to King that if he did not make a statement conclusions of an adverse nature would be formed. Upon that ground the statement was inadmissible. With regard to the statement to the young woman with whom King was living, it was quite clear that if she had had any opportunity of communicating with him, Mr. Travers Humphreys appearing on behalf of the Crown would not for a moment have suggested that any statement made after that would be admissible. On the ground that something in the nature of a threat was held out to prisoner, his Lordship held the statement to be inadmissible and therefore excluded it.

Chief-inspector BOWER, further examined. At the conclusion of the interview with King I left him and went into another part of the bank, leaving him with Sergeant Burton. I afterwards went to King's flat, 60. Greyhound Mansions. He made no objection to our looking over his flat. On the way there he said, "I know the bank suspect me of being concerned with Robert, but they cannot prove it. I am a fatalist, and do not care what happens to me. You are welcome to go to my flat, but you will not find anything there." We then went to his flat and searched it in his presence. One drawer of the wardrobe was locked up, and he unlocked it in our presence saying, "You can search wherever you like, but you won't find anything here. As a matter of fact, I have been expecting you for a month or two." I

said, "What, to search your flat?" He replied, "Yes." I said, "How did you expect us to do it without your knowledge?" He said, "You might have entered with a false key, whilst I was at the bank. So as not to have this drawer broken open, I have left it unlocked for quite a fortnight. It is the only drawer I keep locked. If I had had the notes here I could have put them in heaps of places. where it would take you days to find them. "As a matter of fact, we found nothing at his flat. I left this country on April 22 for the purpose of going to Madrid to arrest Robert, and the interview arranged with prisoner for April 24 was attended by Sergeant Burton.

Cross-examined. I did not observe any drawings of pattern at the flat. I did not observe any joking going on while the flat was being searched. I do not remember prisoner searching in the coal-box or in a saucepan for the banknotes. Prisoner Robert is a very respectable man and highly educated, and a man whom anybody would be glad to have as his friend. From his temperament, intelligence, and character I should not have thought him likely to do anything of this description. He also is the son of parents in a substantial position, and could probably have obtained money by writing to them.

Detective-sergeant ALBERT BURTON, Scotland Yard. At the close of the interview at the bank on April 20, prisoner King and myself were left alone together. He then said, "I never thought you would get to the bottom of this case as you have done. You have worked the case up very well. What do you think Robert will get—five years?" I said I did not know. He said, "Are they going to take me to Bow Street to-night?" I again said I did not know. He said, "Well, I shan't run away. If I had wanted to I could have gone weeks ago where they could not extradite me. I am a fatalist and do not care what happens to me. "We then went in a taxicab to prisoner's lodgings with the inspector. I have omitted to say that during the course of the conversation prisoner said, "I do not look upon it as a crime to rob a bank. Why should there be capitalists as there are and the rest of humanity slaves. They (the capitalists) are the ruination of this country. "I made my note of the conversation outside the flat, while prisoner went in with the inspector (witness also spoke to the identification of the prisoner King in Leicester Square). After M. Servais had raised his hat in sign of identification I said to prisoner, "You know who I am, Mr. King?" He said, "Yes." I said, "You have now been identified by M. Servais, a banker of Antwerp, as being the person who endeavoured to cash six £5 Bank of England notes at his bank on December 26 last, which were part of the proceeds of the 'D. S. Windell' fraud, and I shall take you into custody for being concerned with Bernard Robert, who is now in custody in Madrid." He said, "I thought something would come to it sooner or later. I must put up with it. "On the way to Bow Street Police Station he also said, "I shall not say anything more at present until I consider my position. "At Bow Street, when charged by the inspector, he said, "I make no admissions, naturally. "While waiting in the passage to go before the magistrate he said to me. "I want to ask you a question. If they find any of the

proceeds of the fraud on me when I get out of this, can they take me up again for it?" That statement I wrote down in his presence in my pocketbook, and told him I should give it in evidence against him. I said nothing in reply. On April 26 I went again to prisoner's flat, 60, Greyhound Mansions, and found in the sitting-room the bundle of bank cheques mentioned yesterday. Some were cheques of the South-Western and some of other banks. I also found two letters addressed to Mr. B. Robert, 22, Champion Road, Wembley, which had been readdressed to 60, Greyhound Mansions, West Kensington. Both bore a date of September, 1908, The postmark on the envelopes containing the eight forged transfer advice forms shows that they were posted at Willesden before 7.45 p.m. on September 22.

EDWIN L. COX , recalled, stated that Harlesden was in the postal district of Willesden, and all Harlesden letters bore the Willesden postmark. The stamps on the letters were perforated with the initials of the London and South-Western Bank. These perforated stamps were supplied to the branches from the head office, and clerks sometimes bought them, though the practice was not recognised. In the ordinary way letters would be posted between five and six.

(Saturday, June 26.)

Verdict, Guilty both of forging and uttering.

Mr. Bodkin said his Lordship would appreciate that the whole of the circumstances which could have been put before the Court had not been put before it, and he did not think it was desirable or necessary to describe in detail the steps taken by the bank authorities and the police, resulting in the proof of one of the most audacious bank frauds of modern time. Prisoner King, having been convicted, there was no reason why his statement should not be referred to. The only importance of that document (and this was doubtless the reason why Mr. Lever had objected to the admission of it) was that Inspector Bower, by a random question, elicited from King this statement: "Last Christmas I spent my holidays at Brussels and Rotterdam. Whilst in the latter place I visited Robert's parents. "Antwerp being but a short distance from either of those places, there could not be the slightest doubt that it was the prisoner King who went into M. Servais' Bureau de Change on December 26. The rest of the statement was an absolute denial, but prisoner admitted that he had known Robert for some five years. One of the clues which the police had to work upon was the finding of a piece of paper with the name "D. S. Windell" typed upon it at the MacFadden Homes, where Mist,. Davidson was employed. Mr. Bodkin also called attention to a flaw in the "1" in the word "gold," which appeared upon the lithographed transfer advice forms which King himself had to fill up, and, as an illustration of the enormous care which had been taken in this case, he might mention that something like 80, 000 of these forms had been examined. By a process of elimination, it had been possible to localize the forger within three branches, of which West Kensington was one, where these forms had been used. The majority of the stolen notes

which had returned to the bank of England had dribbled in from places in Belgium. The packet which had been referred to was not the only parcel which had been deposited with the Birkbeck Bank. In the month of January of this year a small sealed parcel of light weight, which the bank officials were now of opinion contained bank notes, was deposited in the name of Miss Davidson, and that was taken out on March 9. The bank did all they could to delay the handing out of that parcel in order that they might communicate with the police authorities, but it was ultimately handed out to Miss Davidson, and had never since been seen. From statements made by Robert to Chief-inspector Bower, it was now clear that Robert wrote all the contents of the 13 forged advice notes, together with the subsequent signatures, at the dictation of King. The confession of Robert (Exhibit 32) was in the form of the following letter, written to Chief-inspector Bower from Madrid Prison: "I herewith voluntarily declare that under the assumed name of 'D. S. Windell' I obtained moneys to the value of £290 from each of the eight branches of the London and South-Western Bank. I understand that besides this offence I am also to be charged with forgery; forgery I absolutely deny! As to the other matter, I beg to state, not in order to excuse my action, but merely for the purpose of explaining, that my intention in the first instance was not to obtain the money as such, but rather to feel myself able to do something which many others might feel themselves incapable of accomplishing. In other words, it was the devilment, the excitement, the ingenuity, the humour, and the almost impossible success, to crown it all, that urged me to attempt the fraud. The very name assumed, D. S. Windell, intended to mean 'Damned Swindle,' goes to corroborate this intention. I am still very young (twenty-three), and this may explain my desire for excitement of some sort or other. The Great Tempter exploited my weakness, and from the moment almost that I had been apparently successful I was sorry for the deed. I could not retrace my steps. I once intended to do so by returning the remnant of the money obtained to the legitimate owners, but subsequent considerations somehow made me reverse my decision. I had to go the whole hog, and I am afraid I have come to the tail now. I am prepared to refund my share as I can, bit by bit quite independently of the punishment I may get. My share was £1, 160." With regard to Robert's account at the London and Westminster Bank, it was opened with a draft of £275 bought in Paris with bank notes. The ability of Robert was great, and his mastery of language remarkable, he possessing an acquaintance, and something more than an acquaintance, with six or seven languages, especially German. But the bank had no doubt that King was the originator of this scheme by reason of his knowledge of the internal working of the bank, and the fact of his possessing three cheques from other branches of the bank, three or four of the cheques of other banks, and a cheque with four signatures of officials of the Prudential Assurance Company on the back of it, left no doubt that something of a dishonest character had been contemplated, for there could be

no legitimate excuse for a bank clerk having in his possession customers' spent cheques or the cheques of other banks. With regard to the perforated stamps, a Junior clerk named Pierpoint, who was in attendance hut had not been called, recollected that during the summer and autumn of last year King was buying the perforated stamps of the bank, two pennyworth or three pennyworth at a time, the practice of selling perforated stamps to clerks taking place, though it was not a recognised practice, and perhaps not a permitted practice in the various branches of the bank. One thing Mr. Elliott would wish him to say on behalf of Robert. When embarking at Bilbao for this country, he said, "I am prepared to engage myself to return to the South-Western Bank, Limited, my half, amounting to £1, 160 of the amount I collected, as soon as my finances will allow me, quite independently of any punishment I may get. "Mr. Elliott, on behalf of Robert, called the following evidence. Chief Inspector BOWER. I have made inquiries into Robert's history. This is the first time he has been involved in any criminal transaction. He was born in February, 1886, and comes of highly respectable parents. His mother was English and daughter of a very learned rabbi. His father is a Dutchman, and carries on an extensive drapery business in Rotterdam, known as the Maison Robert. Up to the time of this affair Robert had been supporting himself by journalistic work, and by assisting authors, and making translations. Among other things he translated Dr. Eissner's "Diagnosis of Tuberculosis" from the German. He has also lectured on theosophy and occult matters, and has taken a great interest in mesmerism. I know him to be a most accomplished linguist, having a knowledge of English, French, German, Dutch, Italian, Hebrew, Yiddish, Portuguese, Spanish, Latin, Esperanto and Arabic. He was also an accomplished musician, and took a prize for music at the University of Rotterdam. I found him frank and open in his manner and he gave absolutely no trouble.

ALFRED PERCY SINNETT , journalist and author., 59, Jermyn Street, St. James', said he had known Robert since 1905, when he came into his service as private secretary and shorthand writer, and remained with him so long as the review he was editing remained in existence.

LUIS WESTENRA SAMBON , M. D., Highgate, said that since 1904 Robert had assisted him in literary and in research work connected with investigating the sleeping sickness and in his work as a specialist in tropical diseases. Robert had read considerably and had a considerable store of knowledge, and took great interest in the, research work.

ALFRED JOSEPH FAULDING , Ma-id a Vale, director of companies, gave Robert, whom he had known for seven years, the character of being impressionable.

FREDERICK STEPHEN BALESTRA , merchant, 95, Wigmore Street, said prisoner had assisted him in correspondence in various languages. He was very clever in everything he did, very straightforward and very honest, but always gave him the idea of having something a little loose—too much learning. He had long conversation with

prisoner on some ideals of life, and his ideas were very nice, very beautiful to hear, but impractical. One day prisoner had a stone in his pocket and wanted witness to believe it had life in it. Witness always thought prisoner "balmy," and that he might end in a lunaric asylum, but never thought he would end in a criminal court.

Mr. Elliott then laid before the Court a statement written by Robert to his solicitors: "Until September 13 or 14 last—that is to say, nine or ten days before the taxi drive—no thought of dishonesty had ever crossed my mind. When the scheme was suggested to me I did not look upon it as a serious suggestion at all, and dismissed it laughingly. But it was broached again and again, and, being somewhat romantically disposed, I listened to the details like a novelist may consider the details of a plot which ultimately he will employ in some shape or form in his projected novel My mind worked at it very actively, though I must say quite impersonally. Until it came to the filling up of the forms the scheme in my mind was wholly disconnected with myself. Then what I can only describe as a curious psychological process took place. Till that time it had been the hero of the romance who was going round to the banks. All of a sudden I substituted myself in his place. Instead of the plot remaining imaginary, I became very excited with the prospect of making it a reality, with myself the hero of one of the most daring and ingenious schemes of modern times. I became more and more excited. I lived as in a dream. I hardly recollect the three or four days preceding the taxi-cab tour, and only dimly remember filling up the blank forms on dictation. From that moment to the time of the taxi drive everything is wiped out from my memory with two exceptions. I see myself standing in St. Paul's Cathedral admiring intensely Holman's (sic) picture of Christ knocking at a door. I must have stood there for upwards of an hour and a half. That must have been one or two days before the fraud—at any rate, it was between Sunday and the Wednesday. There is one other interval that I remember. The evening of Tuesday, September 22, I went to a lecture on Buddhism, a kind of private meeting, I think, in the Holborn Restaurant, by a European Buddhist monk. The chair was taken by some Indian princess. I remember being very much impressed that night with the beauty of the subjects under discussion, and mentally resolved to abandon the projected scheme, should my spiritual elevation last. Apparently it did not last, and I fell back into my old attitude of false romanticism. All this to my mind now is very hazy and confused, as if I saw somebody else do it, although I recollect perfectly going round to the different banks. However, I could not for the world remember the order in which I went, and it puzzles me to find that I alighted actually at eight of them—to me it seems only two or three. I remember directing the driver to go to headquarters I am under the impression that I handed him a sovereign over and above the 5s. I had given him earlier in the day. I walked through the building, came out at the other side, went to the Bank Tube Station, and at about a quarter past one I arrived at the Eustace

Miles Restaurant. There I left my bag with the porter, had some lunch, but could hardly get any down, and took the two o'clock Charing Cross train to Paris, which I caught only in the nick of time. I thought it delightful to have so much money at my disposal, and I found everything very cheap. I gave heaps of it away to various poor people I happened to come in touch with, more particularly to a friend of mine who lived in Brussels and who was very ill and in penury. I gave an amount which to him seemed extravagant. Had the money at my disposal at the time been my own I consider I could hardly have made better use of it from a philanthropic point of view. I have never been able to save, and always gave, even when I had nothing to give, to those who had less than myself coming my way. I did not do those things because I wished to be good or to be thought good, but merely because it was my nature to do so. I expect this is a trait of character inherited from my grandfather, who spent all his money on charitable purposes. "The statement concluded with a detailed account by prisoner of his early life.

Mr. Elliott added that it was pathetic to think that for a young man so gifted as Robert there should only be the old unsatisfactory punishment of the gaol, and that, though in the administration of justice efforts had been directed to bring into use a milder code in dealing with those who had fallen, there was no means of employing such great gifts in some channel which would be of service to the State. But if the Recorder would give him an opportunity it might be that, after he had answered for his conduct by the punishment which would be imposed upon him, Robert would yet be able to become one of the brightest and most gifted members of society.

The Recorder said he entertained no shadow of a doubt that the offence originated with King, and the sentence upon him would be Seven years' penal servitude. Robert's case was of an altogether different character. He was not a servant of the bank, and owed no allegiance to the bank. The design of the scheme emanated from King, and his Lordship thought it was quite possible that Robert's statement that he was only brought into it a few days before September 23 was true. He sentenced Robert to 18 months' hard labour. The Recorder remarked that the highest credit was due to Chief-Inspector Bower, Detective-Sergeant Burton, and the other officers for the way they had conducted the inquiry.


(Wednesday, June 23.)

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-19
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty

Related Material

SAWYER, Frederick James (25, clerk) , pleaded guilty. of forging and uttering, knowing the same to be forged, a certain endorsement on a certain order for the payment of money, to wit, a banker's cheque and order for the payment of the sum of £686 4s., 8d., and a certain deed, to wit, a mortgage, in each case with intent to defraud.

Mr. Hamar Greenwood prosecuted; Mr. Bernard appeared for prisoner.

Prisoner was stated to have borne the highest character during 5 1/2 years in the employ of the Equitable Insurance Society of the United States; he absconded, but voluntarily surrendered, and restored £589 8s. 3d., being nearly the whole of the money stolen.

Sentence, Nine months' imprisonment, second division.

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-20
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

WHITWELL, William (49, labourer) ; uttering counterfeit coin, twice within 10 days.

Mr. Pickersgill, M. P., prosecuted.

CHARLES PYKE , potman, "Copenhagen" public-house, Salmon's. Lane, Limehouse. On May 22, 1909, at about 10.15 p.m., prisoner ordered a glass of ale and tendered florin produced. I was suspicious of the coin and took it to the manager, who asked the prisoner if he had any more. Prisoner said he did not know it was a bad one, paid 1d. for the ale, drank it, and left. The coin was doubled up and returned to prisoner. On May 26 I identified prisoner at Arbour Street.

HARRY LEE , manager, "Copenhagen" public-house. On May 22 Pyke spoke to me and handed me a counterfeit florin, which I doubled up and handed to prisoner; he paid a 1d. for his ale, drank it, and left the bar. I followed and spoke to Sergeant Rickson.

Cross-examined. I followed prisoner to the corner of Burdett Road. Before seeing Ricks on I spoke to Inspector James opposite the "Pigott Arms. "I did not give him in custody—I waited to see if he went into another house.

Detective-sergeant EDWARD RICKSON, K Division. On May 22: prisoner was pointed out to me by the last witness—he was standing outside the "Pigott Arms," Commercial Road, which is three minutes' walk from the "Copenhagen. "He entered the "Pigott Arms," called for a glass of ale, and paid 1d. He afterwards went home to Bow Lane, Poplar. I did not arrest him, as Lee declined to give him into custody.

Cross-examined. I did not arrest prisoner, because I had no evidence at that time.

MAUD MONKSFIELD , "Prendergast Arms," St. Leonards Road, Bromley, wife of Frederick Monksfield, licensed victualler. On May 25, at 11.30 p.m., prisoner called for a glass of ale and tendered bad florin produced. I gave him the change and then doubting whether the coin was good, spoke to my husband as the prisoner was going rut of the bar.

Cross-examined. Prisoner also asked for a pennyworth of tobacco, which he paid for from his pocket, keeping the change I had given in his hand. He was about six minutes in the bar.

FREDERICK MONKSFIELD , landlord of the "Pendergast Arms. "On May 25 my wife spoke to me, handed me a two-shilling piece, and pointed out the prisoner as he was leaving the bar. I followed, stopped him about 100 yards off, and said, "I want you; you have changed a two-shilling piece in that public-house?" He said, "Yes

I have." I said, "Do you know it is a bad one?" He said, "No, I do not think it is. "I pointed him out to a constable who was passing, who said to prisoner, "You had better come back. Have you got any more of these on you?" Prisoner said, "No, I have not got any more money on me. "He was taken into custody, the coin being given to the police-constable.

Police-constable JAMES VINING, 543 K. On May 25 Monksfield pointed out prisoner to me, and gave me florin produced. I said, "Is this your two-shilling piece?" He replied, "Yes, it is. I took it in part payment at the dock for my work. I did not know it was a bad one. "I found upon him sixpence in his inside coat pocket and 1 1/4d. in his outside coat pocket. (To the Judge.) He said that he had changed it and got 1s. 11d. change.

WILLIAM JOHN WEBSTER , inspector of coins, His Majesty's Mint. The florin produced is bad; it is of average make.

Statement of prisoner: "I am guilty of one two-shilling piece—I went to change it there—I did not know it was bad."

Verdict, Not guilty.

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-21
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

JONES, John William (21, shoemaker) ; uttering counterfeit coin twice on same day.

Mr. Pickersgill, M. P., prosecuted.

ALFRED PHILLIPS , 25, Queensbury Street, Essex Road, Islington, tobacconist, etc. On June 7, about 10.50 p.m., prisoner came into my shop and said, "A 1d. packet of Woodbines, please," and tendered a 2s. piece; I gave him a shilling, a sixpence, and five pennies, and threw the coin in the till. There was no other 2s. piece there. A few minutes afterwards I heard a police whistle. I went down to Flowerdule's shop, saw prisoner, and was told he had been passing a bad 2s. piece. I went back, found the coin given to me was bad, and gave it to a police officer.

Cross-examined. Prisoner was the man who gave me the bad coin. It was about three or four minutes afterwards I heard the whistle. Flowerdale's is about 75 to 100 yards from my shop.

EDWARD FLOWERDALE , 53, Queensbury Street, general shop. On June 7, at 10.55 p.m., prisoner bought of me a 1d. packet of cake and tendered 2s. piece produced. I thought it bad from feeling it, tried it on a slate, and it made a leaden mark. I went to the prisoner and asked him for my packet of cake. Prisoner had not attempted to leave. He said, "What for?" I held the coin out and said, "That is what for." He said, "I will give you a penny—give me that back." I said, "No, not me. "Then I asked my wife for the police whistle; she demurred for a minute or two; the prisoner, still standing there and not having moved, said he would fetch a policeman. I got out of temper, I made my wife get the whistle, and blew it. A crowd came round the door; a constable came up to whom I gave the two-shilling piece and gave the prisoner in charge, who wasstill standing at the door. Prisoner said nothing.

Police-constable GEORGE HYNE, 215 N. On June 7 I heard, a whistle and went to 53, Queensbury Street, where I saw prisoner

detained by Flowerdale, who said he had tendered a bad 2s. piece and asked him for a 1d. packet of cake. I asked prisoner where he got it from. He said, "Horse racing, or somewhere. "While I was searching him Phillips came in and stated that prisoner had been in his shop, bought a packet of cigarettes, and tendered a bad florin. Prisoner said, "I do not know anything at all about him. I did not know the 2s. was bad," referring to the coin he had given to Flowerdale. I found upon him four packets of Woodbine cigarettes, three packets of chocolate, sixpence silver, and 2d. bronze good money.

WILLIAM JOHN WEBSTER , inspector of coins, His Majesty's Mint. The two florins produced are counterfeit, from the same mould, a fair imitation.

Prisoner's statement: "I only went into one shop."

Verdict, Guilty.

Convictions proved: August 5, 1905, seven days' Worship Street, stealing boots; August 23, 1905, Worship Street, three months', receiving; August 21, 1906, Guildhall, three months' for frequenting; February 22, 1907, Old Street, five months' for larceny; December 14, 1907, Tower Bridge, three months' loitering with intent to commit a felony; May 26, 1908, North London Sessions, 12 months' as an incorrigible rogue.

Sentence, 12 months' hard labour.

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-22
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

RILEY, Harry (23, photographer), and BRYAN, John (23, carman) ; both unlawfully uttering counterfeit coin, knowing the same to be counterfeit, and unlawfully having in their possession nine pieces of counterfeit coin, with intent to utter the same.

Mr. Pickersgill, M. P., prosecuted; Mr. Daniel Warde defended Riley.

Detective GEORGE WHITMORE, L Division. On June 9, 1909, at 7.30 p.m., I was with Detectives Tonbridge and Hawkes in Deacon Street, Walworth, when I saw the prisoners loitering outside the "Gloster Arms" public-house. We kept them under observation, and eventually followed them to Henshaw Street, where they stopped outside the "Henshaw Arms," and talked together for two minutes when Bryan entered the bar, afterwards followed by Riley; they stayed in about two minutes, left, and conversed together outside. Bryan then re-entered, followed by Riley; Bryan then came out, when I stopped him and said I was a police officer and suspected him of having in his possession counterfeit coin. He said nothing. I took him into the bar, when he took from his right-hand jacket pocket a counterfeit florin and threw it on the ground, and from his left pocket a small paper parcel, which he also threw on the ground. It was picked up and found to contain seven bad florins. Riley was present. I told Bryan I should search him. He said, "That is all I have got. You have caught us fair. We have only passed one in here and was just going." I found on him two pennies and one halfpenny in good money. Prisoners were taken to the station,

charged, and made no reply. I produce the coins; that marked "G. W." was the one thrown on the ground; the others are initialed by Hawkes and Tonbridge.

Detective FRANK HAWKES, L Division. I was with the last witness, and corroborate him. Prisoners were about 10 minutes together. When Bryan came out and was stopped by Whitmore, I entered the "Henshaw Arms" with Tonbridge and told Riley we were police officers, and suspected him of possessing counterfeit coin. He said, "Yes, I have just passed a 2s. piece for a drink; that barmaid (pointing to Shaw) took the money." I called the barmaid, and said, "Has this man paid you any money for drink?" She said, "Yes, he has just paid me this 2s. piece, and I was showing it to the mistress when you called me. I thought it was a good one. "Prisoner said, "Yes, that is the one," I initialled the coin in her presence. It was also marked by Tonbridge. Detective Whitmore then entered with Bryan, who threw down parcel (produced) containing seven coins, which I picked up and initialled. On the way to the station Riley produced another florin from his left jacket pocket, saying, "Here you are you had better have this—I do not know how it got there." He was charged at Walworth Road Police Station, and said he had no fixed abode, and that he was an army reservist. On searching him I found 1s. 6d. silver and 6d. bronze good money.

Cross-examined by Mr. Warde. In the "Henshaw Arms" Riley told me at once that he had passed a coin there—he made no disguise about it.

LOUIE SHAW , barmaid, "Henshaw Arms," Henshaw Street, Walworth. On the night of June 9 Riley with another man came into the bar, called for two glasses of ale, and paid with two separate pennies. They went out and returned in two or three minutes, one entering one bar and the other another bar. I served Riley with a glass of ale, he handed me florin produced, and I gave him 1s. 11d. change. While he was standing there I thought the coin was bad, and handed it to Mrs. Sanders. While she was examining it a police officer came in and she handed it to him.

Cross-examined by Mr. Warde. I did not think it was a genuine coin and handed it to my mistress before Riley went out—I thought it was bad when I gave him the change.

LILT SANDERS , "Henshaw Arms," wife of John Sanders. On June 9 the two prisoners came into the bar, called for ale, and Riley handed a coin to Shaw, which she handed to me, which I immediately saw was bad, and which I handed to the police.

Detective-sergeant TONBRIDGE, L Division. On June 9 I was called to the "Henshaw Arms," when the counterfeit florin produced was handed to me.

WILLIAM JOHN WEBSTER , Inspector of Coins, H. M. Mint. The 10 florins produced are counterfeit; they are all made from the same mould; they are all poor imitations; no one of them is more likely to be noticed at once to be bad than the others. Looking at the one handed to Shaw, it is a poor imitation.

Cross-examined by Mr. Warde. The edge of every coin is bad. In all my experience I do not know that I have ever seen a worse lot.


HAERV RILEY (prisoner, on oath). At the time of my arrest I was living at 97, Crampton Street, Newington Butts. I am 23 years old, am a photographer, have served seven years in the Worcestershire Regiment, and am now on reserve at 6d. a day. I left the Army with a third-class character, and worked with my brother at Hanfield, afterwards went to Yarmouth, and from there to France, returning to London on April 6, 1909, to look for work. Besides my reserve pay of 6d. a day I have had money from my mother every week. I knew Bryan for three weeks before my arrest; I met him at the "Fountain" public-house, St. George's Road. He never asked me to pass bad money—I did not know he had any. I got the 2s. piece which I gave Shaw at the "Henshaw Arms" from a man who invited me to have a drink. I met him with Bryan in St. George's Road. I had no reason to think he was passing bad coin and I handed the coin in without looking at it. When the officer came in I at once told him I had passed the 2s. piece. When I was arrested and taken to the station, putting my hand in my pocket I found a 2s. piece which I handed to the officer and told him I did not know how it got there. I had about 2s. good money in my pocket. I have a situation open to me now.

Cross-examined. I was then living at 97, Crampton Street. I did not tell the police officer I had no fixed address; there were three or four addressed envelopes upon me and he could have seen my address. During the three weeks I had met Bryan occasionally and I happened to meet him on June 9 in St. George's Road, between six and seven p.m., with another man whom I had not seen before. We were together until we went into the "Henshaw Arms," when the other man went into another bar, and that was the last I saw of him. Whitmore's evidence is not true about my going in and out of the public-house. I could not say why the third man did not pay for the drinks himself—he handed me the money to pay. I think the coin I handed to the constable must have been thrown into my pocket. I did not know it was there. I put my hand in to feel for my cigarettes—I found the coin and gave it to the officer. There may have been on me 1s. 6d. silver and 6d. bronze—I did not take any notice.

Verdict, Guilty.

Riley, on May 14, 1909, was bound over as a suspected person. Bryan, on October 11, 1904, was fined 10s. for unlawful possession of cigarettes.

Sentence: Each prisoner, Six months' hard labour.

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-23
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

LLEWELLEN, Frederick George (40, clerk) , pleaded guilty of feloniously marrying Lucy Mary Ann Pooley, his former wife being then alive.

Sentence, Six months' hard labour.

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-24
VerdictsGuilty > unknown
SentencesImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

SOLOMON, Alfred (motor-cab driver) ; concurring in making false entries in a certain account the goods of the General Motor Cab Company, Limited, his masters, with intent to defraud; embezzling divers sums of money received by him for and on account of his said masters; stealing divers sums of money, the moneys of the General Motor Cab Company, Limited; having received divers sums of money on account of the General Motor Cab Company, Limited, fraudulertly converting the same to his own use.

Mr. Muir and Mr. Bigham prosecuted; Mr. George Elliott, K. C., and Mr. Cecil Fitch defended.

EMMA ROSS , 21, Wardour Street, wife of George Ross. I and my husband are music-hall artists, and, during the week March 29 to April 3 were engaged at the Holborn Empire, for two performances, and the Hippodrome, Crouch End. On March 29 I engaged prisoner to take us for the round journey, first to the Holborn, then to Crouch End, to Holborn again and home to Wardour Street. At the conclusion of the journey I asked him how much it was; he said 9s., which Mr. Ross paid him. I then told him he could take us the next night, which he did, and did so for the rest of the week, charging for each night 9s.

Cross-examined. I did not' examine the meter. We thought his charge was very reasonable. We took the same journey every night from Monday to Saturday. We made no engagement for prisoner to do it for the week. There was no further argument about the price. We had on other occasions arranged with a horse cab driver to do the work by the week.

GEORGE ROSS , 21, Wardour Street, music-hall artist. I employed prisoner to drive myself and wife and paid him 9s. a night.

Cross-examined. I took no notice of the meter—what the prisoner asked seemed reasonable; I did not question it, and paid him.

GEORGE WILLIAMS , garage foreman, General Motor Cab Company. On March 31 I received instructions from Mr. Bell, general manager, and went in a private cab driven by Coles to the Holborn Empire, waited there 20 minutes, and proceeded to the Hippodrome, Crouch End, arriving at 8.30 p.m., when I saw prisoner's cab, No. 1418, arrive at the stage door. I saw it about 150 yards off. His flag was up. The cab stayed there about an hour; the prisoner left the cab; I examined the taximeter—the flag was up and padlocked. A lady and gentleman got in and prisoner drove off with the flag up. I followed and passed him, the flag was still up; I let him pass me a second time—the flag was in the same position. I followed him to the Holborn Empire, where he arrived at 9.50 p.m., and I left. The next day I made a verbal report to Mr. Wilson, which was taken down in shorthand, typed, and signed by me—it is correct. The next day, April 1, I and Walker were driven by Coles direct to Crouch

End, arriving there at 8.35 p.m., when I saw prisoner's cab at the stage door of the Hippodrome. His flag was up and padlocked. Two passengers got in and were driven off—the flag was slightly tilted—in such a position that the meter would not record. We passed him on the way—the flag was in the same position; we went to the Holborn and saw prisoner's cab arrive with the fare inside at the stage-door—his flag was up. I waited some little time and then left. On Friday, April 2, we drove to the Holborn Empire and saw prisoner's cab at the stage door—with the flag up; waited 20 minutes, saw him start off with the fare, the flag being up. I then drove by a different route to Crouch End and saw prisoner arrive at the stage door of the Hippodrome with his flag up. He waited an hour and 10 minutes, leaving his cab. I took the numbers recorded on the meter. The 2d. charges were 4, 970; 8d. charges, 5, 473; extras, 5, 415; half miles travelled, 341; recorded half miles, 277; non-recorded time, 317. Prisoner then drove off with the fare, his flag being up. I followed and passed him on the way; his flag was up. I reached the Holborn Empire and saw him arrive with his flag up and three passengers inside; 6d. extra should have been registered for the third passenger; 3—2d. should have been punched up by the driver. The fare got out and prisoner went into a public-house. I again took the numbers on the meter. They were: 4, 970, 5, 474,. 5, 415, 352, 279, and 320—showing that no 2d. charges were recorded, one 8d. charge recorded; no extra, although a third passenger was carried; half miles travelled 11, which would represent a fare of 3s. 8d. with the extra passenger at 6d., making 4s. 2d.; there being only 8d. recorded, there would be 3s. 6d. earned but not recorded. On April 3 I again was driven by Coles to the stage door of the Holborn, having with me Detective-sergeant Hawkins and Detective Jones. Prisoner arrived with his flag up, waited 25 minutes, and started with a fare, his flag still up. We followed for a little way and then had a puncture; we put on the extra wheel and proceeded to the stage door of the Hippodrome, where we found the prisoner's cab, prisoner having gone away. The flag was up and padlocked. I took the readings of the meter as follows: 2d. charges, 5, 047; 8d. charges, 5, 478; extras, 5, 415; half miles travelled, 5, 430; recorded half miles, 317; non-recorded time, 338. We saw the cab leave with passengers—the flag was tilted. We passed the prisoner in Seven Sisters Road—the flag was tilted—and proceeded to the Empire, where he saw prisoner arrive with his flag tilted, so that it would not record. We waited about 45 minutes, when Police-constable Jones, 272 E, was directed to take the readings, which were 5, 050, 5, 479, 5, 415, 441, 321, and 342—showing three charges of 2d. recorded, one of 8d., no extras; showing that it had travelled 11 half miles, amounting to 3s. 8d., only 1s. 2d. being recorded, leaving a difference of 2s. 6d. On May 4 I with Detective-inspector Ward drove in prisoner's cab with the flag tilted; the meter recorded nothing whatever.

Detective-inspector ALFRED WARD, W Division, On May 4 I rode with the last witness in taxicab No. 1, 418, from 4, Suffolk Street,

Pall Mall, to High Street, Kensington, about three miles. Williams. placed the flag in a slanting position; the meter recorded nothing at all on the side which is visible to the passenger.

(Thursday June 24.)

GEORGE WILLIAMS , recalled. Cross-examined. When the flag is tilted the meter does not record; it has to be down at right angles in order to register. When giving evidence before the magistrate I confused the nights and mis-stated the times of arrival. We always started about the same time. I was then giving evidence from memory without my notes, and on the second occasion I had my notes and corrected the error. I did not make a note of the times of arrival until I reported the next morning to Mr. Wilson, when my report was taken down in shorthand. I made a note of the readings at the time they were taken. The figure given as 317 could be 317 or 318; 320 might be 321, the record being between the two figures. I have not tried to work out the calculations. I suppose meters sometimes go wrong, but I have nothing to do with that. I am garage foreman, and my duty is to lock all the cabs for the drivers. I have seen printed notices produced put up—I could not say how long they have been up.

Re-examined. In giving my evidence on the first occasion before the magistrate I said I had seen prisoner's cab on March 31 and April 1 first at Holborn, whereas I had seen it first at Crouch End.

EDWARD LEOPOLD COLES , 54, Brixton Buildings, Brixton Hill, motor driver, General Motor Cab Company. On March 31 and April 1, 2, and 3 I drove the last witness in a private car following, the prisoner's cab between Holborn and Crouch End. I noticed prisoner's flag about three times—it was straight up.

Cross-examined. I was driving a car belonging to the company and known to the drivers. Prisoner would know me—I think he waved to me one night; I could not say whether he could see who was inside my car. My car is used for private hire work. I did not know what I was out for until I reached Crouch End on the first night, when I was told to watch the prisoner's flag. I never saw it tilted.

Re-examined. There were passengers inside prisoner's cab when I saw the flag up.

SIDNEY WALKER , assistant foreman, General Motor Cab Company. On April 1 I went out with Williams and Coles to the Hippodrome, Crouch End, and saw prisoner's cab standing there; the flag was up and padlocked. We followed him towards Holborn; passed him on the road; his flag was up. On April 2 I saw him at the Holborn Empire stage door; he left with three passengers; the flag was tilted. We followed him to the Hippodrome, and I saw the flag tilted on the journey. On the return journey he had three passengers—his flag was tilted.

Cross-examined. The flags do not get loose or fall that I am aware of. When the flag is tilted the meter does not record. The

object of tilting it might be to give the idea that he was engaged. I do not understand the meter nor how the uniforms are paid for The men may go out without their uniforms. I have seen notices about since 18 months ago in the allotment department; they have not been put up just lately.

Detective JOHN JONES, W Division. On April 3 I accompanied Williams and Cole in a motor-car. I saw prisoner's cab arrive at the Holborn Empire at 7.35 p.m.; he waited there till 8.5 with the flag up; two people got in; we followed to the Crouch End Hippodrome, arriving about 8.30; I saw the prisoner's cab outside the stage door with the flag up. I then took the numbers as follows: 5, 047, 5, 478, 5, 415, 430, 318, and 338. The cab left Crouch End about 9.40 p.m. with two passengers with the flag tilted. We followed and passed the cab in Seven Sisters Road—the flag was slightly tilted. We arrived at the Holborn Empire and saw the cab arrive at 10.5 p.m. I again took the readings: 5, 050, 5, 479, 5, 415, 441, 321, and 342.

Police-constable OWEN BUSBY, 272 E. On April 3, at 10.25 p.m., I was on duty near the Holborn Empire. On instructions from Jones I took the readings from a taxicab standing there as follows: 5, 050, 5, 479, 5, 415, 441, 321, 342. Prisoner asked me if there was anything the matter. I told him, "Not that I know of, but that we had to do that for our own information. "I handed my note to Jones.

SIDNEY VAN LINGSCHOOTEN , cashier, General Motor Cab Company. I receive the drivers' money in a section of cabs, including No. 1418. The day's takings are paid in the next morning. Driver's sheet produced is prisoner's sheet of March 31, signed by prisoner in two places. It shows the time of departure, of re-entry, amount of earnings, and balance due from driver 19s., which amount I received from prisoner; he signed it in my presence at the foot, and I initialed the sheet. There are similar sheets for April 2 and 3 paid to me on April 3 and 5, showing the takings and amount due from driver, signed by prisoner and initialled by me.

Cross-examined. I saw the prisoner's signature at the bottom only. The signature at the top is not signed in my presence; my initials are at the bottom left-hand corner. That is signed after he has paid the money and is allowed to take the car out for the next day. On the sheet of April 1 the time of departure is put at 1.38 p.m.—that is not entered by me—I do not understand it, and it appears to be wrong—I do not know whether it means "a.m." or "p.m." I do not know how the petrol is reckoned.

EDGAR HENRY SIMMONDS , relief cashier, General Motor Cab Company. I produce prisoner's driver's sheet for April 2, showing total receipts for the day, £1 1s. 6d.; amount due from driver, 16s. 1 1/2 d.; which I received from prisoner, who signed the sheet in my presence. There are charges at 2d., 12s. 10d.; charges at 8d., 8s. 8d.; total, £1 1s. 6d.; driver's proportion, 5s. 4 1/2 d.; balance due from driver, 16s. 1 1/2 d.

Cross-examined. Prisoner signed after he had paid the money.

Detective-sergeant CHARLES HAWKINS. On April 3 I was with Williams and Jones in a car at the Holborn Empire stage door, where I saw prisoner arrive at 7.35 p.m. He waited there till 8.5 with his flag up; took up two passengers, and drove towards Crouch End with his flag upright. We followed and had a puncture, arrived at Crouch End at 8.30 p.m. I saw prisoner's cab at the stage door and took the readings as follows: 5, 047, 5, 478, 5, 415, 430, 317 over eight, 338. In the 317 the "7" was just changing into the "8." I saw him some distance up the road as he arrived—he had two passengers; the flag was upright. He left the Hippodrome and I saw his flag 500 yards further on and again in Seven Sisters Road—the flag was slightly tilted. I saw him arrive at the Holborn Empire, two passengers got out, his flag was up. On April 27 I saw prisoner at the garage, No. 1, Brixton Road, and read the warrant, which is, "Being employed by the General Motor Cab Company, Limited, did unlawfully, unlawfully, and with intent to defraud, falsify certain accounts," etc. He said, "When was this?" I said, "On April 1, 2, and 3." He said, "Who saw me?" I said, "I did." He said, "Where was it?" I said, "At the Holborn Empire and the Hippodrome, Crouch End. "He asked me to allow him to go to 53, Acton-road—his address. We went there and he said to his wife, "This gentleman has arrested me for carrying passengers with my flag up. "She said, "Who saw you?" He said, "He did. I hope he won't swear my life away." I said, "I do not do that. "He was taken to Brixton Police Station, charged, and replied, "All right, sir."

CHARLES WILLIAM WILSON , superintendent, General Motor Cab Company. At the beginning of the day the driver gives the cashier his earnings of the previous day and receives a driver's pass, showing the name of the driver, his badge number, etc. He then goes to the allotment department, where the clerk lets him a cab, the London County Council number and the police plate number of which are entered on the pass, which is initialled by the clerk, who enters those particulars on the driver's sheet. He then goes to the taximeter department and receives a new driver's sheet, on which is marked the figures then shown by the meter, and he signs an undertaking to be responsible for the cab. He then passes the turnstile into the garage, gets his cab ready, and presents his white pass, on which is entered the time he leaves and which he initials. He has an opportunity of checking the figures shown on the meter. After doing his day's work he returns and is met by the taximeter reading clerk, who enters on a slip the readings of the meter and the time he returns, the. driver checking the readings, which are initialled. The slip is given to the watchman, who hands it to the night clerk. The first reading is deducted from the second and the amount due is worked out; the driver is entitled to 25 per cent. and he pays in 75 per cent, of the amount recorded to the cashier, the next morning, keeping the 25 per cent, for himself, He then signs the sheet at the bottom, which is initialled by the cashier, and he is again given a pass for the next day. The drivers gene-rally

are permanently employed, and required to wear the company's uniform—part of which we supply and part of which they buy. A number of rules are hung up in the garage. The notices, produced have been up about two years. One says that any driver who leaves London for more than 24 hours without permission will be discharged on return. Another directs the driver in case of accident to take the names of witnesses. Another requires them to get permission before taking a day off; another requires that they should ply for at least 12 hours per day. Another requires that after obtaining permission to be away more than 24 hours the driver must telephone to the garage the number of his taximeter; that he must keep his flag down 14 hours per day; at the end of each day he must send to the garage the readings of his meter and a postal order for the amount due, including 6d. per day for insurance and the amount charged per day for clothes. The driver is charged for the breeches, cap and leggings—those garments which cannot be used by another man. The notices require them to deliver articles found in the cab at the nearest police station; that they must have their cabs out before 11 a.m.; that they must see that the horn, lubricator, pump, etc., are in good working order, and the cab in good running condition, and report any repair required; that if a driver is found working with his flag up he will be instantly dismissed and prosecuted for fraud; drivers wishing to rest must get permission from the inspector the day before; they are prohibited from putting grease in the gear box or crank, under penalty of one week's suspension; any driver gambling in the garage will be in stantly dismissed; there are notices dealing with the return of petrol cans, etc. Any driver driving a cab without wearing the company's uniform will be suspended for two weeks; or taking a cab out with badly adjusted brakes will be held responsible for accident and suspended for a week; requiring him if the brakes are not holding to return immediately to the garage; any driver reported by the public or convicted of furious driving will be suspended. Any driver breaking the rules will be deprived of bonus. Working out the number of miles shown as being travelled from the Holborn to Crouch End and back, it would be 11 miles at 8d.—7s. 4d. The waiting would be 4s. per hour; it registers 2d. for every 2 1/2 minutes. Without including the travel from Wardour Street to Holborn and back, prisoner should have earned at least 11s. 4d., whereas his sheet shows a total on April 2 of 16s. 10d. earned from 12.45 p.m. to one a.m., or 12 hours and 15 minutes. On April 3 his total earnings are returned at £1 4s. 4d. between 1.14 p.m. and 2.7 a.m. The figures which were read at Holborn compared with those on his return home at 2.7 a.m. show that he earned 12s. 8d., and that he travelled 21 1/2 miles—43 half-miles travelled after he last left the Holborn Empire.

Cross-examined. The notices produced have been put up at various times. I would not go so far as to say that some of them are never paid any attention to. We paid a bonus to drivers in 1907—the notice referring to bonus bears that date. When the notice about the cabs being out before 11 was put up that was the

rule; now that we have a much larger number of cabs we could not get them all out before 11 a.m. In some cases the rules are no longer in force. Drivers are not charged for overcoat or mackintosh; they are charged for the breeches, cap, and leggings. The driver pays for petrol—that is not entered on the sheet. There is now no charge for insurance; the charge was formerly 9d. I am now saying that the prisoner is a servant of my company. I recollect the case of Clifton, who was applying for the return of certain charges—I cannot say whether our counsel argued that the driver was not a servant but an agent—I do not think that is quite right. As between the company and the drivers we simply goby the reading on the meter—it is all we have to go by. If the driver has been bilked out of his fare he would generally have to pay for it, and if a boy pulled down his flag he would have to pay unless there was corroboration of the fact that his flag had been wrongly pulled down. The driver now goes out practically at any time of the day; he is not confined to any part or district of London; he is left to himself for 12 hours and if he does not earn a satisfactory amount we discharge him. We can discharge him or he can leave at any time. He can come on as often as he likes. If he is an irregular worker, or if he does not work his 12 hours a day he is discharged. He is not engaged for any period: he has no salary; his wages depend on what the cab earns. He is not entitled to wait after being engaged with his flag up. He is not authorised to make a special bargain with the fare. The rule may be broken—I do not think it is regularly broken. Drivers sometimes do make a special bargain. You cannot hire a taxicab by the hour—it is paid for under a combination of the miles run and the time—whichever is the larger. The driver ought to put his flag down directly he is engaged and put it up when the hiring is terminated.

Re-examined. The orders are those which we desire the men to obey. Drivers ought only to work by the taximeter, which records how much is earned; the whole system depends upon that. Drivers generally pay 6d. a day for clothes until they are paid for, when they become the driver's property. Prisoner was not paying for any clothing at this time. Drivers are all licensed under the Metropolitan Cab Act in the same way as horse cab drivers.

CHARLES WILLIAM WILSON , recalled, stated that the driver's sheets were the property of the company and never left their hands.

Mr. Cecil Fitch submitted that there was no ease of any criminal act, so proof of any contract signed at the time of hiring, without which the company could not sue and a fortiorian indictment would not lie. Secondly, that a taximeter is not an "account" under 38 and 39 Vic, c. 24; s. l. Thirdly, that prisoner was not a servant—(R. T. Walker, 27 L. J. M. C. P. 207); (R. v. Cullum, L. R., 2, C. C. R., p. 28).

Mr. Muir, in reply, submitted that under the Larceny Act, 1891, there was ample evidence of misappropriating money "received for or on account of another person or any part thereof," and cited R. v. Tite (L. and C, p. 29); R. v. Hartley CR. and R. p. 139): R. v. Bunt (15 Cox, p. 564); R. v. Oliphant (L. R., 1905, 2 K. B., p. 67); R. v. Negus (X. R., 2 C. C. R., p. 34); R. v. Hughes (1 Mood. C. C., p. 370); R. v. Wortley (5 Cox., p. 382).

Held: That the taximeter was an" account, and that there was evidence to go to the jury as to whether the prisoner was a servant, and as to fraudulent misappropriation not as a servant.

Verdict, Guilty of falsifying accounts, he being a servant; Guilty of fraudulent misappropriation or conversion of moneys received for the company. Prisoner was stated to be of good character.

Sentence, Five months' hard labour on each count, to run concurrently.


(Wednesday, June 23.)

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-25
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceMiscellaneous > sureties

Related Material

CHALFIN, Leonard (33, traveller) , who pleaded guilty last Session of bankruptcy frauds (see page 134), came up for judgment. He was released on his own recognisances of £10 to come up for judgment if called upon.

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-26
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

EDWARDS, George Frederick (35, pianoforte polisher) , pleaded guilty of stealing on May 9, 1909, three billiard balls, the goods of J. G. Pemberton; on May 2, 1909, one overcoat, the goods of George Hayward Bumby; and on April 23, 1909, one watch, the goods of Charles Mansfield. A previous conviction was proved.

Sentence, 12 months' hard labour.

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-27
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

STOCKING, Herbert Edward ; forging a certain accountable receipt for the payment of money, to wit, income-tax, with intent to defraud.

Mr. Kenrick prosecuted; Mr. C. F. Gill, K. C., and Mr. Warburtom defended.

ALBERT THOMAS HUTCHINGS , clerk to the collector of taxes at Ealing. On February 7 last year prisoner came into my office and handed me a cheque for £17 19s. to pay taxes in respect of certain properties. I identify that cheque. Among those properties was a house, 84, Salisbury Road. After he left I made out a receipt for 8s. 3d., being income-tax 6s. 3d. and house duty 2s., in respect of 84, Salisbury Road. I identify that receipt. I cannot say if that receipt reached prisoner by post. In the usual course it would be sent out the same evening, not by post: It would be placed in the ordinary course of events with 50 or 60 other receipts and sent off to the Surveyor of Taxes, through whom it would reach the prisoner. The receipt before me differs from the one I sent out; there are three "ones" put in; the 6s. 3d. has a "one" put in front of it making it 16s. 3d.; the total at the bottom has a "one" put in front of it. Those are not my "ones."

Cross-examined. To the Justices I said, "To the best of my recol-lection I think I sent the receipt by post. I think there is no doubt it did go by post." As a matter of fact I had not sent it by post. On the day prisoner came to the office only Mr. Cross and myself were there attending to the callers. Undoubtedly we were very busy. Prisoner spoke to me—he always comes to me. He has lived in the neighbourhood some time. It takes some time to arrive

at the sum to be paid on the number of houses to be dealt with. Some of the houses may have been empty. We have to calculate the length of time they have been empty, then he would be told the amount arrived at and he would write a cheque. I do not remember saying I would send the receipts. On this particular day I made out probably 150 receipts. Most probably there would be a lot of people there. The receipts would be made out the same day, probably in the afternoon between three and six, during which hours the office is closed. I cannot remember the particular receipts I made out. In a case of this sort all receipts going by post are put on one side, and then perhaps there are 50 to 100 or more on one day to go off by post. All the envelopes are made out together and all the receipts are put on one side. Mr. Stocking's receipts were made out probably with 50 others. They are then put in a large envelope and sent off to the Surveyor of Taxes. We I send none by post. I leave them in the Surveyor of Taxes' office. That office is in another building. I put them in a letter box there. Then I have done with them. It is difficult to say through how many hands they would pass after that. On those Tuesdays we are very busy, and usually enter up the cash book, and if I have time I make out envelopes, or Mr. Cross would do so. After that these envelopes are put in a large envelope unsealed, because we were not allowed to post them ourselves in those days. We have franked envelopes now and we post them ourselves. In that particular year we had not. They were all put in one large envelope. The last envelope is sealed and put in the Surveyor of Taxes' letter-box, which is 50 yards away from our office. Those documents, I should say, afterwards go through at least two hands; the Surveyor would open them and pass them on to his chief clerk. The Surveyor's office is over a bank, or was in those days. The porter would take the envelope and place it on the Surveyor's table. The counterfoils of the receipts are written first; then I made out the receipts one after the other. Prisoner wrote the cheque in the office, I remember a pen and ink being given him for the purpose. Before the magistrate I said, "I was very busy at the time. The ink on the cheque appeared similar to the receipt." I also said, "I sent above five receipts to the defendant. "I might have made a mistake at the time I made out the counterfoils and checked the receipts with the, cheques; the "ones" were not made by me, and had it not been for the difference in the ink I might think I had made a mistake. At that time I had thought I had sent it by post. What I appear to have said was, "I made out the receipt; I think I sent it by post." I could not have quite meant that, for the simple reason we were not allowed to send them by post. I meant that we sent them through the Surveyor. This matter was not brought to my attention for more than a year afterwards. I have known prisoner for the last eight years.

CHARLES ROBBINS , 49, Belgrave Square, W. I am the owner of 84, Salisbury Road, Ealing. Prisoner has been acting as my agent. He collects my rents and pays the rates and taxes. I know prisoner's handwriting. The letter of July 2, 1908, is in his handwriting.

As far as I remember, I received the receipt which was enclosed. I was abroad at the time. As far as I know, it is just as it was when I got it. Prisoner did say to me, "Of course, you can reclaim your Income-tax," when he called on me at Belgrave Square. I eventually filled up a form and sent it to Dover Street, applying for a return of the Income-tax. With that paper I sent this receipt and, I think, another.

Cross-examined. I know if my income is less than £160 a year I can make a claim for rebate. Having that house did not make my income over £160 a year. I do not remember whether the conversation I had with prisoner about the claim for rebate was before or after the receipt.

ALFRED WILLIAM COPE , Prevention Inspector, Customs and Excise Department. On March 6 last I called on prisoner. I showed him this receipt and pointed out to him that a "one" had been added to "six" and "eight," making 8s. 3d. into 18s. 3d. I allowed him to closely examine the receipt. I told him if he had anything to say I should report to the Commissioners of Inland Revenue. He said, "I will see Mr. Bobbins. I do not think I should do it for 10s. I paid that house with other houses by cheque to Mr. Cross. I must see Mr. Bobbins."

Cross-examined. The first thing I did when I went to see prisoner was to examine his ink and his pens. I took out a pocket book and made experiments with the ink and pens. I asked him to write and make strokes. I did not exactly hold an inquiry. I asked him if he would care to write his name.


HERBERT EDWARD STOCKING (prisoner, on oath). I have lived in Ealing nearly 10 years; before that I lived at Acton. My family is well known in Ealing and Acton. Up to the present time I have never had the slightest imputation against my character. I am a builder and decorator. I remember having to go to the Surveyor of Taxes in April last year with regard to 18 houses, some of which were unlet, for the purpose of arriving at the amount of taxes. I should say there were a dozen people there at the time. I handed Mr. Hutchings the demand note and also a paper with the empties and the numbers of the houses, and he made the deductions. I do not keep any clerks. At this particular time I was painting 120 houses for the Borough Council of Ealing. The receipts for taxes are always sent on to me. I put them in the drawer of my desk. I did not check them. On July 3 I wrote Mr. Robbins. At the time he bought the house (four years ago) I spoke to him about the income-tax. We spoke about it two or three times. We had been talking about rents, rates, and taxes, and he said he would apply for a rebate or exemption, I am not sure which. I sent this receipt on to him in the same condition in which I got it. I did not make an alteration to it. I have no office. I keep my papers in a roll-top desk in one of the rooms of my house.

I remember Mr. Cope seeing me on March 6 about this receipt. He asked to see my pens and ink and so on. He asked me whether I thought I should do such a thing. I said, "Certainly not. "Then he asked me for the ink, and he followed me closely from that room to another one. I wrote at his request and made strokes for him. I think he tested the ink and pens. He made some figures in a book. My ink does not last 13 months. I had fresh ink. After that I received a summons and went before the Justices.

Cross-examined. I act as agent for Mr. Robbins and pay the taxes on this house. I put the receipts for taxes ii my desk and do not check them. I never have checked the King's Tax receipt if it comes by post. I do if I wait for it. I do know that. I. agree that the receipt has been altered by someone. I do not know anything about it. I cannot explain it. I did not do anything to it. I sent it away as I received it. Supposing it was sent in that form to me, I should have benefited by it to the extent of 10s. I was innocent of it, though I did not know it. When the inspector called on me I told him I should have to see Mr. Robbins. I did not know what the amount ought to be. I did not say to him, "I do not think I should do it for 10s." He asked me whether I thought I should do it. I said, "Certainly not, I would not risk my reputation for 10s." I could not give him an explanation of the matter then. I told him I did not know anything about it. At the time I wrote the letter, mentioning the amount, 18s. 3d., I had the receipt before me. I did not notice the "ones"; I did not give it a thought.

A. T. HUTCHINGS, recalled: Defendant wrote this cheque in the office. A pen was handed to him for the purpose. He would not use my pen. I would lei nobody use mine. He would use one of the old office pens.

Three witnesses to character were called.

Verdict, Not guilty.

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-28
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

WILLIAMS, Frank (24, clerk) , pleaded guilty of being entrusted with one horse, a quantity of harness, and one van, the goods of Read Adams, in order that he might deliver the same to the said Read Adams; fraudulently converting part of the said goods, to wit, the said horse, to his own use and benefit, thereby feloniously stealing the same. Several previous convictions for minor offences were proved.

Sentence, Eight months' hard labour.

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-29
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceMiscellaneous > sureties

Related Material

HUGHES, Samuel (34, manager) , pleaded guilty of feloniously uttering, knowing the same to be forged, two receipts for the several sums of £1 and £1, in each case with intent to defraud; unlawfully making certain false entries in books and documents, the goods of Edward Hutchinson, his master. Nothing was known against prisoner, and the prosecutor recommended him to mercy.

Prisoner was released on his own recognisances in £25 to come up for judgment if called upon.

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-30
VerdictsGuilty > pleaded part guilty
SentencesMiscellaneous > sureties

Related Material

FILDES, Angelina (41, no occupation) , indicted for feloniously attempting to discharge a loaded revolver at Charles Hy. Cumberland, with intent to do him grievous bodily harm; assaulting and resisting William McDonald, a Metropolitan police-constable, in the execution of his duty, pleaded Guilty of a common assault on Cumberland; Not guilty of assaulting the police-constable or of firing the pistol.

Prisoner is a married woman, separated from her husband, who has been making her an allowance. Some 18 years ago Mr. Cumberland, solicitor, acted for her husband. During the last 18 years he has seen nothing of the defendant and has had no communication with her. He was acting on behalf of her trustees in paying her a weekly allowance. On May 14 she came to see Mr. Cumberland. She was shown into a room and behaved in a somewhat odd way and announced that she was not going to be under his thumb any longer. He said he had no desire that she should be. She had some impression that her allowance was going to be stopped, which was quite wrong, and wanted the address of her husband. Mr. Cumberland told her he was instructed not to give her the address, and she then pulled a revolver out of her pocket, pointed it to Mr. Cumberland, and said, "I am a desperate woman," and again asked for her husband's address. Mr. Cumberland did not take the threat seriously, although he took the precaution of telephoning to his clerk's office to send for the police. When the police came she was still pointing the revolver to Mr. Cumberland, and upon the officer going up to her for the purpose of taking it away from her she struggled with him, and in the struggle the revolver went off without hitting anybody; Mr. Cumberland and the officer stated that it went off by accident. Prisoner has been in prison five weeks, during which time she has been under observation. The doctor reports that her mental condition is somewhat unstable, perhaps, and she seems to have been brooding over more or less imaginary wrongs; but she has undoubtedly benefited by her detention. It was stated that she would undertake in future not to communicate with Mr. Cumberland except by letter.

Prisoner was released on her own recognisances in £20 to come up for judgment if called upon.


(Thursday, June 24.)

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-31
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceMiscellaneous > sureties

Related Material

BRIELEY, Richard (23, labourer) , pleaded guilty of unlawfully and carnally knowing Frances Capper, a girl above the age of 13 years and under the age of 16 years, to wit, of the age of 15 years.

Prisoner was released in his own recognisances in £10 to come up for judgment if called upon.


(Thursday, June 24.)

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-32
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty

Related Material

HARDINGHAM. Charles Stephen (42, house agent) , pleaded guilty of obtaining by false pretences from >Alan Burke Connell a certain valuable security, to wit, a banker's cheque and order for the payment and of the value of £75, from Edgar Duart the several sums of £10 and £15, from George Thomas Tamplin the several sums of £20 and £55, from Ronald Charles Parr the sum of £75, from Louis Dagley the several sums of £25 and £75, from Clement Henry Watkinson the sum of £10 and a certain valuable security, to wit. a banker's cheque and order for the payment and of the value of £90, in each case with intent to defraud; in incurring certain debts and liabilities did obtain credit of and from the said persons to the said amounts under false pretences.

Sentence, Twelve months' imprisonment, second division.

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-33
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

DRYDEN, William (21, carman) , indecently exposing his person with intent to insult Kate Greeno and others.

Mr. Stewart Garnett prosecuted; Mr. St. John Macdonald defended.

Verdict, Guilty.

Sentence, Three months' hard labour.


(Friday, June 25.)

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-34
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

WARNE, Edward (60, carman) , feloniously throwing carbolic powder at William Daniel Watford with intent to do him grievous bodily harm.

Mr. G. Wells Thatcher prosecuted.

WILLIAM DANIEL WATFORD , master of St. Luke's Workhouse, Chelsea. On June 21, about 9 a.m., prisoner (an inmate of the workhouse) came to my office and asked for his discharge. I said, "When did you go out last?" He replied, "I have been in and out many times." I directed an official to get from another office prisoner's recent discharges, and told prisoner, "Please wait outside." He said, "I'm damned if I do," and at the same moment, raised his hand and threw a handful of powder in my face; it went chiefly on the right side of the face, some in the eyes, and across the forehead.

ALBERT MANNING , labour master at the workhouse. I was present in the master's office on this occasion. After the occurrence I caught hold of prisoner. I said to him, "You will get time for this." He replied, "I will willingly do that, and I will finish the job when I come out; next time I will have something better." When I was looking to see what the powder was prisoner volunteered that it was

carbolic powder. I said, "You might have blinded the master." He replied, "That is what I intended to do."

Dr. EDWARD TORRIANO HOLLAND, assistant medical officer at the workhouse, who examined prosecutor shortly after the occurrence, described the nature of the injuries.

Police-constable WILLIAM KERR, 218 B, proved the arrest. All that prisoner said was, "Them chaps" (referring to some other men standing by) "did not see me do it. I don't want them to get into trouble."

Prisoner's statement before the magistrate. "I have been laid up with paralysis since 1905 and have been badly treated. I fell downstairs and hurt my hip. They took me to the infirmary ward and I stopped one night. They never even gave me a drop of medicine to rub on it. I am in pain now with it. They said it was all right. That caused me trouble to go in the workhouse. I lost the use of my left arm. I worked for the vestry for years. No witnesses to call here."

Prisoner now declined to give evidence or to make a statement, simply saying, "I would sooner have it settled and done with."

Verdict, Guilty. Several previous convictions were proved.

Sentence, Three years' penal servitude.


22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-35
VerdictsGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentencesImprisonment > penal servitude

Related Material

LAWLER, James Francis (63, gardener) , pleaded guilty of obtaining by False pretences from Walter Thomas Higgins one ring, value £45, one pendant and one ring, value £9, and one chain; from Harry Rides the sum of £48 11s. 9d., and from William Marven Everett a valuable security, to wit, a bankers' cheque for the payment and of the value of £26 8s., in each case with intent to defraud; on or about February 27, 1909, stealing one gold watch, the goods of Walter Thomas Higgins and another. Prisoner pleaded not guilty of having been convicted of felony at Clerkenwell Quarter Sessions on March 21, 1892.

Mr. Frampton prosecuted; Mr. C. Bray defended.

BENJAMIN MORGAN , retired inspector, Metropolitan Police. In March 21, 1892, I was a sergeant in attendance at Middlesex Sessions, Clerkenwell, when I had prisoner in custody in the name of William Clark, charged with stealing clothing and other articles, of which he was convicted and sentenced to five years' penal servitude. I produce the record, including a photograph. I identify prisoner as the man convicted under the name of William Clark.

Cross-examined. I was detective-sergeant, D division, which is a very busy division. I had then been in the service 12 or 13 years, and retired after 26 1/2 years' service. I have arrested and had in my charge hundreds of prisoners. I was first asked about the prisoner a

month ago; the record was not shown to me until Monday last. The officer in charge of this case spoke to me and I saw the prisoner. I afterwards saw the photograph which, I believe, was taken in 1896, when Clark was released. According to the record prisoner should be 71 years of age. (To the Judge.) After I arrested Clark in 1892 I had him in custody for some weeks, and repeatedly saw him before his conviction. That was the first occasion on which I saw him. I have no doubt prisoner is the man.

CHARLES MUNROE , Inspector, Finger Print Department, New Scotland Yard. I have been engaged exclusively on finger print work since 1901 and have classified and compared hundreds of thousands of finger prints. We have a record at Scotland Yard of about 146, 000. After the prisoner was in custody I had submitted to me finger prints taken at Portland Prison of William Clark, which I have compared with finger prints taken by me of the prisoner. Photographic enlargements have been made. I find the finger prints of Clark and of the prisoner to be identical. I have never found the finger prints of two persons to be identical. In my opinion the prisoner Lawler and William Clark are the same person.

Cross-examined. I have come to my conclusion by comparing the points of similarity; there are no points of dissimilarity. I have pointed out 21 points of similarity. I agree that the furrows are wider and more distinct in the Portland Prison print than in the print taken by me of the prisoner. The first is blurred, being badly taken by the warder; mine are very clear. There is no difference except what a difference of pressure would make; I attach very small importance to that, as it is due to a difference of pressure. The general character of the lines never changes from a little after birth. There is no marked distinction between the two prints. The record of William Clark shows seven previous convictions in several different names—there are none in the name of Lawler. I have heard prisoner has been head gardener to the Duke of Norfolk. I do not know that Lawler is his true name. (To the Judge.) The way the thumb is put down and pressed may alter the position of part of the flesh, but the way the lines make a sort of circle in the middle and branch off in arcs always remains the same from early life to the end of life. I find here in the two prints absolutely the same ridges and furrows. I have studied the points of identity and I have not the slightest doubt they are of the same person.

Sergeant HARRY CALLAGHAN, E division. I arrested the prisoner on this charge. I produce record of William Clark, together with photograph taken in 1896, when he was released. In the record it is stated that Clark had a scar over the eye. Prisoner has a similar scar. There are other marks described for which I have not examined the prisoner.

Cross-examined. The scar I refer to is over the right eye. I have not examined the prisoner for other marks because we now rely on the finger prints. I asked prisoner to show me his arm. I did not notice the mark there mentioned in the record. I do not know the prisoner. I know he has been head gardener to the Duke of Norfolk

and has been employed there for three years. Prisoner did not tell me who his father was. He stated his age as 61. According to the record Clark would be 71, but we never take any notice of the age given—we accept the age given by the prisoner, but we do not always believe it. I do not know when he was married—I have made no inquiries.

Verdict, Not guilty of having been previously convicted.

Sentence, Three years' penal servitude.

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-36
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceMiscellaneous > sureties

Related Material

HARRIS, Christina (33, servant) , pleaded guilty of forging a banker's cheque for the sum of £2 with intent to defraud.

Prisoner was stated to have acted under the influence of her husband, who is now serving nine months' imprisonment for receiving. She was released on her own recognisances in £10 to come up for judgment if called upon.

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-37
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

LANGLEY, William Charles (31, porter) , pleaded guilty of feloniously marrying Emily St. Clair Dunn, his wife being then alive.Sentence, Six months' hard labour.

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-38
VerdictGuilty > with recommendation
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

WILLIS, James (47, gasfitter), and SMITH, John 44, gasfitter) , both unlawfully uttering counterfeit coin twice on same day and unlawfully uttering two further pieces of counterfeit coin. Smith unlawfully uttering counterfeit coin. Willis unlawfully uttering counterfeit coin twice on same day.

Mr. Pickersgill, M. P., prosecuted; Mr. St. John McDonald (at the request of the Court) defended.

FRANK PIERCE , 72, Boville Road, Forest Hill, butcher. On May 20, 1909, at 4.45 p.m., I was standing at my shop door when I noticed Smith, with two other men, go by in a pony cart and turn down an opposite street. I then saw the two prisoners, Smith in front, return into Boville Road. Smith went into the grocer's shop of Woolley, No. 68; Willis crossed the road. Smith came out and crossed over to Willis, crossed the road again, and went into Weekes's tobacconist shop, 70, Boville Road, Willis coming across and standing outside. Smith then came out and they both went away. I went into Weekes's shop and made a communication to him. Weekes and I then communicated with Woolley, and all three went in search of the prisoners, and found them in Brockley Rise, about 300 yards away, Smith on one side of the road and Willis on the other. I spoke to a constable, and the prisoners were arrested.

Cross-examined. This occurred on Thursday, which is early closing day—as a butcher I close early on Monday. Woolley does not close early. I saw the three men in a costermonger's barrow with a grey pony—the cart went out of my view round the corner. After I recognised Smith returning I looked round and saw the trap waiting at the corner, with one man in it. I did not see prisoners get out of the trap. I recognised Smith by his face—but not Willis. I was suspicious because a month before someone had stolen a till from a distillery near by and from seeing they had left the cart. There was a van of which the horses were in front of my shop, but

I could see prisoners approach. I did not notice Smith had a bag of biscuits. When we found the prisoner Weekes said he would give Smith in charge, and I went in search of a constable.

(Saturday, June 26.)

WALLACE WOOLLEY , 68, Boville Road, Forest Hill, grocer. My shop is two doors from Pierce's. On May 20, at 4.45 p.m., Smith came into my shop, asked the price of Osborne biscuits, and bought half a pound for 4d. I served him, and he tendered the half-crown produced to my mother, who gave him a two shilling piece and two pennies and put the coin in the till. Directly, after Smith had left Pierce came in and spoke to me. I looked in the till and found the coin produced. It was the only half-crown. I afterwards gave it to Police-constable Sharp. I went with Pierce and Weekes to Brockley Rise, where we found Smith crossing the road. Weekes told him he had given us two bad half-crowns. He said, "Oh! have I, old chap? I am sorry; of course I did not know it," took a purse from his pocket with silver coins in it and said, "I do not know how I have come by them; I have not got any more," and gave me a good twoshilling piece and sixpence and Weekes a good half-crown. The bag of biscuits produced is like what I sold him.

Cross-examined. When Pierce came into my shop he said, "What did that man; want who came in just now" I said, "Half a pound of biscuits." He said, "What did he give you?" I said, "Half a crown." He said. "Is it a good one?" Then I looked at it and found it was bad by the feel of it. The one produced is the identical coin. It was the top coin in the till; there was no other half-crown there. My mother gave the change to Smith. I served the biscuits from the front of the shop. There were no other customers in the shop. Pierce went along the road to look for a cart. I had never seen Smith before. Smith did not seem surprised when I told him he had given us bad money—he did not ask for the coins to examine them; he immediately took his purse out and gave us good money. I refused to return him the bad coins. He at once offered us the flood money.

WILLIAM GEORGE WEEKES , 70, Boville Road, tobacconist. On May 20, at 4.50 p.m., Smith came in and asked for a 3d. packet of Player's cigarettes, tendering the half-crown produced. I gave him two shillings and three pennies in change and put the coin in the till. Pierce came in and spoke to me and I found the coin was bad. There was no other half-crown in the till. I afterwards handed it to the police. I gave chase with Woolley, found Smith about 300 yards off, and said, "You have given me a bad half-crown." He said, "I would not do you for the world, old pal—very sorry," and gave me a good half-crown. I did not hear him say anything more.

Cross-examined. I gave Smith in charge; only Woolley was present. I can swear to the date of the half-crown—1889. I found the coin was bad by weighing it against a good one—it was considerably lighter. Smith gave me good money at once.

FLORENCE WEEKES , 106, Brockley Rise, wife of Henry Weekes, tobacconist. On May 20, at about 4.30 p.m., Smith came to my shop, asked for a packet of cigarettes, which I gave him; he tendered halfa-crown; I gave him 2s. 3d. change, and he went out. I put the coin in the till. About five or 10 minutes later Willis came in and asked if I had a book called "Spare Moments. "I looked on the counter and had not got it. He said a "Weekly Telegraph" would do, and picked it up; he also picked up a "Heartsease Library," gave me halfa-crown, and I gave him 2s. 4d. change, putting the coin in the till. Willis left. About 5.30 p.m. I received a communication and examined the two coins; they were the only half-crowns in the till; I gave them to Inspector King; they are the coins produced. The next day, at Greenwich Police Court, I picked Smith out from a number of other men—I did not then identify Willis. Afterwards, on the same day, I recognised Willis, when he was in the dock, as the man who had passed the second coin.

Cross-examined. W. G. Weekes told me he had taken some bad half-crowns—that made me look in the till. I picked Smith out at once from about 12 to 20 men; I could not identify Willis. I then asked that the men should show their hands, because I noticed that the second man's hands were very dirty. Both prisoners held out their hands with the ethers. I did not notice that Smith had three fingers cut off or that Willis had a finger off. No one whispered to me to ask to see their hands. I did it on my own initiative. I did not notice the prisoner's dress. After picking Smith out I became very nervous and could not identify Willis; I recognised him when in the dock. I am positive he is the man.

EMILY SILVESTER , spinster, 72, Brockley Rise, confectioner and tobacconist. On May 20, between 4 and 4.30 p.m., Willis came in, asked for a packet of Player's cigarettes, 3d., and tendered me a half-crown, which I put in the till, giving him two shillings and three pennies. About half an hour afterwards I looked in the till, examined the half-crown (which was the only one there), and found it was bad. I afterwards gave it to King. On May 27, at Greenwich Police-Court, I picked Willis out from about 12 men. I have no doubt he is the man who tendered the coin.

Cross-examined. The half-crown is the one produced. I recognize it by the date—1889. I identified Willis at once—I was told to have a good look round and I may have taken four minutes before I picked him out. He had the same clothes on as he now wears—I identified him by his hat, coat, features, and expression. I am not an expert in coins—I asked someone else's opinion. That was half to threequarters of an hour afterwards. I did not go to the police, I did not wish to take proceedings; hearing there was an arrest, I gave information. I was not called up till May 27, because I did not wish to go; I felt nervous about going to the court. I am sure Willis is the man.

Police-constable ALBERT SHARP, 214 E. On May 20, at about 4.45 p.m., I accompanied Pierce and Weekes to Brockley Rise, where I saw Smith standing on the pavement. Weekes said, "That man

has passed a bad half-crown at my shop, and I shall give him into custody. "I asked Smith if he knew the man who was coming down the road with an overcoat on (Willis). He said, "Yes it is my brother-in-law." On Willis coming up to us Pierce said, "That man was with this man. "I told Willis I should take him into custody for being concerned with Smith in uttering counterfeit coin. He replied, "I am looking for my governor in a pony cart." I searched both prisoners. On Smith I found 9s. 6d. in good silver, 5d. bronze, a packet of Player's cigarettes, and a bag of biscuits; on Willis 5s. 6d. good silver and a copy of "Union Jack Library. "Weekes and Woolley handed me two counterfeit half-crowns (produced).

Cross-examined. On Smith I found four two-shilling pieces, one shilling, one sixpence, and 5d. in bronze. Smith said, "I did not know they were bad. Willis had one half-crown one florin, and one shilling. I found no false coin on either. Weekes gave Smith into custody; Pierce was following us up. Willis said, "I know nothing at all about any counterfeit coin." They did not tell me they had given good money for the bad coins.

Detective-sergeant EDWARD KING, P division. Florence Weekes and Miss Silvester handed me two half-crowns produced, which I marked. On May 21 prisoners were put up with 12 other men for identification in the waiting-room of Greenwich Police Court. Florence Weekes at once picked on Smith, but failed to identify Willis. After the case was disposed of in court for that day she said, "I am positive the other man (Willis) is the man from whom I received the other half-crown. "On May 27 Miss Silvester picked out Willis from 11 other men. She walked round the men and took, about a minute.

Cross-examined. I have been in charge of this case and have searched the prisoners' houses. I found nothing. I asked prisoners, to refer me to anyone for whom they had worked. They said they could not refer me to anyone, that they obtained their livelihood by selling gas mantles. Smith did not hand me a receipt—I am certain—I swear it—I received no paper at all from him. I saw the prisoners after having visited their homes, and told Smith I had informed his wife of his position. I have been unable to find out whether prisoner bore a good character. Willis did not tell me he was an old soldier—I saw no medal on him. No receipt from Smith has come into the hands of the police. When Miss Silvester identified Willis I was standing in the room where the men were put up. The inspector in charge of the court sent for Silvester, and he was the only person who spoke to the witness. He said to her, "Have a good look round all these men and see if there is anyone here that you can identify." She identified Willis in about a minute or two. She came naturally a little flurried into a room where there were a lot of men. It is the duty of the inspector of the court to conduct identifications, not of the police in charge of the case. I was not standing close to Florence Weekes when she identified Willis. She was sent for from outside the court and spoken to by the inspector of the court. I cannot explain why she asked the men to show their hands, except

from what she has said—that she noticed how black the hands of the man who changed the coin were. It was not because Smith has lost two fingers; she did not know that and I certainly did not inform her.

Police-constable ALBERT WOOLLEY, 509 P. On May 20, at about 5 p.m., I was in plain clothes in Brockley Rise, when Sharp called my attention to Willis. I told him I was a police-constable and that he would have to come with me to the station. He said, "Yes, I will come with you, I am not going to run away; I was with him—he is my brother. We are out canvassing," or "getting orders for mantles. "I took him into custody.

WILLIAM JOHN WEBSTER , Inspector of Coins, H. M. Mint, The five half-crowns produced are bad; four are from the same mould.

Cross-examined. Everyone is not an expert who takes half-crowns. These are not good imitations. I am absolutely sure these are bad. They are 2 1/2 dwt. short in weight. They are not silver; they do not ring like silver.

Statement of Willis. "I never passed any money to Mr. Woolley or Mr. Weekes, and I never saw the two ladies before. I cannot read or write. I was about 15 yards away from Smith—we were going home perfectly innocent. "Statement of Smith. "I gave Mr. Woolley's mother half-a-crown for biscuits. I bought a packet of cigarettes from Mr. Weekes for 3d. and paid half-a-crown. I never saw Mrs. Weekes before. She hesitated when she recognised me and asked to see our hands. When she saw I was crippled in my hands she turned away. I have never done anything dishonest in my life."


JOHN SMITH (prisoner, on oath). On Thursday, May 20, I went to in man named Clark, of 50, Perevia Street, who keeps a small corner shop and sells wood, etc., and who has got a trap—he had a trap outside, and I asked him to lend it to me for the Sunday, because I was going to christen my baby, eight weeks old. He said, "Give me a deposit of 2s. 6d. and you will owe me 1s. I said, "I have only a sovereign and a few coppers." He said, "Give me the sovereign, I will go out of the shop and get change. "He went out and came back and started giving me three or four half-crowns. I asked him if he had anything smaller, because I was thinking of going to buy some burners and going round Spitalfields Market to sell to tradesmen and wanted smaller change. He said he had only those, and he gave me three half-crowns and five 2s. pieces, keeping half-a-crown as deposit, and he gave me a receipt for my half-crown. I then went and asked my step-brother (Willis) to come round the markets, Spitalfields, Smithfield, and Covent Garden, to see if we could do business. I said I would like to find a cheaper place to buy mantles. He said he had heard of a place near the Crystal Palace, near Dulwich. We agreed to go, and we had dinner at Pearce's, in Hounsditch, for which I paid 1s. 2d., then took a 1d. 'bus to Old Kent Road, walked to Lee, and had two drinks. That left me 15s. 6d. Going towards Dulwich

we lost ourselves, and coming to Woolley's shop I felt a bit hungry and proposed to Willis to have some tea. He said we were spending too much and that we had better buy 5 lb. of biscuits, so I went to Woolley's shop and bought 1/2 lb. of biscuits, which his mother served me with. I gave Woolley half-a-crown, he gave it to his mother and went on serving another customer, and his mother gave me a 2s. piece and 2d. change. I joined Willis and offered him some biscuits, at the same time taking some myself. He said he wanted a cup of tea with them, I agreed, and then I wanted some cigarettes and went into Weekes's, next door to Woolley's, bought a packet (3d.), tendered him half-a-crown, received 2s. 3d. change, came out and lit a cigarette. I had only one packet of cigarettes. We walked on 400 or 500 yards, when I saw a boy on a bicycle following me. I looked at his bicycle, because I thought of buying one. Weekes overtook me and said, "I say, young man, do you know you have given me a bad half-crown?" I said, "God bless my heart and soul, no; I could not do that—I do not think so—do you mind letting me have a look?" He said, "You have, and if you do not give me good money I shall lock you up. "I never had a policeman's hand on me before in my life, and you can guess my feelings when I was threatened to be locked up for passing counterfeit money. I turned round like an honest man and said, "Will you kindly examine my money to see whether there is any more bad. He looked at my money and said, I cannot see any more bad money there. "There was no policeman there at all I gave him a half-crown and said "Is that good?" He said, "Yes." I said, "You have examined my money have mot you?" He said, "Yes." Mr. Woolley then said, "You have given me one." I said, "Damn it all, you had both better have a look. You had better bring a few more and say I have given them to you." He said, "If you do not serve me the same as Mr. Weekes I shall lock you up; I want a good half-crown. "I turned round honestly and gave him half-a-crown and said, "What are you going to do with those two half-crowns. "They said, "We are going to keep them." I said, "Oh, are you," and walked away to look out for a policeman to see that those half-crowns were destroyed. I had got about 500 yards down the road when I was overtaken by Mr. Weekes and his. sister. He said, "Mr. Pierce spotted you, old chap. ", A constable came up and I was given in charge. He took me back to Woolley's shop and searched me. I was taken to the station and put in a cell at about 5.15 p.m. King went to my residence and came to my cell at about 10 or 11 p.m. with a sergeant, who had a slate, and King asked me," Where did you make this money; where did you get it from? Who are you dropping this bad money for? Cannot you tell me where it is made?" I said, "I cannot tell you where it is made, I do not know. I can tell you' where I got change." He said, "Where?" I said, "I got it from Mr. Clark; I have got his receipt for 2s. 6d." I then gave him from my pocket a small paper such as would come out of a notebook, "Received from John Smith the sum of 2s. 6d. deposit for the loan of pony trap to seat six—3s. 6d.—for Sunday. Paid C. Clark, 50, Pereira Street, Brady Street, Bethnal

Green Road. "King took the receipt and put it in his waistcoat pocket and told the sergeant, "Take him," to take my description. The sergeant then took my description, my clothes, the colour of my tie, etc. He said he had seen my wife. The next morning I was taken into court, when King said to me, "I would be ashamed of myself if I was you, having a wife and five children. Why don't you tell me where this money came from and where it was made?" I asked him, did he go to Mr. Clark's place. He said, "No; do you think I have got b——wings? You had better tell me where this. bad money was made. I will give you five or ten years' imprisonment." I replied, "If I was a man like you I would be ashamed of myself to try and prosecute a man afflicted like me"—trying to make me say what I did not know.

Cross-examined. I received the two bad half-crowns from Clark, of 50, Pereira Street, Bethnal Green. Clark is not here—we have ascertained that he has gone and the shop is empty. I was not engaging the trap for that day, but to take my wife for a ride on the Sunday after the christening. I was going to get cheap mantles at a place near Dulwich—I was told it was a large place and we started to find it and absolutely lost ourselves. I have been nine years in London. I asked several people where the place was;, I did not succeed in finding any factory at all. I asked a gasfitter I met. I was not one of three men in a trap. Willis never said to the police-constable, "I am looking for my governor in a pony cart". I was not in Mrs. Weekes' or Miss Silvester's shops; I only went into Weekes' and Woolley's. Mrs. Weekes is committing perjury.

Re-examined. When I tendered the two half-crowns to Weekes and Woolley I thought they were good—I could not tell now that they are bad. They are about the first bad ones I have seen. I absolutely deny going into Mrs. Weekes' shop. As soon as I heard the two were bad I at once gave good money. I have never been convicted of any crime. I did not refuse to tell the police where I worked. I am well known all over London. I produce written characters my wife has received from customers in Spitalfields Market in consequence of this case. I have had a child born who is not yet christened. I was hiring the wagonette from Clark to go on the Sunday for a drive, and my step-brother bad a pony which he was going to lend me, so that I was only to pay 3s. 6d. for Clark's trap. I have been hawking mantles and burners in London for five years, and before that I was seven or eight years travelling about the country. I am a good mechanic in gasfitting and do small gasfitting jobs for butchers and fishmongers. When I was being identified the inspector told all the men to hold up their hands. (To the Judge), I never entered a trap on the day the half-crowns were passed. Willis and I were walking all the time except when we had the 'bus. I did not see any trap near Pierce's shop; there was; a cart standing outside. Sergeant King is the officer to whom I gave Clark's receipt and who bullied me in the police court.

Sergeant Dessent was directed to make inquiries with regard to Smith's written characters and the statements made and report to the Court by Monday morning.

(Monday, June 28.)

JOHN SMITH (prisoner, on oath) recalled. Willis's hands were perfectly clean. I did not state before the magistrate where I got the half-crowns from, because I had not time—the only question put to me was had I anything to say—I cannot say what I was asked. It is the first time I was ever before a magistrate. I asked the magistrate to look at the characters I gave in. I did not go into the shops in Boville Street—I was not in a trap with Willis and another man.

JAMES WILLIS (prisoner, on oath). I have been working for my step-brother (Smith), hawking mantles and burners for about six or seven months. Ten or 12 years ago I worked for Mr. George Conquest of the Surrey Theatre. Before going with Smith I was out with a pony. and barrow buying and selling mantles for myself; I had my own billheads printed with my address, "8, Margarets Place. "I have done that ever since I had fits, which is nine years ago. I have been in the Army eight years 25 days—I left on April 3, 1889. In 1887 and 1888 I was through: India and Burmah—through the Burmah war. There is nothing against me except that I had seven days' cells for being drunk while in the Army. On May 20 I met Smith at 10.30 and told him I knew a place where we could get cheap mantles at from 12s. to 15s. a gross in Dulwich somewhere. We went to Billingsgate Market and then to Whitechapel, where we took a 'bus to Kent Road, had dinner, went in a tram to Rye Lane, Peckham, and walked towards Dulwich. We lost our way, and my brother asked a man, who looked like a gasfitter, where the place was. We then felt hungry, and he went into a shop to buy some biscuits, came out with them, and we agreed to go and have a cup of tea. He then went to a tobacco shop to buy cigarettes. We went about 300 yards when Pierce and Woolley came up and said, "You have given us two bad half crowns. "Smith said, "I am very sorry—I would not do such a thing; you had better look at my money and see if I have got any more." He then gave them two good half-crowns. There was a gentleman riding a bicycle and a boy on a bicycle following us watching. The policeman caught hold of my brother, who was ahead of me. I was not arrested then, but he said to me, "I want you to come to the station." I said, "All right, I will come to the station." Then the gentleman (who was a private detective) came up and took me into custody. We were taken into a paper shop and searched. There was found on me a half-crown, a 2s. piece," one shilling, a copy of the "Union Jack," which I was going to send to South Africa, and a purse. I never entered any shop at all either In Boville Road or Brockley Rise. When Mrs. Weekes picked me out she said in court that I wore a silk handkerchief—I did not. I only wore a collar and tie. The solicitor turned round and said there was a mistake, and we were put back to the Saturday to call a. gentleman from the tobacco shop to identify the coins. I was remanded for a week on £5 bail. I came back and the young man

never picked me out. There was only one lady picked me out. Florence Weekes never picked me out at all; she picked Smith out; and the inspector said there was another charge made against Smith. Kiss Silvester picked me out when I was in the station; then I had a fit—I do not remember any more. I was charged with being concerned. My hands were cleaner than they are now because I have done a bit of work this morning. Smith was going to have a christening party. I had a pony on hire from Ferguson at 5s. a week, and Smith was going to hire a trap for Sunday, and on May 20 he went into a shop by the brewery—I do not know the name—and he brought out a slip of paper about eight inches square with writing on it—"Received 2s. 6d. for the loan of a trap." I cannot read and write. Smith read it to me. He said, "I have got a receipt for 2s. 6d. for a trap to hold six. "He told me he had changed the sovereign. I told him I had 5s. 6d., but he said as I was. to lend him the pony on Sunday he would pay my expenses going to Dulwich. When Woolley and Weekes accosted Smith I was close by on the kerb. Smith gave them the two good half-crowns at once. They were both going away when Pierce went for a policeman. As we were going away Smith told me they had kept the two bad coins, and I said, "More fool you. Why don't you go to the station with them?" Neither I nor Smith were in a trap. Pierce's story is untrue—we had not turned the corner at all. When we were put up for identification every one was asked to show their hands. When I was in the cell at about 10.30 p.m. I had just come out of a fit; I heard King speaking to my brother and my brother gave him something. The next morning Smith told me he had given him the receipt. My purse was taken from, me—the 5s. 6d. found on me was given to my missus.

Cross-examined. I met Smith on May 20 at 10.30 a.m. We went to a corner shop down by the brewery. Smith told me he was going to hire a trap for Sunday. I stayed outside. He told me he had changed a sovereign; and got the change. I do not know where he got the sovereign from. I have had a pony and barrow from Ferguson for four months. He took it away when I was locked up because I owed him 5s. I did not use it to go to the place where they sold cheap mantles because the pony hadn't a shoe and the farrier was closed on a Thursday. On May 20 I was not in a pony barrow at all. I never said to the policeman, "I am looking for my governor who is in a pony cart"—nothing of the kind. I heard the officer say that—it is a lie. Florence Weekes' evidence is not true—I had never seen her. Miss Silvester's statement is a falsehood. I cannot explain why the four bad coins are from the same mould.

ALFRED CLARK , 13, Felgate Street, Bethnal Green. On May 20 I was living at 50, Pereira Street. I am a costermonger. I have three ponies; I used to let one out on hire now and again. On May 20 I had a pony and barrow which I used to let out on hire occasionally. I had no trap or wagonette; I had one light van and a pony-barrow. I do not know either of the prisoners; I have never seen them to my knowledge. On May 20 no one came to my place

to hire a pony and trap or changed a sovereign, nor did I give a receipt for half a crown, to my knowledge; I had a little shop besides and I might have changed a sovereign or half-sovereign at any time.

Cross-examined, No one else was in. the shop with me that I know of except my wife; but she was away at the time. I could not say whether I was in my shop at 10 a.m. on May 20. I have had to close the shop as my wife has gone away. I sold confectionery and wood. I used to fill up my time chopping firewood. My wife has been away six or seven weeks. I have two brothers, they have nothing to do with my shop. I do not think it is possible for some man to have been attending to my business on May 20. I am not quite sure, it might have been. The half-crown produced looks a good one to me. I could not say whether I might have given it to the prisoner. (To the Judge), I do not know Smith and have never seen him to my knowledge. I have no trap; I could not have taken a man's money to let a trap out. I might have lent a pony and barrow.

Detective-sergeant HENRY DISSENT, H. Division, I have made inquiries with regard to the letters with reference to Smith and a letter handed to me by counsel with reference to Willis. They are from salesmen in Spitalfields Market. I have seen them all and there are six of them up here to-day. They say they have known Smith from three to 10 years as a man doing jobs in fitting gas burners, etc., at their offices in Spitalfields Market and at their homes. They are surprised to find he is in trouble and they give him a very good character. I have also made inquiry with reference to Willis of the persons mentioned; two are publicans and two. are shopkeepers. They speak highly of Willis; he also has been working as a gasfitter and plumber, and they have known him for many years. He was in the 2nd Battalion of the West Surrey Regiment and received a medal for the Burmese War, which is pawned for 4s. 6d. I have also seen pawn tickets for gasfitting tools pawned this year. Smith has a wife and five children, one a baby which is not yet christened. I have found out nothing against their characters.

Verdict (both), Guilty; recommended to mercy on the ground of previous good character.

Sentence, each prisoner, Five months' hard labour.


(Friday, June 25.)

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-39
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty

Related Material

RILEY, Maggie (18. servant) pleaded guilty of unlawfully wounding Mary Chaney, with intent to do her grievous bodily harm. Sentence, Six months' imprisonment, second division.

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-40
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

LOWDEN, John Stewart (28, dealer) and HARMER, Henry Revell (39, dealer) . Conspiring and agreeing together to obtain by false pretences from divers of His Majesty's liege subjects as should deal with them or with the West End Stamp Company, Limited, or with Herbert Mack and Company or with Herbert Mack and Company, Limited, in buying stamps of divers kinds and values, purporting to be stamps of divers kinds and values issued for use for postage and revenue purposes in ( British North Borneo, divers large sums of money and valuable securities, and in pursuance thereof obtaining; by false pretences from William Ackland, Henry Nehemiah Burgess, Otto Ernest Theodore Kuhn, William Brown, and Cyril Woodhouse divers sums of money and valuable securities, and obtaining by false pretences from the said William Ackland, Henry Nehemiah Burgess, Otto Ernest Theodore Kuhn, William Brown, and Cyril Woodhouse divers sums of money and valuable securities, in each case with intent to defraud; conspiring and agreeing together to contravene the provisions of Section 7 of the Post Office (Protection) Act, 1884, and to make, knowingly utter, deal in, sell, and have in their possession without lawful excuse, certain fictitious stamps, to wit, certain stamps purporting to be stamps of divers kinds and values issued for postage and revenue purposes in British North Borneo.

Mr. Bodkin and Mr. Travers Humphreys prosecuted; Mr. Curtis Bennett defended J. S. Lowden; Mr. Frampton defended H. R. Harmer; Mr. Guy Lushington appeared on behalf of the British North Borneo Company.

HARRINGTON V. FORBES , secretary of the British North Borneo Company. I have been in the employ of the company over 28 years, 15 as secretary. The company was incorporated by Royal Charter for the purpose of acquiring sovereign and territorial rights over a portion of the island of Borneo. On May 12, 1888, the territories to be administered by the company became a British Protectorate under the name of the 'State of North Borneo. The company has from time to time issued stamps, which are valid for postage and revenue purposes. The first issue was 1883. In 1887 the company employed Messrs. Blades, East and Blades to prepare a new issue. This issue was at first confined to 1/2, 1, 2, 4, 8, and 10 cents., afterwards 3, 5, and 6 cents were added. Messrs. Blades engraved these stamps and provided the dies, printing, and paper, and supplied the stamps in sheets of 50 each, perforated. There was a certain amount of waste that was perhaps not perforated. The 1887 issue continued valid till March, 1909. In 1893 there was a new issue, prepared by Messrs. Waterlow. Both issues were available up to March, 1909. Some of the stamps issued by the company were sold by them to dealers direct. Some of them were cancelled with an obliterating stamp at the junction of four stamps, generally speaking. The cancelled stamps were sold below their face value; unused they were sold at their face value. We sold stamps in large quantities to a Mr. Parker. It sometimes happened that the makers sent us some spoilt or imperfect sheets. We sold some of these to Parker. The company had no contract with Parker; we entered into different arrangements with him from time to time.

We never constituted Parker our agent. I do not know either of the two defendants. We never had any arrangement with either of them with regard to the sale of stamps, or with the West End Stamp Company, Herbert Mack and Co., or Herbert Mack and Co., Limited. When this case arose I handed Inspector Stockley genuine specimens of the 1867 issue. I know Rene Carame of Paris only by reputation. We have never had any dealings with him.

Cross-examined by Mr. Curtis Bennett. I should say the 1887 to 1890 issue were used after 1894 for postage purposes. There was a considerable stock of that issue. Two orders only were given for fresh supplies of that issue to Messrs. Blades, East and Blades, one in July and the other in October, 1894. I should think the second order was undoubtedly given for the purpose of selling to Parker. Both were sold to him in October, 1894, so far. as my memory goes. I should be very doubtful whether the lot ordered in July was for that special purpose. I should say it was ordered in order to replenish our stock of that particular issue. They were eventually sold to Parker. They were printed from the original plates solely for the purpose of sale to dealers. They are precisely identical with what has been shipped to Borneo. Some stamps are printed and cancelled purely for sale to dealers, and the cancellation mark is as nearly as possible exactly similar to that which would be put upon the stamps if they had in fact come through the post. Messrs. Blades would return with the stamps ordered any spoilt or imperfect sheets. These also would be sold to dealers. Mr. Parker had some. I cannot say whether they bear some enhanced value in the eyes of a collector. I do not remember a single instance of their being purposely imperfect. Parker had not the sole right of giving the 1887-90 issue from the company. He would not have the right to make any contract with anybody to sell the whole of that issue to them. If he did so it would look as if he was an agent of the company. I have heard that there was some sort of contract between Parker and the West-End Stamp Company for the sale of North Borneo stamps. I am not prepared to say that when these stamps were delivered by Parker to the West-End Stamp Company they were always delivered and paid for at the offices of the British North Borneo Company. I believe on many occasions the completion of the arrangement has taken place from time to time in our offices, possibly in the presence of a clerk of the company. The cancellation was done at the offices of the company.

Cross-examined by Mr. Frampton. I think you can take it that when the company gave an order for a new issue, the previous issue was no longer sent out to Borneo. The 1894 issue made by Waterlow were shipped to Borneo in order that they might be put in circulation in January, 1894. I do not suppose we shipped any of the previous issues after January, 1894. I cannot say positively whether no further orders were given to Messrs. Blades to reprint the 1887-89 issue for the purposes of Borneo. If Borneo had wanted another supply of that issue naturally they would have been sent out. I have not looked to see if there is any correspondence from Borneo asking

for a further supply of that issue. As far as my recollection serves, I should say the only stamps we sent out would be Waterlow's 1894 issue. I do not say we ceased to print from the 1887-89 plates. The 1894 issue was a different stamp entirely. The North Borneo Company keep books containing records of their dealings in stamps. If we had given an order to Blades, the only record would be an order. We do not tell Waterlow's or Blades's what we are going to do with certain stamps. We gave an order in July, 1904, for ourselves. In October of that year they were sold with others to Parker. That was not a reprint for Parker. I cannot say as regards the order of July that it was not a re-issue for postal or revenue purposes of the company. I did not say at the police court that the reprints of the 1887 issue made in 1894 were probably made for Mr. Parker. When my evidence was read to me I took exception to the word "reprint. "I did not make use of it. I should call it "further supply." The further supply of the 1887 issue in 1894 were probably for Parker. They would be stamps of the original issue of 1887-89. We had no objection to supplying stamps for collector's purposes after the new issue came into existence—quite the contrary. The 1897 issue with Chinese characters on them, you can hardly call an issue. Perhaps you do not quite understand the printing of these stamps of 1894; they are what they call the centre plate and border plate. They are quite distinct; and in 1897 we made an alteration in the border plate only. I could not say the date when we surcharged all the stamps "British Protectorate." You would not call the 1897 stamps: an issue; it was an overprint. I believe we quite recently agreed to further supply Mr. Parker with 100, 000 sets of the 1897 issue. I am in no way an authority in stamp collecting. When I was asked to describe what a reprint was I described it as far as my knowledge went. I did not describe it as a further supply. All stamps issued prior to 1894 were demonetised officially on March 1. Once a stamp has been put out of circulation it is no longer available for postal purposes. If you have a fresh supply after that those may be called reprints. That is my idea.

WILLIAM ACKLAND , London and Brighton Stamp Company, Hove. I have known Lowden as managing director of the West End Stamp Company since April last year and Harmer since June last. I have had transactions with that company in buying and selling stamps. They were generally done by post. Exhibit 46 is an invoice of stamps which I bought from that company on April 13, 1908. That includes 1, 500 sets of four varieties of the 1887 issue of Borneo. The price of the 1, 500 sets was five guineas. On the same invoice are 400 sets of nine varieties, 1887 issue, £6 13s. 4d. I paid that invoice by cheque. On April 27 I received an invoice for 5, 000 sets of four varieties Borneo 1887, £12 10s. I paid for those. In May I also bought from them 1, 750 sets, four varieties Borneo 1887, price five guineas, and 430 sets of nine varieties, same issue, £5 7s. 6d. That invoice was paid by exchanges. In September I received another invoice, which included 1, 000 sets, four varieties of the 1887 issue, 400 sets, nine varieties, price £5. In October there was an

invoice for 8, 000 sets, four varieties 1887 issue, price £8, and 2, 000 sets of nine varieties, price £33 6s. 8d. There was an error in the pricing of these. Lowden called at my address with the October transaction stamps. He left them with me. I think most of them are in stock still—the forged ones. I sold some. of them to a Mr. Brown, of Salisbury, about August last. I received a communication from Mr. Brown with regard to those stamps, and in consequence I came to London and saw Lowden about October 2 or 3 I told him I had heard from a correspondent who thought the 1887 issues were not genuine. Lowden said, "Oh, they are all right, I got them from the Borneo Company with the other sorts of Borneo's except a few I bought here and there to complete broken sets." He also said some he had received from the Borneo Company were without perforations, so he thought they might be reprints or printer's waste. They were not sold to me as reprints but as genuine original stamps. I said, "If those stamps are reprints I cannot send them out to my customers as genuine." He said, "You can send them out all right." "Send them out without comment, "I think were the words he used. I might say at the same time I told him I had heard from a correspondent that the stamps had been submitted to a firm in London who pronounced them genuine. I told him that because I was surprised to hear from Mr. Brown, that there was any doubt about these stamps. I have had sixteen years' experience as a stamp dealer. There is a great difference between the prices of reprints and originals. The former usually cost a fraction of the value of the latter. I could not tell you what would be the price of reprints of the 1887 issue. I never heard of any being. on the market. I do not deal in reprints. Until the interview I had with Lowden in October I never heard about the stamps I bought from them being printer's waste. They were sold to me amongst hundreds of other stamps without any special designation or explanation. I think all the others were perfectly genuine. On September 24 invoice they describe "two sets of errors, Labuan, 8s." The North Borneo's have no description such as "waste," "reprints" "errors," or anything of that sort. I therefore understood they were perfectly genuine. Exhibit 40 are the stamps I handed to Inspector Stockley. They came from the West End Stamp Company.

Cross-examined by Mr. Curtis Bennett, The firm in London to whom my correspondent sent some stamps stated that in their opinion they were genuine. That is Stanley Gibbons, a firm of repute. Errors and reprints are quite different things. No doubt the particular errors I bought from the West End Stamp Company are described as errors in Stanley Gibbons' catalogue. The price I was paying for these prints was between 25s. and 33s. 4d. per 100 sets of nine. On one occasion I bought 8, 000 sets of four for £24; that is less than a penny a set. That is not the price of reprints as far as I know. I would not give anything for reprints myself. I do not think there is a large market for reprints. Lowden told me in October that some of the stamps might be reprints or printer's waste. I understand he was referring to the unperforated ones. It is untrue

that Lowden told me when I first bought from him that he was going to sell me stamps which were reprints. It must be untrue, because I never buy reprints. During the last 12 months I suppose I have bought about £1, 200 worth of stamps from the West End Stamp Company. Of that amount about £100 worth are alleged forgeries.

Cross-examined by Mr. Frampton. I believe there are a large number of works upon reprints. I know something about reprints of some stamps. There may be instances of them being of value, but in most cases they are of very little value. I believe Stanley Gibbons are about the best known authority on stamps. I have never read their book on reprints. I have never heard of "Annie Hills on Reprint. "I paid under a 1d. a set for the 8, 000 sets of four. I think retailers try and get 2d. or 3d. a set for them. I have not heard that Mr. Brown carries on business as Bright and Sons. I believe Bright and Sons are members of the Stamp Trade Protection Association. I suppose they are interested in this prosecution, but I am not quite certain who is interested in it.

WILLIAM BROWN (1, St. Thomas Square, Salisbury). I have been in business 25 years. I have done business with the West End Stamp Company I know, Harmer has been connected with that firm. I do not know Lowden personally. Exhibit 66 represents a transaction between myself and the West End Stamp Company in the 1886 issue of Borneo stamps. Exhibit 67 is a letter signed by Harmer and relates to the stamps referred to in Exhibit 66. These are low values of the 1887 issue, a thought the invoice calls them 1886. I sent out some of those stamps in the ordinary course of business to customers, amongst others to a Mr. Renault, of Brussels. He returned them. I wrote about this to the West End Stamp Company. They replied, "In reply to your letter of October 17, we are perfectly satisfied as to the genuineness of the stamps, but as you raise a doubt as to the matter we will take them back and credit you with the amount. Probably you are not aware there were several reprints of this issue." I wrote Harmer personally about these stamps afterwards. I had some dealings with last witness. About July or August last I bought from him 1887 issue North Borneo stamps. I returned the whole of them. I draw a distinction between genuine stamps and reprints. I was never told by anyone on behalf of the West End Stamp Company that I was buying reprints. I did not know they were reprints.

Cross-examined by Mr. Curtis Bennett. He pointed out in his letter that there were several reprints of that issue, speaking of reprints as distinct from genuine stamps. When I buy cancelled stamps I do not think I am buying stamps which have actually been through the post. I do not think they have been specially printed for collectors. The stamps were cancelled exactly as if they had a postmark on them. They are generally specially printed for collectors. If printed from the original plates I would call them genuine. Reprints are printed from the original plates. It is the custom of the trade if any fault is found with stamps that have been

sold for the money to be returned. No money passed in my case. I got credit for it. I sell packets of 1, 000 different stamps. The price varies to dealers and collectors. The latter pay 10s. 6d. for them. They are described as genuine. I do not know if I could afford to put in that packet a 50 cents brown Panama stamp of the 1888-91 issue, which is priced at 2s. in a book sold by me; it depends entirely what it cost me. I should not put in it knowingly. I do not make up the packets myself.

Re-examined. I do not deal in reprints.

OTTO E. T. KUHN . I am 15 years of age and a scholar at Westminster School. About two years ago I saw in "Boys' Life" an advertisement of Mack and Co., stamp dealers. I got into communication with them, and bought sixpenny packets of stamps nearly every month. Some contained North Borneo stamps. I handed Inspector Stockley one of the packets. I also got approval sheets from them similar to Exhibit 14. Sometimes there were North Borneo stamps on them.

Cross-examined by Mr. Curtis Bennett. Last year I was taking in "Mack's Stamp Review." It contained articles attacking and exposing persons for dealing in forged stamps. I saw that two of the persons attacked were said to be members of the Stamp Trade Protection Association and that their names had been given to the directors of that association for the purpose of inquiry. The articles pointed out what the stamps were and what the forgeries were. The sixpenny packets contained about 100 stamps. I cannot remember if they contained only three Borneo stamps.

Cross-examined by Mr. Frampton. I have taken an interest in stamps for some little time. I have read no other publication issued for collectors except "Mack's Stamp Review. "I might not know if a stamp I got was printed some time after the original issue. I have not complained in this case. I have not suggested that I have been defrauded, or that people have made untrue representations. It would surprise me to know that somebody had suggested that I had.

CYRIL WOODHOUSE , Lansdowne Road, Hackney. I am a stamp collector, and in my spare time I sell and exchange stamps. I have dealt with Mack and Co. for about 18 months. I have seen Lowden at 20, Villiers Street, more than once. I have bought from him North Borneo stamps in packets and small lots. Exhibit 65 contains a number of stamps which I handed to one of the police officers in this case. These 12 sheets and loose stamps were sent to me by post by Herbert Mack and Co. I bought them, believing them to be genuine.

Cross-examined by Mr. Frampton. I cannot say the date of my first transaction in Borneo stamps. I never dealt specially in them. I have studied stamp collecting. I know there are reprints of old issues, that they are valuable at times and difficult to get. I would have no objection to purchasing a stamp which had been produced from a plate after it had been issued to the public, at a very reduced price of course. I suppose I paid the usual wholesale prices. If I got a set of four North Borneo for a penny it would be cheap, I suppose,

if I bought them as stamps. If they came on a sheet with nothing said beyond the price I should think I had got a bargain. I used to make bargains even when dealing with wholesale dealers. I should sell them at the same price as marked on the sheets. The sheets were priced at 10s. each; I paid 1s. I took them off and put them in books. I did not trouble whether they were reprints or reissues.

HENRY BURGESS , managing clerk to Bright and Sons, 164, Strand, My principals instructed me to write to H. Mack, 20, Villiers Street, in January last. I wrote in the name of W. Plummer from my private address. My wife wrote the letter at my dictation. In reply I received a book of North Borneo stamps. I took from the book a set at the price of 1s. 3d. and returned the book with the 1s. 3d. After that I got another book on approval (Exhibit 43). It has on the front cover inside, "All stamps guaranteed genuine." The price was £9 9s. 6d. I offered them £3, which they accepted. I did not believe they were genuine Borneo stamps. I am not an expert. I was simply acting on instructions.

Cross-examined by Mr. Curtis Bennett. I do not express any opinion even now as to whether these stamps are genuine or otherwise. I handed the book to my employers. The first book I handed to them and the stamps were put in stock. So far as I know they may be sold. The second book I only just looked at.

Cross-examined by Mr. Frampton. I have been in the stamp trade six or seven years. Possibly during that time hundreds of thousands of stamps have passed through my hands. Stamps of the same issue may differ in colour, not in size. Various perforations exist in most stamps. Bright and Sons issue a catalogue. I do not remember their prices for North Borneo off hand. I should think their price for 1890 Borneo £ cent or 1 cent, would be 1d. or 2d., the 2 cents 2d. or 3d., the 3 cents about 3d.

Re-examined. We allow discounts off the catalogue prices according to quantity purchased; 50 per cent, is the usual discount with some firms. Very often the original price is put high in order to allow that discount. The nominal price in the catalogue does not necessarily mean the price we would get.

WILLIAM A. STEWART , clerk in the office of the Registrar of Joint Stock Companies. I produce the file of the West End Stamp Company. It was registered January 22, 1906. John Stewart Lowden, 15, Curzon Road, Weybridge, is the first subscriber; 20, Villiers Street, Strand, is the registered office. According to the return filed in May, 1908, Lowden held 510 £1 shares; Henry Revell Harmer, Preston Road, Southend, 2, 998 shares. The directors are stated to be J. S. Lowden, Mary Ethel Lowden, and Harmer in 1906, and in 1907 there were only two, Lowden and Harmer. On June 21. 1906, there is a resolution on the file that Harmer and Lowden shall be the joint managing directors of the company. There is no return after May 4, 1908. There is no notice of either of them having resigned. I have here also the file of Mack and Co., Limited, registered May 20, 1905; capital £100 in £1 shares. Neither Lowden

or Harmer are signatories. No return of shareholders has ever been filed. The directors are stated to be Alfred Edward Boyce, 16, Alexandra Road, Twickenham, and Augusta Pile, Arundel Terrace, Southend-on-Sea.

Cross-examined by Mr. Frampton. Harmer is not a signatory of the original articles of the West End Stamp Company. There is an. Agreement by which Harmer sold his business to the company, dated May 2, 1906. Harmer took shares in the purchasing company. If we are not notified of a change in the directorate it is a breach of the law.

JOSIAH D. WATTS , Notary Public, 5, Nicholas Lane, E. C. Exhibit 37 is a statutory declaration made before me on December 31, 1908, by J. S. Lowden, 20, Villiers Street, Strand As I said at the police court, I should not like to be sure I recognise Lowden, but his face seems familiar. (Statutory declaration read.)

JOHN WALLIS , 59, Finsbury Pavement. I have done business with the West End Stamp Company for some years. I sold them genuine North Borneo stamps in 1907; I think they were the 1887 issue. On that occasion I dealt with Harmer. The price was £3 11s. and something for 150 sets. I saw him several times after that. About nine or ten months after that transaction he proposed to return some of the stamps I had sold. He said he did not require them. They had not been paid for. I agreed to take back the 150 sets on his giving me 26 extra sets. Part of these are Exhibit 41, which I handed to Inspector Stockley.

Cross-examined by Mr. Curtis Bennett. I have not done business in North Borneo stamps with Lowden.

Cross-examined by Mr. Frampton. I have done considerable business with Harmer. I have never had any reason to complain. He had a very good business and occupied a good position in the trade. So far as I know the stamps I sold to the West End Stamp Company were not returned to me; I believe they sold them. It was a good while afterwards that they told me they had no need for them. I believe what I got Back were forgeries. I am certain they are not the same stamps. I got mine from a gentleman on the Stock Exchange, who had them some years. I do not know a good deal about stamps—just a little. Compared with the trade in genuine stamps I should not say there is not quite a large market for reprints. A reprint is supposed to come from the original plate. They form the best substitute you can get of the original issue. They more often than not vary in colour from the original. In most cases they vary in paper. The perforation is sometimes different. I do not know about the size. I know that many States and companies who have printed their own stamps have afterwards sold the plates to dealers, who have reprinted stamps from the plates and put them on the market. Those are recognised as reprints—that is all. Apart from getting these differences in reprints, there are differences in the originals themselves in colour. I have not noticed differences in size. If I were purchasing as a dealer North Borneo stamps at something, under a 1d. a set of four I should think it a very low

price. If I knew the stamps were going in large quantities at that price I should suppose there was something up, knowing the stamps to be very scarce. I should not think they were the original issue. I should think £24 for 8, 000 sets was nearer the reprint price than the genuine. For a set of nine I ask 1s. 6d. retail. I have never handled the small sets. I should say reprints were of undoubted philatelic value when the stamps are genuine and difficult to get. At the time these stamps were dealt in I considered them scarce.

Re-examined. I have never bought as many as 8, 000 sets at a time of North Borneo stamps. If I had done so I should expect to get them very much cheaper than if I were buying a few sets; 1s. 6d. a set is my price for my window and catalogue, to the trade it would be 1s. If I sold 5, 000 sets I should take a profit on what I gave for them. The price would vary enormously between one set and 8, 000 sets. This particular set is scarce and very difficult to get in quantities. I know Parker. He has none of these stamps now. The only ones I bought were from that gentleman on the Stock Exchange. I tried to get them elsewhere. I did not apply to the West End Stamp Company for them. It would be no good when they were applying to me for them. I did not know they had any in 1908—just a few hundred I thought they had. I did not ask how many they had got.

(Saturday, June 26.)

HENRY GRIEVE PARKER , 35, Linthorpe Road, Stamford Hill. I have known Harmer five or six years and Lowden about three years. I was introduced to Lowden by Harmer at Villiers Street, I believe. I have had dealings with the West End Stamp Company in connection with which I have seen both defendants at different times. I have bought considerable quantities of British North Borneo stamps from the British North Borneo Company. I bought some of the 1887-89 issue of all the values from 1/2 cent upwards. I bought them in sheets of 50. both perforated and unperforated, cancelled and not cancelled. No doubt I bought some in 1887. They were valuable unused. The last time I bought any of that issue would be in 1894 or 1895. I was never the agent of the company. I was an independent buyer of stamps from them. I had no other relations with them. I had an agreement with the West End Stamp Company, or two agreements, for the sale to them of some of the stamps which I bought from the North Borneo Company. Exhibit 59 is the first agreement. That is signed by Lowden and Harmer and witnessed by E. Neumann (agreement read). Exhibit 60 is a supplementary agreement dated June 4, 1908. Under this agreement there was a question of interest to be paid by them on some unpaid sum of money. I began at once to make monthly deliveries of the stamps which I bought from the North Borneo Company. On December 5 I got a deposit of £800 and then practically once a month up to January, 1908, 1 got £200. The next payments were in June, September. October, November, 1908, then January and April, 1909, £200

on each occasion. There was no interest due until six months afterwards. The January parcel was not taken up, and according to the agreement that carried 5 per cent interest. For the February parcel I have been paid £200. The March, April, May, and June parcels carry 5 per cent, interest. Since the date of that agreement I have not sold these stamps to others than the West End Stamp Company. I had a monopoly of the 1887 issues for a short time. I held the entire stock. The cancelled stamps which I sold to the West End Stamp Company were sold at considerably under their face value.

Cross-examined by Mr. Curtis Bennett. I was not an agent at all of the North Borneo Company. I had a monopoly of the 1887 issue for certain periods. At the time I entered into the agreement with the West End Stamp Company I did not think I had a monopoly of the 1887 issue. I think it had expired years ago. The stock of the 1887 issue I sold years and years ago, with the exception of some unperforated stamps. I agreed with Lowden and Harmer not to sell any of the said cancelled stamps or any variety, or re-issue to any person, company, or firm. As to the word "re-issue" entitling me to a monopoly of any re-issue the company might make, I say the company can make as many re-issues as they like. In putting in the agreement that any of the said cancelled stamps or variety or re-issue would not be sold to anybody else by me, it was a trade risk I was willing to take. I was willing to take the risk that the company did not make re-issues of any of their stamps. I did not think the company would print any more. If the company did make a re-issue the West End Stamp Company had the option, if they liked, of taking legal proceedings against me. That is a trade risk I took. At that time I did not know anybody else was dealing with the North Borneo Company in this issue. I bought them from the company to do just whatever I liked with; I could burn them if I liked, but I bought them with the intention of selling to collectors and dealers. I do not know that the North Borneo Company was specially printing stamps to my order in July and October, 1894. I have not heard Mr. Forbes's evidence. I have heard something about it. I daresay I bought a quantity from the company in October, 1894. I have no books to show this; it is a long time ago. I have not looked to see. I may have sold to persons other than the West End Stamp Company, but not since the agreement was signed. Amongst the stamps I sold to the defendants were all the unperforated stamps of the 1887 issue. Occasionally for convenience I delivered these stamps at the North (Borneo Company's office, and the money was paid over there. The fact that I had an agreement with the defendants was known to one, at any rate, of the clerks of the North Borneo Company. I said at the police court I was under the impression that the higher values were genuine, that the higher values had passed through my hands and the lower values might have done. That is what I say now.

Cross-examined by Mr. Frampton. I could not consider that by the agreement I contract with the defendants to supply them with

any re-issue by the North Borneo Company. I agree it is a contract to supply defendants with any re-issues that I get of that issue. I undertake not to supply any other person at all with those particular stamps subject to the payments being kept up, of course. I did not assert that I had a monopoly, although I had for the time being. The object of the clause was that if the company did at any time re-issue any of these stamps the West End Stamp Company were able to bring an action against me for damages. I do not know that North Borneo stamps were re-issued to me. There might have been a re-issue without my knowledge, and I might have bought the stamps afterwards. I said at the police-court, "There were some stamps specially printed to my order a few months ago. They wore the current issue, 1897." That is true. Why I told you just now so positively that North Borneo's had not been issued was because I was under that impression, and so I am now, but you are talking of the 1887 issue. I do not know if 1887 North Borneo stamps were ever re-issued to me. The last that were issued were the current issue. The stamps that were reprinted for me were the current issue, with the exception of being surcharged" British Protectorate." The stamps I wanted were not surcharged. I asked the company whether they could oblige me by giving me some. If I had wanted the word" Labuan" printed upon them they would not do it. Labuan is out of the jurisdiction of the North Borneo Company. Several years ago I got stamps from the North Borneo Company with the word "Labuan" stamped upon them. That was not done to my order. I did not have the word left out to my order. "Labuan" is on the plate, and that plate has been destroyed a long time ago I believe. It is a separate island. The North Borneo Company do not issue stamps for it now (plate with "Labuan" on produced). I understood you were talking about the 1 to 24 cent, stamps printed by Waterlows. It is a pity I did not see the Exhibit then, as I should not have been under the impression I was. Those stamps were printed and surcharged afterwards. That is the 1895 issue. The 1 to 24 cents, are Waterlows; the others are Blades. None of the stamps were stamped "Labuan" to my order. The word was not left off to my order at any time. The high value "Labuan" stamps, which I presume you are talking about at the present time, were in the office, and I bought up the remaining stock. No high value stamps of Labuan have ever been printed for me. I have only given one order for stamps to be reprinted; that was last year, but I have had contracts with the company to supply me with stamps. I daresay I have had contracts with people and have charged them for the printing of the stamps. I make out my invoices just as I like. I can sell stamps by the square foot, yard, weight, or anyhow. I had a contract with Mr. Penny and charged him for printing and cancelling. I do not think they were printed and cancelled to my order. In that particular instance I might have paid so much a thousand for the stamps, and so much per dollar, so much for printing, and so much for cancelling. The company themselves did not get any of the cancelling money; it

was done by private arrangement between the company's clerks and myself for them to do it in their spare time. They were cancelled to my order. Penny paid me for the printing. He is not the only person to whom I made out invoices in that way. I have dealt in other stamps besides North Borneo. I have a fair knowledge of certain kinds of foreign stamps I have dealt in. It has been known that authorities in native States and South American States after printing stamps frequently dispose of their plates to dealers, such as Salvador and Nicaragua. Berged or fused to be a little native State before the German Empire was established. I do not know about books being specially printed dealing with the numerous cases where plates have been sold to dealers. "Stanley Gibbons on Reprints" has no interest to me; it might exist. It is the fact that in addition to the regular stamps printed by Blades I got printers waste and all spoilt copies. I have noticed in very many foreign stamps the colours differ. I will not go so far as to say there are differences in size. I have not taken the trouble to compare. You can only tell some reprints by the difference in perforation, but some reprints that were made by the original printers for stamp dealers have the same perforation as the original one. There have been different shades of colour in the North Borneo stamps. I have noticed them myself.

Re-examined. In 1894 the West End Stamp Company were not established. I did not buy from the North. Borneo Company in October, 1894, for the purpose of selling to Harmer or Lowden. The stock I then bought were all disposed of fully ten years ago, with the exception of some imperforated ones which the West End Stamp Company were to take under their agreement. I had some unperforated stamps of the 1887 issue at the time of the agreement. I had sold small quantities to various people before that date. The last I bought from the North Borneo Company was about 1894. I do not think the company have issued a single stamp of that issue since 1894. If they had done so I think it would have come to my knowledge. I did not think for a single moment they would, and I do not think so now. In September, 1907, I held of all denominations perhaps 100, 000 or 150, 000, not in sets—odd values to a certain extent—£ cent to 10 dollars, of the 1887 issue, both perforated and imperforated. By the agreement I entered into some were Borneo and some Labuan. I sold to the West End Stamp Company the whole stock of those issues that I possessed (Exhibit 43 handed to witness). I cannot recognise whether these stamps have ever passed through my hands. It is impossible. If they are all genuine they have passed through my hands. I have not examined them critically. If they have not been printed by the North Borneo Company they have not passed through my hands. I have never bought stamps from Mr. Carame, of Paris. I never heard his name mentioned till the commencement of this year, or the end of last year. Every single stamp I sold to the West End Stamp Company came from the North Borneo Company. The stamps I sold to Mr. Penny were printed by the North Borneo Company. I have never

heard of the Transvaal selling their plates. I never heard of the British North Borneo Company selling their plates; I wish I had the opportunity of buying them.

Further cross-examined by Mr. Frampton. I do not know what I should have done if I could have bought the North Borneo Company's plates. In addition to the 1887 unperforated stamps I have supplied defendants with stamps of all issues from 1887 onwards.

Inspector JAMES STOCKLBY, Scotland Yard. On April 13 I went to 11, Preston Road, Westcliff-on-Sea, where Harmer lives. I got a warrant for his arrest on April 3. The warrant charged the two defendants with conspiracy. I saw Harmer there, told him I had a warrant for his arrest and read the warrant to him. I told him it had been granted at the request of the Director of Public Prosecutions. Harmer asked me who the persons were that were complaining of being defrauded. I said Mr. Brown, of Salisbury, was one of the parties mentioned in the information upon which the warrant had been granted. He said, "Yes, I have done some business with him. I think you are wrong. There is an explanation to all this. I suppose you know I severed my connection with Mr. Lowden some time ago." He took me upstairs into the office. I found there stamps and correspondence. I took possession of them. Amongst others were some North Borneo stamps on the table. I brought him to Bow Street. The same evening I saw Lowden in Villiers Street. He already knew me. I told him I was going to arrest him upon a warrant granted at Bow Street, and went with him into his office, where I read it to him. I told him also that it had been granted at the request of the Director of Public Prosecutions and he asked who the persons were who were supposed to be defrauded. I said Mr. Ackland, of Brighton, was one of the persons mentioned in the Information. He said, "I know him; this is a very bad business." That was at the office of the West End Stamp Company and Mack and Co. I searched the office in his presence and took possession of a large quantity of stamps, books, and letters. In a cupboard I found a large quantity of British North Borneo stamps of the 1887-90 issue, £ to 10 cents. They were put apart. When I found them Lowden said, "These are the ones all the trouble is about." At Harmer's premises I did not find any of the 1887 issue. At Lowden's premises there were 92, 000 odd. They were put in different packets and marked different Exhibits. In this envelope the 4 cents are not the 1887 issue. The numbers of the different denominations were pretty evenly distributed except the 10 cents, of which I found only 2, 061. They were all sealed up in small envelopes. I opened them for inspection. I identify the various Exhibits. On April 14 I went again to Villiers Street. I found Miss Neumann there, who is a clerk employed by the company. She was dealing with the morning letters. Some of the letters were opened in my presence and found to contain approval sheets sent back by persons to whom they had been sent exactly similar to Exhibit 16. I asked Miss Neumann to let me view as she opened them. They were returned in the firm's printed envelopes. I also found two

albums containing stamps of all countries, including North Borneo 1887 issue. I also found the memorandum and articles of association of the West End Stamp Company, Limited, press copy, letter books, and several copies of "Mack's Stamp Review. "I also found books of the West End Stamp Company, Limited; others were subsequently handed to me by Mr. Lowden. When I was searching the office on the evening of Lowden's arrest I asked him where the books were. He said he had not got them, because he had sold the business to a Mr. Schneider. He said he had sold it for £10. I asked him who Schneider was, and where he lived. He said he did not know—somewhere in the Gray's Inn Road. I continued the search and found the books. He handed me the other books some days after he was charged and bailed out. I have been through the books. I find no entry of any sale to Schneider. While at Lowden's office I found some paid cheques on the London and South-Western Bank pasted to the counterfoils, ranging from 1897 to December, 1908. Some are signed by Harmer and some by Lowden, as directors of the West End Stamp Company. Some of those cheques are payable to Rene Carame. I also found a bill-book. In that book I found entries of bills payable. Rene Carame's name is not there. I found two bills which were pasted in the cheque-book. Exhibit 26 is a bill for 1, 000 francs paid April 8, 1908, accepted by Harmer as director, drawn by Carame. The other bill is of the same date, for 1, 000 francs, accepted by Harmer, and drawn by Carame. I found also a large number of cheques paid to Mr. Parker between May, 1907, and August, 1908. I also found a number of cheques between May and October, 1907, the counterfoils of which are marked "Expenses for Mr. Harmer in Paris." The last one is July, 1908. The seven stamps and photographic enlargements produced were handed to me by Mr. Calcas, of the French Police. Exhibit 34 are copies made from press copy letter books. The letters in Exhibit 34 purport to be translations into English of letters in Exhibit 23, pages 477, 480, 483, 516, and 544, written in German by Lowden to Carame. I know Lowden's signature. The statutory declaration, I believe, is signed by Lowden. I received from the secretary of the North Borneo Company specimens of their genuine stamps.

Cross-examined by Mr. Curtis Bennett. The stamps I found in the cupboard were not handed to me. I have not formed an idea of the number of stamps I found there; I seized a great quantity of various countries besides the Borneo. I found the books in a drawer in Miss Neumann's desk. I think it was at the court that Lowden said if I called I might have the other books. I have not heard that Monsieur Gay was the gentleman who introduced Carame to the defendants. In the bill-book I find in April, 1908, a bill for 1, 000 francs due April 18 entered as M. Gay. I find on the next bill the name of "Rene Carame, impressions de luxe" and his address in Paris. That bill seems to have been through several persons' hands, stamps of banks, etc.

Cross-examined by Mr. Prampton. I found no Borneo stamps of the 1887 issue at Harmer's.

Detective-sergeant SIDNEY WYBORN. I received from the witness Woodhouse a number of stamps which I handed to Inspector Stockley, which are Exhibit 65. Exhibit 41 are those I received from the witness Wallis.

(Monday, June 28.)

ALPHONSE CALCAS , of the Paris Police. On December 22 last I went to 110, Avenue D'Orleans, the premises occupied by Rene Carame. I saw him there. There were also some workmen and workgirls engaged in printing North Borneo stamps. The police seized a quantity of material there. We seized the stamp perforator produced and about 700, 000 or 800, 000 stamps in course of fabrication. They were all North Borneo stamps of different series; 1, 2, 8, and 10 cents all of the same issue. I gave Inspector Stockley a few of them. We also found a large amount of correspondence, some signed by Harmer and some "Mack and Company. "All those in French and German have been translated. In consequence of what Carame said to me I went to 28, Rue de Grevier, the address of Galen, a printer. There I found some large lithographic stones, on which were representations of stamps found at Carame's. (Stone produced.) Carame is being prosecuted in France. He has been examined by the Juged' Instruction many times.

JOSEPH CORAZZA , director of Gatti, Stevenson, and Slater, Limited. My company is the superior landlord of 20, Villiers Street. Before June, 1907, Lowden leased those premises; he surrendered the lease in that month.

Cross-examined. They have spent a considerable sum on the premises.

THOMAS MACDONALD , 6, Barnsbury Terrace, Barnsbury. I have been employed from time to time to design and engrave for Blades, East and Blades. I designed and engraved the whole of the North Borneo 1887 to 1889 issue. (Plates produced.) The stamps are produced by the lithographic process, otherwise they could not have had this forgery as it is now. I have examined a great number of stamps submitted to me in this case. This exhibit are genuine stamps printed from the original plates. No. 28 are all forgeries. I am able to point out clear differences and discrepancies between the two. In the forgeries different methods of treatment appear. I should say they were of different workmanship. One man is more clever than the other. The principal has done one part and he has had assistants to do other parts. He had assistants to do those corners, and some assistants to do the lettering, and when the card is finished he places those things in position so that they can be all photographed together. Those things would be quite simple, but they have been badly done. I have examined the specimens from Mr. Ackland. The series 1/2 to 10 cents of 1887 issue are all forgeries, and from the same original. The envelope also contains photographic enlargements with stamps attached, which were made for the purposes of this case. The same remarks apply to Exhibits 41 and 42. I do not think Exhibit 43 are

genuine stamps produced from our plates, but they are not the same as the others. There are some differences in the sizes. (The witness explained the process of producing the stamps, and declared various exhibits to be forgeries.)

Cross-examined by Mr. Frampton. I found differences in the size and colour in the 1/2 to 10 cents in Exhibit 43. I am not a printer. The paper may vary. Odd sheets may make a little difference, but, if they are all of the same make, very little. I did not specially examine the stamps taken from the stones at Messrs. Blades. I have had great quantities of them through my hands. If one of our plates were handed over to another printer or lithographer I do not think he would do it so negligently as to cause differences in the production of the impression; you might get it badly printed, but I do not think you would get a difference in size. (The witness explained the process of colouring.) If the North Borneo Company sold their waste it would not be genuine. It should be burnt.

WILLIAM CROMACK , lithographic manager to Messrs. Blades. The plates that were engraved for the 1887 issue were kept in a special safe with bank-note plates until they were applied for; perhaps they had to go to Mr. Macdonald for some alteration or sent direct to the North Borneo Company, according to instructions. We had the plates in the early part of the year when I first heard of this case. They were then given up. They were signed for by each person through whose hands they went. (The witness explained the process of printing and the differences between the forgeries and the genuine.)

HENRY WILLIAM TYLER . I am in charge of the paper department of Messrs. Blades. The paper used for printing the North Borneo stamps of the 1887-90 issue was called 24 mill 15 lb. cream wove medium. All the sheets were identical. The paper is counted over twice before it comes to my department, and is counted again when it goes to the printing department. After they are printed they go to be gummed and perforated. When completed they go to the North Borneo Company. They have to be accounted for right through.

ETHEL FRANCES PIX . I was lady clerk employed at 20, Villiers Street. I was engaged by both Mr. Lowden and Mr. Harmer for the West End Stamp Company. I started in September, 1907, and remained there until just before Christmas last. Both Harmer and Lowden managed the business. When I left I was really transferred to other offices down below, Herbert Mack and Co. Mr. Lowden chiefly looked after the business of Herbert Mack and Co. I think Mr. Harmer had left then. I used to make approval sheets and books and repair them. Mr. Lowden used to give me the stamps to stick on the approval sheets. They were then sent out to customers with the price of each stamp marked. They were then sent back by the customers and any blanks had to be paid for. The blanks would then be filled up with stamps from stock. Exhibit 14 is the sort of thing. I used to put the prices on. I had a sheet given me as a sample, usually by Mr. Lowden. I remember giving some sheets to Inspector Stockley in April. I have not the slightest idea where Lowden got the stamps to give to me. Mr. Harmer was absent sometimes. I do not remember about Mr. Lowden.

Cross-examined by Mr. Curtis Bennett. The West-End Stamp Company was a wholesale business. Herbert Mack and Co. was a retail business.

Cross-examined by Mr. Frampton. When I was transferred to Mack and Co. I think Harmer had left.

MARGARET SELBY . I was clerk at 20, Villiers Street, from early in 1907 onwards in the employment of H. Mack and Co. I had nothing to do with the West End Stamp Company, Limited. Both Mr. Harmer and Mr. Lowden gave me directions. I used to make up and sent out approval sheets. Exhibit 14 are the sort of things I used to send out. There was a book in which I used to enter the name of the person to whom each sheet was sent on approval. Each sheet had a number so as to enable me to identify the person. I do not put the stamps in the books (Exhibit 43); I simply send them out. I think Mr. Harmer came to the office regularly until about last September. After that he came occasionally.

ELLA NEUMANN . I was first employed as clerk at 20, Villiers Street, in May, 1906. Mr. Lowden. was carrying on the business of the West End Stamp Company. Mr. Harmer went there the same time as I did. H. Mack and Company, Limited, was not carrying on business in the same offices when we went there. Afterwards they used the same offices. I kept the books of the West End Stamp Company. In this ledger there is an account of Mr. Wm. Brown, of Salisbury. The goods sold to him are entered there. There is also an account of the London and (Brighton Stamp Company. There is no entry of any dealings with Mr. Carame, of Paris. I have heard the name of Carame from Harmer and Londen. I used to write letters from dictation in French and German. Mr. Lowden does not know either of those languages, Harmer knows German. I used to write to Mr. Carame. Mr. Harmer dictated them as long as he was there. After he left Mr. Lowden dictated them in English. I used to write them in French at first, then in German. I did the translation. I have seen the bundle of letters, Exhibit 31, and been through them. The typed ones are typed by me. Nos. 4, 20, 7, and 33 are Harmer's writing. The signature is typed. I do not think there ever was any handwriting on the typed letters. They are signed with a stamp. I used to type letters for H. Mack and Company, although employed by the West End Stamp Company. There are a number of entries in the ledger of travelling expenses, with initials against them, something "H. B. H." and something "J. S. L." It shows where they are travelling. Those are the travelling expenses for Mr. Lowden or Mr. harmer.

Cross-examined by Mr. Curtis Bennett. In the ledger there are a number of entries of stamps purchased without any names. That would include stamps which were purchased from other people than Carame. In the cash book there are entries of stamps bought which correspond with the amounts and dates of payment to Carame, and in some cases the name of Carame appears in brackets. I used to draw the cheques to Carame. There was no secrecy at all about

Carame in the office. All his letters were copied into the letter book. I kept the hill book.

Re-examined. The letters from Carame were kept. Every three months I cleared the looker out, so that in April, 1908, you would not find any letters from Carame earlier than January, 1906. They would be put in the store room. Separate letter books were kept for Mack and Co. There were two. I thought you had them. I do not think you will find any letters copied in any of the letter books to Carame. They may have got into them in mistake. I do not remember if I wrote any letters before February, 1909, to Carame for the West End Stamp Company. I might have done in February. This is one of them. I do not know if I did some for H. Mack and Co. at that time.

Detective-sergeant JOHN THOMAS CURRIE, New Scotland Yard. I am acquainted with French. I have had placed in my hands for translation and have translated a number of letters which are in Exhibit 31, which I found in Carame's office at Paris and which are in French. The correct translations are in Exhibit 75. I am also acquainted with German and have been through part of Exhibit 75, which are correct translations made by Detective Ward, who is now suffering from pneumonia. I have also had the letter book of the West End Stamp Company. Exhibit 34 are correct translations of the last five letters addressed to Carame; 35 consists of the original letters from Carame found at Lowden's premises; 36 is a correct translation of those. They are in German.

Inspector STOCKLEY recalled. I did not find any press copy letter book of Herbert Mack and Co. at 20, Villiers Street; none has ever been given to me. In the letter books of the West End Stamp. Company I found six letters to Carame other than those dated February and March, 1909. (Letters read).

Detective-sergeant CURRIE recalled. I have not translated the letter dated June 9, 1908. I have the original in French. (Letter read).

(Tuesday, June 29.)


JOHN STEWABT LOWDEN (prisoner, on oath). I have been engaged in the stamp trade eight or nine years. I first became associated with Harmer about the end of 1906. At that time I was carrying on the West End Stamp Company. That was an entirely retail business. After it was converted into a company it did only wholesale business. Herbert Mack and Co. was formed, I think, in 1907. That was for retail business. First of all, Herbert Mack and Co. carried on business at Cheapside. That was an experiment. Then it was transferred to 20, Villiers Street. I did not know Parker before I met Harmer. Harmer introduced me to Parker. He told me Parker was the man that had the entire monopoly of the Borneo stamps, and that if any-one

wanted to buy Borneo stamps they had to get them from him. I think this was the first week I was introduced to Harmer; that would be a month before Harmer joined me. I began doing business with Parker about June or July, 1906. We bought the entire remainder of the Labuan Crown issue for £2, 500. The money for the stamps was always paid to Parker in the offices of the North Borneo Company. After that we contracted with him to buy the entire remainder of the Borneo and Labuan stamps that had been cancelled to order for the purpose of sale to collectors, for the sum of £10, 500, of which something like £7, 000 has been paid to him. We had a distinct guarantee from him that no one else had ever bought these cancelled stamps of Borneo, that he was the sole buyer. Some few months ago Mr. Parker was unable to deliver stamps of the 1894 issue. He suggested he should have the 1887 issue reprinted to make up for the stamps he could not deliver. The difference between the 1897 and 1894 issues is that the 1897 has the words put in in Chinese characters. That contract is still running. I do not understand the French or German languages. Harmer understands a certain amount of German. Prior to Christmas of 1907 we had some transactions with a Mr. Dumonteuil, in France. About Christmas I was in Paris with Mr. Harmer. Monsieur Gay called upon us and brought with him Rene Carame. Carame spoke French only. Gay understood a little bit of German, so we managed to get along; it was rather difficult. Harmer translated it on to me. Carame said he had heard we had bought this large stock of Borneo stamps, and as he had the plates of the 1887 issue he suggested reprinting them for us and selling the lot to us with the plates at the completion of the printing. The sum was eventually agreed at £200 for 50, 000 sets complete and 50, 000 sets of four values. It was common knowledge that certain Governments sold plates after they had finished with them; in fact, I had the plates of one country myself, Venezuela. I have also the written authority allowing me to reprint those stamps. I have still got those plates. I did not get them from President Castro; it was the revolutionary Government. The revolutionary Government had a new stamp, and sold them to dealers straight away. Parker sold to us 100, 000 of the 1887 printers' waste; we were not able to get any of the proper ones. In printing from plates obtained from Governments it is practically impossible to get the right colour; you may get it in a few sheets correct. At the first interview with Carame it was settled we should buy subject to the proofs being correct; he subsequently sent the proofs along and we concluded the deal. We had to give Carame instructions as to colour, size, perforation, etc. If he had taken the 10c. blue and printed it in red it would have been no use to me. We have to have continual proofs until we find they are correct. Harmer severed his connection with me in October last. I was anxious to continue the retail business as I knew more about that. Harmer is entirely wholesale; he does not understand retail business. That was the reason we separated. The reason of the bills given to Carame appearing

in the name of Gay was this: Gay was a stamp dealer and bill discounter; the bills were given to him to discount, and as the bills were not made out to any special name we thought Mr. Gay would sign these bills. Miss Neumann would be given instructions to enter them up in the bill book. The bills themselves were kept. The price Mr. Ackland paid, 25s. to 33s. per 100 sets, was the price of reprints. The genuine stamps cannot be bought under 80s. per 100 sets. I had not the slightest idea we were selling forged stamps. The stamps printed and cancelled by the North Borneo Company I should call genuine. Every word in the statutory declaration is true. Carame never suggested that the stamps he was supplying us with were facsimiles.

Cross-examined. I did not carry on business as H. Mack and Co. before I met Harmer; it was started a year after Harmer met me. I do not think I ever signed letters; they were stamped generally. I do not produce the letter book of H. Mack and Co.; I have not been asked to do so. I have not been asked to look for the letters from Carame. I cannot tell you whether when I bought the right to reproduce Venezuela stamps I bought the right to reproduce stamps then current. I think you will find it in Gibbons' book. I did not know at the time that in November, 1907, the 1887 issue of "Borneo" were available for postage and revenue purposes. I thought they were demonetised immediately they were out of print. I bought some £400 worth of this issue from a man who had taken them to the North 'Borneo Company to buy back. They said, "No, you have got the stamps and we have got the money" They would not pay for them. I asked Parker about it; he always understood they were demonetised. I was naturally anxious that Carame should imitate the original stamps as near as possible. For that purpose we purchased the paper and sent it out to him. We were rather under the impression that Carame had bought the plates from a dealer, and we had the particular dealer in our mind. He has got hold of one or two things like that, and probably would not like his name mentioned. I did not deal with the matter of the perforation; that was done by Mr. Harmer. It never crossed our minds to go to Messrs. Blades to get them perforated. We should not expect to pay other people for doing it. Carame did not get it right, and we sent the perforator along and told him to put it right. We did not get Carame to perforate any of the stamps we got from Parker. It is customary to return their money if customers complain. Mr. Ackland told me he had had some of the Carame stamps returned as forgeries. He also said he had taken them to Gibbons, who said they were reprints. I told him I knew they were genuine reprints and I knew the man who had the plates. I did not tell him to send them out without comment. It is absolutely untrue. I cannot say if there is any reference in any letter to Carame having the original plates. The prices ought to have told the buyers that they were reprints. A collector. does not expect to get 4s. 4d. worth for 9d. and expect to get originals.

HENRY REVELL HARMER (prisoner, on oath). I have been in the stamp trade some 11 years. Before I joined Lowden I carried on business in partnership as Boulton and Co. in Queen Street, Cheapside. While I was with that firm they acquired the plate of the Venezuela stamps for £300. My interest in that firm was transferred to the West End Stamp Company. Since October last I have had no interest in the West End Stamp Company other than the shares that remained in my name. After that company was formed we started the firm of Mack and Co. for the purpose of dealing with retail business. I had no voice in the management of it. My business took me on the Continent about five months out of 12. Before I joined Lowden I had known Parker many years. I purchased North Borneo stamps from him. He always said he was the only person that was able to obtain the cancelled to order stamps of Borneo from the company. It was common knowledge in the trade. Parker came to Villiers Street to do business, and I introduced him to Lowden. I told Lowden then or previously that Parker was well known as the only person able to obtain those stamps. After that introduction we purchased from Parker the Labuan stamps for £2, 500. We entered into a contract with him to buy North Borneo stamps at the rate of £200 worth a month. In pursuance of that agreement, we received from him a quantity of unperforated stamps of the 1887 issue. They are known as printer's waste. Apart from those, we were never able to obtain from him any stamps of the 1887 issue. He sold the last lot of the 1887 issue, if I remember rightly, about 10 years ago to Caiman, a wholesale dealer in New York, and my recollection is that I bought the last lot from Caiman, amounting to 3, 000 or 4, 000 sets, in the first year or two that I joined Boulton. It was common knowledge in the trade that there had been various issues since then by the North Borneo Company. Parker supplied us with reprinted stamps of subsequent issues to 1887. When I was in Paris with Lowden towards the end of 1907 we had a call from M. Gay and this Rene Carame. I knew Gay before; he is a stamp dealer. I did not know Carame. I had a conversation with Gay, Gay translated it to Carame and back again. Carame said he was the printer of the 1904 issue of Haiti stamps, which had been sold by Mons. Dumonteuil. He also said he had printed some Somali Coast stamps. He produced what I should say were printer's proofs of other issues of Haiti, which made it look extremely probable that the man had got the entree to somebody who was able to get the Haiti plates, and we had no reason to doubt him. He also said, "I am able to get," or "I have," "the plates of the 1887 issue of Borneo." He asked a fairly long price for them, and ultimately we agreed the price of 5, 000 for., which was sub-ject to us sending the paper over. I think we were to have 100, 000 sets. The plates were to be handed to us when the last payment was made. I believed he had the plates of the 1887 issue at that time. Some difficulties were experienced with regard to colour and perforation. Correspondence passed about these matters, and I went over once or twice. The stamps Parker supplied ranged from 1/2 cent to

10 dollars, and included a 25 dollar fiscal stamp. The stamps Carame had were from 1/2 cent to 10 cent only. It is important that reprints should be as near the original as possible. In the eyes of the collector a reprint is a substitute for the original. There are many works known to collectors dealing with reprints only. I never represented that the stamps I was receiving from Carame were originals. I did not sell them at the price of originals. The price I sold to Mr. Brown at was exactly a penny a set. Bright and Sons were selling this set at 7 1/2 d., but they were originals. When Lowden and I parted he continued the contract with Parker. When I was arrested at Southend I had a quantity of North Borneo stamps of my own as well as others, over two millions. I had none of the Carame stamps, although Inspector Stockley swore I had. Nearly all of them were returned to me during the police court proceedings. All he took from me were genuine. Lowden and I parted on quite friendly terms. I have not taken part in the business since. I would not have entered into this contract with Carame if I had not believed he had the original plates. M. Gay is a respectable dealer. It was known that we had acquired a practical monopoly from Parker. We advertised it somewhat, having spent £10, 000 on them.

Cross-examined. When I left the company I sold £500 Debentures which stood in my wife's name to Mr. Lowden, and he was going to find me a customer for the others. The company was not in financial difficulties; it could pay its debts. I had no debts. The reason I did not settle Puttick and Simpson's account was that there was a dispute as to the actual amount due. I think the difference was £10 to £20. I continued to deal with Carame on my own account. He told me he could obtain a plate of a Transvaal stamp, and he was getting it from a Mr. Duveen who was, I think, last PostmasterGeneral to the Boer Republic. I did not deal with Carame in Borneo stamps. He was to submit me proofs of the Transvaal stamps and, subject to the price being agreed, I was going to buy them, but they were never submitted. I should have sold them as reprints. I should not sell a reprint as an original. Whether it would be a fraud to do so would depend on the price. I do not think I supplied anybody with 1887 issue after I left Lowden. I did not supply any to Muller and Co. Their postcard is before I left the company. They wrote to my private address, because they knew I saw them on behalf of the company. It is customary in Germany to write to the individual and not the firm. When I left the company, I did not take any of their stock with me. I bought from them some Borneo stamps, but none of the 1887 issue. Lowden preferred to keep them in his own hands. It did not occur to me when Carame said he had got, or could get, the Borneo plates that he might manufacture plates—quite the reverse. I knew that the Haiti stamps were at that time printed in Paris for the Haiti Government, and thought he had probably got the plates from the printer. As to inquiring where he got the Borneo plates from, I do not care to ask a man his private business. This was two months after our contract with Parker. It would be honest to mix reprints in packets and sell them if they were good value

for money. There would be no objection to the customer knowing they were reprints. I do not sell packets of stamps. I buy from sample and my customers buy from sample. There was no reason why all the world should not know they were reprints. I should not like them to think I was having them reprinted in large quantities. There is a huge difference between a reprint of 1894 and a genuine stamp reprinted a few years before that. You cannot make two printings identically the same. I was not trying to get them identically the same as the genuine original stamps. They should be as near as possible; not to pass for genuine originals. I have a dim recollection of selling Mr. Brown some stamps when I was at Salisbury. I sold them from the sample in my book. When he complained that he had heard that they were forgeries, and I replied that they were undoubtedly right, that they existed in a number of shades and large quantities must have been printed, I wanted him to understand they were from the original plates. It was not my business to tell him they were reprinted. I had left the West End Stamp Company, and I did not think it was right that I should tell him that Lowden had the plates or was likely to get them. If you like to put it, it was loyalty to a late partner. It was loyalty that made me suggest that he should have his money back; that he should apply to the West End Stamp Company. It was the proper thing to do. The printer's waste we got from Parker was never perforated. I think Carame suggested they should be perforated, as there was an excess of values that we did not want so many of unperforated. Presumably they were going to be sold as genuine, having come from Parker. I never sold the Carame stamps at 9d. a set; that was the Mack price. I only sell stamps wholesale. I sell them at 26s. a hundred sets about. Verdict, Not guilty.


(Saturday, June 26.)

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-41
VerdictsGuilty > pleaded part guilty; Not Guilty > no evidence
SentencesNo Punishment > sentence respited

Related Material

HITCHCOCK, Albert (23, coppersmith), and HITCHCOCK, Ada (27, his wife) ; in December, 1907, unlawfully by a certain secret disposition of the dead body of a child, then lately born, of the body of Ada Hitchcock, endeavouring to conceal the birth thereof; in April, 1909, unlawfully by a certain secret disposition of the dead body of a male child born of the body of Ada Hitchcock, endeavouring to conceal the birth thereof; Ada Hitchcock, having been delivered of certain male children, did by the secret disposition of the dead bodies endeavour to conceal the birth thereof; both on coroner's inquisition for the manslaughter of the male child of Albert Hitchcock.

Ada Hitchcock pleaded guilty to the concealment. No evidence being offered against the male prisoner, a formal verdict of Not guilty was returned.

Mr. Muir (prosecuting) stated that the male prisoner had been out of work for something like two years. Prisoners had been living together as man and wife prior to their marriage in 1908, and in 1905 twin children were born, which were no doubt a great burden to them. In 1908 prisoners were living in Keston Street, Deptford, and in April, 1908, the female prisoner was delivered of a male child, but concealed the fact from everybody, and it was not until the police entered the house on May 1, at the request of the landlady, that anything was known about the child having been, born. The body was then found in a cupboard in the bedroom wrapped in some stained linen. The opinion of the doctor was that the child had died from want of attention. The cord had been ruptured and did not appear to have been tied, but there was no sign of violence, and though the doctor was of opinion that the child had breathed he was not certain that it had had a separate existence. The female prisoner stated that the child was stillborn. On the same day there was discovered in a tin box the mummified body of another child, which had been dead some months, but so decomposed that it was impossible to tell its sex, much less the cause of death. With regard to that child, she stated that it was born in November, 1907, that she had lifted it in her arms, and that it had slipped through them on to the floor on its head, and thereby died within an hour. The crime of concealment was, of course, only serious because of the necessity of protecting infant life. In the later case, prisoners being married there was no motive for the concealment. The fact that the female prisoner made no preparation for the birth of that child and of her concealing the fact that she was pregnant seemed to indicate that it was never intended that the child should live.

The Recorder said prisoners should have gone to the workhouse, and expressed the opinion that this was a bad case.

Sentence postponed till next Sessions.


(Saturday, June 26.)

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-42
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceMiscellaneous > sureties

Related Material

MUSSETT, Frank James (64, painter) , who was convicted last Session (see p. 178) of attempting to carnally know Lily Webber, a girl under the age of 16, to wit, of the age of 14 years and 11 months, and indecently assaulting her, came up for judgment.

He was released on his own recognisances in £5 to come up for judgment if called upon.


(Monday, June 28.)

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-43
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

WINSBORROW, Edwin James ; making and concurring in making certain false entries in certain books and papers, the goods;

of the Mayor, Commonwealth, and Citizens of the City of London, his masters.

Mr. Muir and Mr. Bigham prosecuted; Mr. George Elliott, K. C., and Mr. Forrest Fulton defended.

JOHN HODDER , now foreman to Mowlem and Co. From September, 1901, to the end of 1907 I was foreman to C. W. Killingback and Co., contractors. In September, 1904, they secured the contract with the Corporation for repairing and maintaining the City sewers; I was their foreman, and in daily supervision of the work. For the Corporation the work was under the supervision of the prisoner, inspector of sewers, and Mr. Blyth, assistant inspector. I used to send in daily lists to the engineer's office, giving particulars of places where work was being done, distinguishing between "works in hand" and "works completed." Blyth went round to the various jobs, saw what workmen were engaged, noted their names and the number of hours worked; Blyth's notes were for the purpose of enabling prisoner to check my daily lists. Prisoner then entered in. his own green book the amount of time worked and materials used in the different jobs, and finally issue vouchers upon which the contractors were paid. Sewering work at Finch Lane was commenced on January 2, 1905, and completed on January 7. When I was checking with prisoner the work done in the week ending January 13, he said to me, "What about the Finch Lane job?" I told him it was already finished; he said the work had been done for £25, which was very cheap and below the estimate, and in consequence the job would have to be fattened; he commenced figuring on a sheet of paper, bringing the work up to about £31; he told me more time and more material must be booked, and that he had seen my employer, Mr. Charles Killingback, about the job. He then entered in his book further time and materials, and I made a copy; these entries are altogether fictitious. Charles Killingback is now dead. On Saturday, March 4, we had sewering work in hand at Cross Lane, St. Dunstan's Hill; it was finished that afternoon. When we came to checking this work, prisoner said that more time had to be booked on to the job, as it had been done very cheaply again; I told him that I did not like booking time like this; he said Mr. Killingback knew all about it. I then saw Mr. Killingback, and after a conversation with him I altered my voucher to correspond with the fictitious entries made by prisoner in his book. Similar fraudulent entries were made as to work at St. Martin's-le-Grand. With regard to this job, I produce the copy I took of the false entries made by prisoner. On it I have written the word "dead'un"; I made that note for my future reference, in case it was required, meaning to say that it was a fictitious job. In October, 1907, a system of trapping street gullies was inaugurated, which necessitated the use of cast-iron, cover plates. Under Killingback's contract they were to provide these plates new and of the best quality; 407 plates, of the value of. £167, were vouched by prisoner as "new" whereas what were supplied and used were old plates broken up to a smaller size. At first the breaking-up was done in

the streets; prisoner said that this was dangerous to the public, and the old plates were taken to the contractor's yard and there broken and cleaned and tarred; on one occasion prisoner told me that the plates should be put behind the cement shed, in. case the City engineer should come into the yard and see them.

Cross-examined. At the time of these transactions I knew that I was assisting in a fraud. I had never previously done anything of the kind. Charles Killingback was a party to the fraud; after his death I should say his son, Charles William Killingback. I never received one farthing from the prisoner, or any offer of a bribe. I have no knowledge that prisoner ever received anything from the contractors. The four matters I have spoken of are the only transactions of the kind of which I have any knowledge. The checking of my daily lists by prisoner was done in his office at the Guildhall; it is not a very large office; the conversation was carried on in an ordinary tone; I did say at the police court that it was in an undertone; of course, prisoner would not shout it out for everyone to hear it. With, regard to the St. Martin's-le-Grand job, the word 'Dead 'un" was not written in prisoner's presence. This is the copy he asked me to make as a record; it has been at my place, and I gave it to Inspector Ottoway; it is particulars I took from the prisoner. I had to voucher up the work with it. I wrote "Dead 'un" on it to recognise it again. The words "Order 51, voucher 772," were added afterwards, I believe—I am speaking without my books, and it is nine years ago. I have no doubt that this paper has been filed at my place from the hole in the corner—I have got hundreds of them; they are on pieces of rough paper cut out of the "Builder" newspaper.

(Tuesday, June 29.)

JOHN HODDER , further cross-examined by Mr. Elliott. With regard to the Finch Lane job, the original order as to which was to cut out projecting brickwork of sewer, build splayed walls and cement, I should hand to Mr. Winsborrow day sheets showing the actual condition of things, work in hand and work complete. Except by personally visiting the works he would have no means of knowing how things were going on. I know that he had many duties to perform apart from supervising and was a busy man. According to my recollection the Finch Lane job lasted about a week. As the job was done by time and materials it would not want any measurements. The book in which I made some rough notes is in the possession of Messrs. Killingback. All the books relating to these matters are, therefore, not here in Court. There was, of course, a time book kept by Messrs. Killingback. I myself kept a time book—with an object. The custom of Messrs. Killinghack's representative was to burn the time books, and when I took the time books to the depot he said, "I do not want you to bring the time books here; burn them for my part. "I did not think that that was advisable, so I kept Shem. I cannot give any reason why I kept the time

time books I had no special idea that there would be an inquiry into these matters. I had found them useful before in case of an accident to turn up when a man started work. I did not keep them to support my story in case any unpleasant inquiries should be made later on. I did not put the fictitious names in the time book because they were a fraud. I knew I was being a party to a fraud. Unfortunately I was compelled to be. I admit that I was consciously assisting my employers to deceive and commit a fraud upon the Corporation. I do not think I should write "dead un" in the presence of the accused. With regard to the Cross Lane work, the whole" of that matter only took one day. As a record of that I have the time book, and there is the corroboration of Charles Hazlewood, one of the workmen. I did not put in the daily sheets when that job was completed. I know that fictitious charges were made in respect of this work. I think five days were added for two or three men, though the whole job was finished in 9 1/2 hours. When I was spoken to by prisoner about it he said the job had been executed very cheaply, and it was necessary to add some time. I did not then point out to him that nothing had been said in my return about the completion of the work. Had he spoken to me I should have had to give some explanation of it. There was nothing to show that the job was not going on, but as it did not appear on the day sheets that was significant that the work was finished. I quite agree that it should have been returned as completed. The work at St. Martin's-le-Grand, though really for the Post Office, was carried out under the Corporation inspectors. Mr. Anderson was, I believe, in charge of the work for the Post Office. I do not 'know that Mr. Holmes, the engineer of the Post Office, was also in charge; I do not know the gentleman. I do not know whether the work was also passed by Mr. Sumner, on behalf of the Westminster Construction Company. The entries of work done in the week ending August 11 are wholly fictitious. The work of altering the gulley drains in Aldersgate Street to suit the telephone work extended over several weeks. I should not at this distance of time have been able to recollect what work was done if I had not been assisted by the time books and day sheets. I am also assisted by Blyth's returns. I could not say whether in this particular year prisoner went for his holidays on August 18 and returned on September 9. It would be at the Guildhall when we were checking up our time weekly that we had conversation about the fictitious work in Aldersgate Street. With regard to the cover plates, I believe the accused was present when the old plates were being fixed, but was not in my company. One of my workmen, James King, told me he was present on one occasion at Goring Street, by Houndsditch. About 400 of the old plates were fitted under the new system. The process of placing the plates in position and getting the first layer of brickwork over them would only take about half an hour for each. Assuming that any of the plates were lying on the ground before being placed in position, the inspector might naturally think that they were old plates

that were going to be scrapped, but I should say he would know that they were going to be reused. Sometimes old plates would be left there a little time; sometimes they would be taken away at once. The old plates did mot differ much in condition; they were practically all alike. The time fixed by the accused for fixing the cover plates was after six o'clock at night, the drillers' time expiring at that hour.

Re-examined. I know of no payment by my employers to prisoner, but he had a gratuity in the shape of a bottle of whisky at Christmas time. I only know that by the accused telling me he had received one. It was the accused who asked me to book the fictitious names in respect of the Finch Lane job. Prisoner would very often go round and visit the works with me. I have very often walked on. to the works and seen prisoner present. The time returned for the Aldersgate Street job includes Bank Holiday. I had nothing to do with either Mr. Sumner or Mr. Holmes. The work of breaking up the cover plates had been carried on for some two or three months in the street before prisoner told us to take them to the yard and break them up there. Of course, if the plates were not going to be reused, but were going away as old iron, there would be no necessity to break them up. There was no difficulty in telling whether they were old plates or new.

To Mr. Justice Jelf. In lending myself to this matter I knew I was doing a dishonest thing towards the Corporation, but I did not receive one farthing in respect of it. When I spoke to Mr. Killingback, senior, about the Finch Lane job, he said I did not want to trouble my ¡head about it. I told him that the accused had told me the account had to be "fattened," and that he (Mr. Killingback) knew all about it. If I had not done this I consider I should have run the risk of being thrown out of employment. Had I received anything I should not so willingly have assisted the Corporation. Although I have done wrong I have not been paid for it; it is not a thing that has done me any good.

ARTHUR BLYTH , foreman of sewers, employed by the City Corporation. My duties were to assist prisoner by giving verbal or written replies when he asked for information as to what was going on at the various works. Witness proceeded to give instances where men were falsely returned as having been employed.

WILLIAM PEARSON , sewers' labourer, employed by the City Corporation, who undertook Blyth's duties in his absence, gave similar evidence.

FRANCIS CHARLES JENNINGS READ , assistant to the City Surveyor. On January 20 of this year I went into the sewer at Finch Lane, accompanied by the witness Hodder and a workman named Charles Hazledon. I noticed a piece of old brickwork that had been cut out and new brickwork substituted, running to a manhole. The work I saw agreed exactly with a report by Winsborrow, that the brickwork should be ramped back, as shown by dotted lines. I was able quite easily to distinguish the new work from the old. I estimated the quantity of materials required for the work. Allowing

for waste I estimated 600 bricks; that would be an outside number. As regards Portland cement and sand, my estimate was three bushels cement to nine bushels sand, on the assumption that the Portland cement in the mortar was mixed in the proportion of one to three, which is the usual proportion for this class of work. The time I allowed for the job was one week. The sewer was not an easy place to work in, and I made an allowance for that in the estimate. The quantity returned by prisoner is 600 stocks of bricks, which agrees with my estimate, and 15 bushels of sand, which is much more than my estimate, and the time to complete the job is five days, as against my estimate of one week. On another page of the green book I find charged in respect of the same job six additional days, another 500 stock of bricks, and 20 bushels of cement and 15 bushels sand. In my judgment it would be impossible to employ all these materials upon the job.

Cross-examined. The position of the sewer was such that the men had to work in a crouching position, and materials could only be taken there in small quantities; the conditions generally were very disadvantageous from the point of view of time and expedition.

FRANK SUMNER , City engineer. I had the supervision of the Killingback contracts; one of the terms was that the whole of the materials should be new, and in all respects in the opinion of the engineer fit for their intended use. Prisoner acted as inspector of sewers under my directions. The green books were supplied to him to keep account of the work carried out; he would have Hodder's daily lists and Blyth's reports. Early in 1906 Messrs. Mowlem's succeeded Killingback's as contractors. After a short experience of the work of retrapping the street gullies, they wrote to me suggesting that instead of new cover plates the old plates would do equally well, and in the letter reference was made to their having allowed the Corporation credit for the old plates so far taken out. I saw prisoner in my office, and read this letter to him; he became agitated, and I thought he was about to faint; he said, "I feel sure we have not had full credit, but cannot tell till I go into the matter; I had suspicion that some of the plates used were old, but did not mention it, nor did I take the matter up with Killingbacks"; he also said something about Mowlem's letter having got him into a trap. In none of Killingback's accounts was credit given for old cover plates. I brought the matter before the Streets Committee, and by their direction I opened three gullies; in each the cover plates were in my opinion old and of long standing; on my report of this to the committee I was directed to open 11 other gullies, the prisoner and Girwin (measuring clerk) being present; I again found that the cover plates were simply old ones refixed. The places at which I opened the latter 11 gullies were suggested to me not by Hodder, but by Mr. Souftham, a representative of Mowlem's. It having been put to me at the police court that the places had been suggested by Hodder, I, subsequently to prisoner's committal for trial, opened nine other gullies, selecting the places haphazard from bundles of vouchers before me, consulting no one

in the selection. In three of the nine there were no plates at all; in the others were all old plates.

Cross-examined. No doubt prisoner had the highest references when lie first came to the Corporation. I always found him apparently devoted to 'his duties and quite steady and capable. It would have been impossible for him personally to inspect every part of the work that was going on; he would be to a certain extent dependant on his assistants, Blyth and Pearson. I am responsible for the vouching of Killingback's accounts; I assumed that any old iron work found on the works would be taken into stock, measured and weighed, and credit given to the Corporation for it. I cannot account for the fact that credit was not given for old cover plates escaping my attention; I could not personally inspect all these little works.

HENRY EDMUND STACEY , formerly chief assistant in the City engineer's office, proved two reports by prisoner to the inspector of sewers, recommending the undertaking of the work at Finch Lane and Cross Lane.

HENRY ABEL PILGRIM , assistant bill clerk, spoke to the incriminated vouchers certified by prisoner, on Which payment was made to Killingback's.

WILLIAM HENRY CROPPER , secretary of the Westminster Construction Company, Limited, said that his firm undertook for the General Post Office the sewering work in Aldersgate Street; this was done by the Corporation, and charged by them to the Construction Company, who repaid the Corporation, and charged the amount to the General Post Office.

JOSEPH DUNCAN SAUL , assistant inspector of sewers to the City Corporation. On prisoner leaving the City service he handed me the keys of his desk. I found bundles of Hodder's daily lists and Blyth's and Pearson's reports, and some green books; these I handed to Trewin.

JOSEPH TREWIN , messenger, spoke to receiving the documents from Saul and handing them to Earle.

WILLIAM NORWOOD EARLE , clerk in the City Solicitor's office, said he received the documents from Trewin; they included the lists and reports and books that had been used in evidence here. He had searched the bundles of lists for any relating to August 7 or 8, 1905, and had found none.

CHARLES HAZELWOOD , a labourer in the employ of the Corporation, was called to prove that on the Finch Lane job less thickness of bricks was used than was vouched for by prisoner; also that he (witness) was not working there on days when his time was entered up.

Detective-sergeant FREDERICK WAGSTAFFE, City Police, proved that on being taken into custody and told the nature of the charge, prisoner said, "I cannot understand it; I have done nothing wrong, at least not in the sense that it should be necessary to call upon you; I merely omitted to enter certain credits in the book; I fully expected to have been reinstated. "In reply to the formal charge,

prisoner said, "I cannot say anything without referring to the books, which are in the possession of the committee."


EDWARD JAMES WINSBORROW (prisoner, on oath). I am 39 years old; in 1883 I entered the service of the Chelsea Vestry as an office boy in the surveyor's department; in the following year I became a junior clerk; in 1889 I went to the Vestry of St. Margaret and St. John, Westminster, and in 1895 was appointed assistant surveyor; in 1900, on the establishment of the Westminster Corporation, my office was abolished, I being awarded compensation of £50 a year, which I still receive. I was given a testimonial under seal of the old Vestry. In March, 1903, I obtained, in competition, the position of inspector of sewers to the Corporation of London, which I held till July of last year. My duties were very numerous, in-cluding the examination of the whole of the sewers once a quarter, attending the meetings of the Streets Committee, and other committees, attending to the instructions of the City engineer, and generally superintending public health matters in the engineer's department. In 1907, when Messrs. Killingback had the sewering contract, I knew for the purposes of the contract Charles Killingback, and subsequently C. W. Killingback, the son; later I met the other partner, Mr. Baker. Until the contract I had not known them. Under the contract the foreman representing them was Hodder. I myself suggested the system of his supplying daily lists, distinguishing between work going on and work completed. Once a week the contractors had to supply vouchers showing the amount of labour and materials; the day work vouchers would come to me; the measurement work vouchers would go to the measuring clerks. Orders for work were given by the engineer, used to go and set out the work before it was commenced, and I visited the work while in progress; Blyth assisted in this inspection, sometimes Pearson. Hodder, as the contractor's foreman, attended me at my office in the Guildhall to take my instructions and to check his figures. There were two clerks in the office, and at the times when Hodder came to me there were other officials in the office. The green books were kept by me, made up from my own observations principally, so far as regards the times and the number of men, but the names of the men and the quantities of material I took from Hodder. When Hodder says that I entered the names of workmen and details of materials, and dictated them to him, it is false. With regard to the Finch Lane job, my entries in the green book are based on what was told me from time to time by Hodder Hodder's statement that I told him that the job must be fattened, that I dictated fictitious entries, and that I referred to Killingback knowing all about it, is absolutely false; the whole story is a fabrication from beginning to end.

(Wednesday, Jane 30.)

EDWIN JAMES WINSBORROW , further examined. The entries in the green books were all made by me from the figures given me by Hodder. There is no truth in his story that I talked to him about "fattening" jobs or dictated false entries to him, or mentioned that I had seen Charles Killingback about making such entries. The St. Martin's-le-Grand works were superintended by Mr. Holmes and Mr. Anderson for the Post Office and Mr. Summers for the Westminster Construction Company. With regard to the cover plates, I had absolutely no knowledge that plates were being used that were broken from the original larger plates. Coming to the interview with Mr. Sumner, at which Mr. Mowlem's letter was read, that was the first occasion on which I learned that there was any question about credit not having been given by Killingback's for old scrap iron, and I at once told Mr. Sumner that I had not obtained credit as to certain old iron; it had not occurred to me. I was present at the subsequent examination of the places at which the cover plates were used; undoubtedly, in a number of instances other than new plates had been put in; this was done without my knowledge. From first to last, while acting as Inspector of Sewers, I never received any money or present from Charles Killingback or any member of the firm, or from Hodder.

Cross-examined. I agree that it was part of my duty to check the information given me by Hodder; that is why I kept the Green books; if he told me an absolute lie as to the number of men working on a given job I should have my knowledge of the work and my own observation to check him by, with the assistance of Blyth's weekly sheets. I should not have made the entries I did in the green books unless I had been satisfied at the time that they were correct. I am convinced now that Hodder was deceiving me; he has committed a wicked fraud and has backed it by perjury. With regard to the St. Martin's-le-Grand work, I do not admit that the entries in the green gook are fictitious; my suggestion is that August 11 is a mistake for August 4, a mere clerical error. I discovered the error in going through the evidence. I did not first think of the error being of importance when it was pointed out that Bank Holiday occurred on August 7. I did not put in any defence at the police court because the whole thing was new to me; I knew I had not committed any fraud. I say now that the work was not executed during the week ending August 11. Prisoner was further cross-examined as to., entries in his notebook, the effect being to show that it contained entries of men being employed on the various jobs who were not shown to be so employed in the daily sheets of Hodder and Blyth.) I am satisfied that the work alleged to have been done on August 7 and 8 is an absolute fraud. I say it was Hodder who gave me this false information. I could only get it from Hodder, and getting it from him I should be absolutely convinced that it was correct. I can quite see that if it is said that work was going on on August 7 and 8, whereas in my own notebook it is stated that August 7 was

Bank Holiday, and no work was being done, that does present difficulty. I say that Hodder was practising a fraud on me by giving me information that work was done on Bank Holiday and the day after, in fact the whole week. Undoubtedly I was satisfied with his statements at the time or I would not have put it down. I believed that all the 407 cover plates put in were new cover plates. I was so satisfied of that that I signed for them as new. I never saw the old plates being broken up in the street, and I say they were not, and that Hodder is lying when he says they were. I never told him it was dangerous to break them in the street. I have no knowledge of them being broken up in the yard, but of course they must have been broken up somewhere. The plates which I saw lying in the street ready to be placed in position I was convinced were new plates; they had not the appearance of being old plates. I never examined the materials which were brought in the trucks.

To the Court. I have said all along I appreciate the seriousness of this thing—that an inspector employed by the Corporation should allow 407 old plates to slip through his fingers and be used as new. I do not admit that it was gross carelessness on my part. It was an act of deliberate deception on the part of the truckers. Had you seen the plates yourself you would have said they had not been used before. I am not an expert in iron. I do not suggest that Blyth was a party to this fraud. He was an honest and competent man.

Re-examined. I do not profess to be a competent book-keeper. I can see now that in relation to the discharge of my duties in relation to this Killingback contract I was somewhat careless and trusting, but at the time I was not conscious of carelessness It is obvious that if I had relied a little more upon Blyth's sheets and Blyth's reports I might have detected the errors that I allowed to creep into my green books. With regard to the week ending August 11, what I wish to imply is that the work put down as having been done that week really related to some other period. I feel convinced that in this case the work at St. Martin's-le-Grand, where there were others concerned, it could not have been a case of absolute fraud, that the work alleged to have been done was not an absolute fabrication, but represents work done somewhere or other, but where it comes in I do not know.

SIDNEY MELBOURNE RUSSELL , mechanical engineer, 35, Cannon Street. I have been engaged in various branches of the iron trade since 1878. On the 22nd of this month I went in company of the defendant to the city depot of Messrs. Mowlem and Co., the present contractors, where I saw certain cover plates more or less oxidized There is a method by which traces of oxidisation may readily be removed according to the depth of the oxidisation. I myself should use a wire brush such as is used in a foundry when castings come out of a mould for the removal of sand and dross, and there is sometimes an intimate association between black lead and iron if you want to cover evidence of rust. Treatment of that kind would alter the appearance of the plates, but I should qualify that by saying it would all depend

to what extent the plates were oxidised. Plates treated in that way could not be readily distinguished from new ones.

WILLIAM EDWARD HOLMES , engineer, General Post Office. It was my duty to superintend the work done in St. Martin's-le-Grand on behalf of the Post Office and to check the accounts when delivered, both in regard to labour and quantity of materials. I inspected the work done by Messrs. Killingback in St. Martin's le Grand in 1905 in connection with the laying of new cables for the telephone service, assisted by Mr. Anderson, who is also employed by the Post Office, and by Mr. Summers, the engineer of the Westminster Construction Company. I afterwards certified the account for the work as regarded the reasonability of the charges for labour and materials; whether the work was properly done was not my function at all.

Cross-examined. Nothing was being done in the streets on August 7, which was Bank Holiday. Work was done on August 8, but I have no materials to show whether Killingback's were working there or not.

WILLIAM FENWICK ANDERSON , clerk of works to General Post Office, spoke to assisting the last witness in checking the work done.

OLIVER CHARLES SUMMERS , engineer to the Westminster Construction Company, also gave evidence as to superintending the work done by Messrs. Killingback under the Corporation in connection with the alterations to sewers. He considered the accounts rendered fair and reasonable.

Cross-examined. I have no record of what took place in the week ending August 11.

JOHN EDWARD SMITH , formerly estate manager, Chelsea Vestry; THOMAS WAGHORN HIGGINS, surveyor to the Chelsea Borough Council; and GEO. ROBERT WHEELER, formerly surveyor to the Westminster Vestry, all speaking with many years' experience of prisoner, testified to his excellent character.

(Thursday, July 1.)

Verdict, Guilty.

Mr. Muir stated that in the three cases of Finch Lane, Cross Lane, and St. Martin's-le-Grand, the amounts of the fictitious work were £19, £12, and £7; in respect of the cover plates the fraudulent payments came to £167. Prisoner had given no information at all about the contractors.

Sentence, 18 months' hard labour.


(Wednesday, June 30.)

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-44
VerdictGuilty > unknown; Guilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour; Imprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

BAKER, Charles (33, licensed victualler), and WHITE, Fred (31, agent) ; conspiring and agreeing together by false pretences to defraud such liege subjects of His Majesty the King as should deal with them or either of them in business in which they purported to carry on in the names of J. Williams and Co., H. Davies, J. Piatt and Co., W. Harvey Burrows, H. G. Staples, Henry Lagwell, and A. Huisk and Co., and in pursuance thereof obtaining from the Marmite Food Extract Meat Company, Limited, certain goods to the value of £10 18s. 11d., one suite of furniture from Uriah Henry Alsop, 12 dozen golf balls from A. G. Spalding and Bros., divers blue serges of the value of £35 18s. 2d., and divers other blue serges a of the value of £16 14s. 10d. From Richard Henry Rudd, and from Stanley Nicholson divers quantities of knives, the goods of Samuel Hibbert and Son, in each case with intent to defraud; both obtaining by false pretences from the aforesaid persons, the said goods with intent to defraud; both in incurring certain liabilities, to wit, to Uriah Henry Alsop to the sum of £11, to the Marmite Food Company, Limited, to the several sums of £10 18s. 11d. and £7, to A. G. Spalding and Bros, to the sum of £11 2s., to Richard Henry Rudd to the several sums of £35 18s. 2d. and £16 4s. 10d., and to Stanley Nicholson to the sum of £16 14s. 2d., unlawfully obtaining credit by means of false pretences.

Mr. Muir, Mr. Leycester, and Mr. Oddie prosecuted; Mr. Purcell appeared for White.

Mr. Purcell said that, acting upon his advice, White was prepared to plead guilty to the counts relating to the golf balls. Baker persisted on his innocence as to all the counts. Mr. Leycester said he could not accept the limited plea of White, and the trial proceeded upon the whole indictment.

ALFRED RILEY GREENWOOD , rope and twine manufacturer, Halifax. In September and October, 1906, I received some letters from a firm calling themselves J. Williams and Co., of 74, Little Britain. On September 21, 1906, I received an order for a quantity of hemp amounting to £5 14s., which was duly executed, and for which I received payment. On their sending me further orders I asked for references, and they gave me the name of J. Piatt and Co. I wrote to that firm and received a reply which was not a favourable one. I subsequently supplied a considerable amount of goods amounting to about £20, which includes the original order of £5 10s. I have made several applications for payment, but have never received any. I went to their place of business, they were not in, and I waited about for a whole day; that would be about a month after I applied for the payment of the account; there was no clerk there; the door was locked. I know nothing of either of these men. I never saw them till I saw them at the Mansion House. All the business was done by correspondence.

FRANK K. ROWE , Bailiff of the City of London Court. Between December, 1906, and January, 1907, I had five to seven default summonses to serve upon J. Williams and Co., 74, Little Britain. I called at the premises numerous times, but never found J. Williams and Co. in; I saw Baker there once; there were three or four in the office at the time. I opened the door and walked in. I said, "Mr. Williams." He said, "No," then he said, "How dare you walk into this office

without knocking I" I said, "Are you a partner of J. Williams and Co.?" He said, "No; and don't walk into this office again without knocking. "I then went away. I never succeeded in finding any partners in J. Williams and Co. I never served the summonses. On March 8 I had a warrant of execution, and went to the office to execute it. I never suceeded in doing so. The last time I called I found the place empty.

To Baker. I inquired downstairs who Mr. Williams was, and they told me that he very seldom came there. They did not describe him to me.

WILLIAM HENRY HIBBS . I am a clerk in the office of the London and North-Western Railway Company at Broad Street Station. In September, 1906, I had a parcel for delivery addressed to J. Piatt and Co., Newman Street, Oxford Street. It was sent out and brought back again with" J. Williams and Co., 74, Little Britain," written on the delivery sheet. In consequence of that the parcel was sent on October 1 to J. Williams and Co. It was received by A. C. Baker, and the words, "One parcel, broken; goods exposed," B. was written against his signature in the same handwriting as the C. words "J. Williams and Co.," etc., on the delivery sheet.

STANLEY NICHOLSON , London agent of Samuel Hibbert and Son, Sheffield. On March 24, 1907, I received a letter from 21 and 23, Gray's Inn Road addressed to Messrs. Hibbert and signed "Harvey Burrows. "The next day White called upon me in the name of Harvey Burrows and gave me a small sample order for cutlery, which I executed, and for which I never received payment. I arranged that we should supply him with goods. I took the goods to 21, Gray's Inn Road. White is the man I saw. I have never seen Baker. On April 18, 1907, I received another order from them, which was delivered, which came to about £6, and for which I have never been paid. There were several other orders executed that have not been paid for. I called several times at their office, but only saw an office boy there. When I entered into these transactions, I believed that the firm of Harvey Burrows was perfectly legitimate, and White gave me every appearance of being a smart, businesslike man.

GEORGE BARRETT , gasfitter, 21, Gray's Inn Road. My uncle is the landlord of 21 and 23. On March 11, 1907, White took from my father the tenancy of two rooms at £44 a year. He gave the name of Harvey Burrows; they were there from March to July the same year; they said they were commission agents. I saw various kinds of goods there, but I cannot say whether they were sold or not. Baker used to be there every day. I do not know what he did there. In July they went, without giving any notice; they paid all the rent that was due. When the goods were removed in July neither ¡Baker nor White was there.

JOHN THOMSON , a railway agent, said that in June and July, 1907, he supplied some vans to a man named Harvey Burrows, who gave 21 and 25, Gray's Inn Road as his address. Some parcels were delivered there and signed for by" P. Baker."

(Thursday, July 1.)

FRANCIS EDWARD WEATHEREAD , manufacturers' agent. I act as agent for Richard Henry Rudd, worsted manufacturer, Bradford. In April, 1908, in consequence of a letter I received from Mr. Rudd, I called at 118, City Road, which was an office and ware room. The name T. and G. Staples was over the door. I saw the two prisoners, who I understood were cousins. I introduced myself as the representative of Mr. Rudd and asked them for references. Baker answered that they were only just practically commencing business, and there was no one they could refer me to, and if they could under the circumstances the references would not be worth much. I then said, "Well, what about your bankers. You could not get an account with a bank unless you had a reference. Cannot you give me that?" They said, "No." I said I did not see how we could extend any credit to them, and that whatever business we did it would simply be a question of "Your money, your goods. "In the first transaction the goods were sent to my office; I had them conveyed to City Road, took the cash with one hand, and handed over the goods with the other. After that a cheque was dishonoured but subsequently taken up, the two prisoners paying cash for it at their office in City Road. Another cheque was dishonoured which I had to go and see them about. Baker expressed great surprise at this cheque coming back, and came round to my office with Bank of England notes in his pocket and paid it. On July 31, 1908, I called at prisoners office to collect £52 13s. which was owing to Mr. Rudd, and saw the office boy. We had begun to relax a little bit when we found the money was always there. I called again in the middle of the following week and could not gain admittance I had an intuition that somebody was there and hammered away at the door until the bailiff of Shoreditch County Court presented himself when I saw at once there was something wrong. I never saw prisoners again until I saw them at the Mansion House.

RICHARD HENRY RUDD . In April, 1908, I received a communication from T. and G. Staples, 118, City Road, E. C. I sent the letter on to last witness, who reported to me that he had seen prisoners. In consequence of that between April 23 and June 30 I delivered certain goods to T. and G. Staples for cash. On July 11 prisoner White called upon me in Bradford saying he had come to see if we had anything suitable for his business, goods slightly damaged or anything of that sort, cheap stock lines, and if we came to a bargain he said he would want an extra seven days' credit. Up to that time I had only given him seven days. I said 1 would make an exception in his case, and agreed to the fourteen days. Accordingly on July 111 sent blue serges to the value of £35 17s. 2d., and on July 22 more goods to the value of £ 16 Us. 10d. When the account became due the birds had flown. Exhibaits 39 and 40 are letters I received from T. and G. Staples (Baker's handwriting). Exhibit 39, dated May 14, 1908, encloses "cheque value £12 1s. 8d. in settlement of account to date." Exhibit 40 has reference to a dishonoured cheque.

PERCY OLDFIELD BRADBURY , clerk, Midland Railway, St. Paneras, produced delivery sheets, dated July 11 and July 23, relating to the abovementioned goods.

NATHANIEL JOHN EVANS , estate agent, 122, City Road. In February, 1908, I had the letting of a room at 118, City Road. On February 18 prisoners called upon me giving the name of T. and G. Staples, and stating that they were brothers. They signed a tenancy agreement for the room at a yearly rental of. £40, payable in advance, as from March 25. They took possession of the premises immediately, paying the proportionate rental to March 25. They remained in possession six or seven months. I last saw them on the day previous to the bailiff taking possession. I took possession in August. I know nothing of the business carried on there. They paid the rent when I asked for it. When I went in there was some stuff there. They left without notice.

HUBERT BLENNELL POLLARD , clerk, Old Street Branch, London and Westminster Bank, produced a certified copy of the account of T. and G. Staples from March 9 to August 16, when the balance left was 13s. 10d. Up to June 30, £1, 059 17s. 9d. had been paid in, and at the half-year there was a credit balance of £131 1s. 8d. Cheques and bills dishonoured during the currency of the account amounted to £533 18s. 6d. The bank had a reference signed "A. Priddy," 47, Rivington Street, stating that he had known T. and G. Staples for some time and had always found them respectable. The handwriting of Exhibits 39 and 40 seemed to be the same as the signature "T. and G. Staples" endorsed on the cheques which passed through witnesses hands as ledger clerk.

URIAH HENRY ALSOP , Messrs. Alsop and Sons, wholesale cabinet manufacturers, Bristol. In October, 1908, we received a letter from "Henry Ladwell," 83, Bishopsgate Street Without, asking us to forward copy of our illustrated price list at our earliest convenience, stating best discounts. I replied by forwarding our illustrated cataloque. I next received an order by telegram for a Dartmouth Walnut Suite which was confirmed by letter. We replied that we had not in stock such a suite, which would take fourteen days to make, and asking for trade references. "Ladwell" replied, giving as his references" Mr. J. Hopson, upholsterer, 58, Warner Place, Hackney, N. E.," and "Messrs. Priddy and Co., upholsterers' warehousemen, Rivington Street, Curtain Road, E. C." I applied to the references and received in reply exhibits 8 (Priddy) and 9 (Hopson). Both were written on business paper. In consequence of these letters I had the suite made. On November 12 I was in London on business and went to 83, Bishopsgate Street. I saw there a person whom I addressed as "Mr. Ladwell" (prisoner White); I told him the references were not satisfactory and that under the circumstances I should require cash before sending the suite. He said it was rather awkward my doing a thing like that, and in future he would let me have a cheque with the order. I never got the cash and did not send the suite, the value of which is eleven guineas.

ALFRED JAMES LEWIS , photographer, Bishopsgate Street Without. In September, 1908, I had three rooms to let on the first floor. On September 29 prisoner Baker called, giving name of Henry Ladwell. I think one of the names, he gave was Huish, but it is too far back for me to remember. He said he was a general agent and merchant and took the rooms at. £25 a

year. The agreement was verbal. He took possession within a day or two and the rent was payable monthly in advance. The last payment he made was on January 18. In March I retook possession. There was nothing but rubbish in the place. Goods were brought there. Sometimes they remained two or three hours, sometimes two or three days. In his absence they were left in my shop and, being large goods, were a nuisance to me.

JOHN HOPSON , upholsterer, Warner Place, Hackney Road. I have known prisoner Baker twelve years as a barman or public-house manager by the name of Baker, but never as Lad well. The reference (exhibit 9) is on my paper but not written by me, nor with my authority.

JAMES FREDERICK JAMES , Robert Street, Bethnal Green. I am manager to Mrs. Armanda Priddy, upholsterer and warehouseman, 47, Rivington Street. I know last witness who has premises off the same street. I have known prisoner Baker some sixteen years. I first knew him as a barman. About the year 1905 Baker was in Priddy's service and left in 1906 or 1907. I next heard of him when he came to the shop and offered me some goods for sale. He either said he was T. and G. Staples or represented that firm. I bought goods of him between March and August amounting in all to about. £100. He was paid by cash and cheque. On March 10 I gave him this reference (exhibit 37) "Replying to your favour of the 9th inst. I have known Messrs. T. and G. Staples for some considerable time and have always found them respectable. "I never knew T. and G. Staples at all; and had had no dealings with that firm at the time I wrote that letter. Baker came to me and said he wanted to open a banking account and wanted a reference, so I said "Very good, I will give you one." The reference dated October 30 (exhibit 8) in favour of "Mr. Henry Lad well" (Baker) is also in my handwriting. It did not strike me as funny that Baker should have changed his name from Staples to Ladwell I was under the impression that a man can trade in any name he thinks proper and can change his trading name whenever he wants to. The reference is written on the paper of G. B. Priddy. Baker himself altered "G. B." to" A." G. B. Priddy is the husband of Mrs. Armanda Priddy who has bought the business. The business was established in 1810, and was his father's before him. Mrs. Priddy did not do any business at all, but left it to me. I never consulted her about writing the reference.

THOMAS GYATT , bailiff of the City of London Court. In the beginning of this year I had summonses and warrants to serve on H. Ladwell, 83, Bishopsgate Street. I went several times between January and March to that address but always found the place shut up, and I never succeeded in serving the summonses or executing the warrants.

HENRY GRIMSDALE , high bailiff, Shoreditch County Court. In August last I had four warrants for execution on the goods of T. and G. Staples, 118, City Road. On August 5 I went in and took possession and next day removed the goods I found there. On August 8 they were redeemed by T. and G. Staples. After the goods had been redeemed I had a communication from the auctioneers. I went to the auctioneers, hoping to be in time to levy upon them afresh, but they had been removed. I next went to 118, City Road, but there was nobody there, the room was

locked up. I had a warrant for £32 7s. on August 26, and on August 31 another for. £11 4 s. 6d. The return to that was that the defendants had gone away. I could not levy; they? were all abortive except the first. On December 1 I had a further warrant for £114s. 6d.

WILLIAM EDWARD STANLEY WISSLER , joint managing director, "Marmite" Food Extract Company, Limited. In January of this year I received a letter from A. Huish and Co., 124, Minories, asking for quotations of "Marmite" packed in 1 oz., 2 oz., and 4 oz. jars, and that our representative should call. Í accordingly went to 124, Minories. Huish and Co. described themselves as tea and coffee merchants and importers of foreign produce. On January 11 we received a small order for which we gave credit. On January 29 we received a letter from them enclosing a reference to H. Lad well and Co., Bishopsgate Street Without. We wrote to H. Lad well and received an answer (exhibit 17) stating that he had done business with A. Huish and Co. for some considerable time and had always found them to meet their engagements. I had no reason to doubt that was a genuine reference. On February 3 we consigned to Huish and Co. jars of "Marmite" to the gross value of £10 18s. 11d., for which we have not been paid. The order prior to that was paid for in cash. We refused to execute any more orders. Some of the goods have been returned.

HENRY MONTAGUE GRAT spoke to calling at the office of A. Huish and Co. in the Minories in February last and collecting £215s. 11d. He believed the money was paid by the prisoner Baker.

HENRY WARD ARCHER , managing clerk to Jones, Lang and Co., Estate Agents, Leadenhall Street, proved letting two rooms at 124, Minories, to a man he now knew as Gallico. One of the prisoners (White) eventually called in company of Huish and they signed the agreement, White in the name of Rogers and Gallico in the name of Huish. They took possession on November 3 and stopped two months.

ALFRED HUISH GALLICO , commercial traveller. I know defendant White, whom I first met in 1901. I met him in October, 1908. At that time I was engaged in the wholesale tea trade under the name of Huish and Co., 79, Fenchurch Street. He then told me his name was Rogers and that I was mistaken in thinking it was White. I had not seen him for years. My business at this time was not succeeding and I owed about £60. White offered to clear off the liabilities and join me in business, but he said he would not do so in such inferior premises; we must take larger and more commanding premises. In the result we took the two rooms at 124, Minories. We opened an account at the London City and Midland Bank, I signing as "A. Huish" and White as "A. Rogers." White did not pay the £60, but something under £25, We continued trading until the end of December, 1908. Up to that time I had charge of the money. After that we both signed cheques but he handled the hard cash. We kept books during the whole period. At the end of 1908 I was taken ill and was away from business six weeks or two months. During that time Rogers (White) visited me. I wanted more money from him, but he said he could not let me have very much. He represented that the business was fairly satisfactory and that Baker, a friend of his, was assisting him in it. I did not agree to that being done, but

White said lie wished him to continue and Baker did so. From time to time he gave me small amounts, and he sent me 11 dozen of "Marmite," part of which I converted into money. He told me he had some summonses and writs in and he was trying to delay matters. He wanted some medical man's certificate as to my health, I assume, in order to get time for the payment of these debts. I went to the office on March 8. There was then no stock at all; papers had been destroyed and there was evidence of their having been burned. The business books had been brought to me by Baker. Several appointments were made for me to meet White and with difficulty I got £12 out of him. White told me on that occasion that he was that night starting for Russia, but did not give me details of his business. Nothing was paid into the banking account in ray absence, and there was only a balance of £16s. 6d. left. I made arrangements with the landlord to be released from my tenancy. I never gave any reference to Henry Lad well, of 83, Bishopsgate Street, and I knew no person of that name at the time of the reference. White never mentioned the circumstances under which he obtained the "Marmite," but he told me he could not pay me any money so I must accept that. He did not mention that a reference had been given to the "Marmite" people by Ladwell. As nearly as I can remember the claims made upon Huish and Co. for goods delivered amounted to between. £1, 000 and £1, 500, the greater part of which was after I was taken over. The signature to Exhibit 13, the order of January 12 to the Marmite Company, the signature to the letter of March 25 addressed to Messrs. Spalding and Brothers by Kalisky and Co., the receipt dated September 23, 1908, and the endorsement to a cheque (Exhibit 29) are all in the handwriting of White. (Witness identified White's handwriting upon other documents.)

WILLIAM ALLEN BASSHAM , housekeeper, 124, Minories, gave evidence as to the occupation of the premises by Huish and Rogers, and identified prisoner Baker as having been there regularly when Huish was away, his hours being from 10 to 5. A registered letter for Huish and Co. was signed for by Baker.

JOHN COOK STANTON , Whitechapel branch, London City and Midland Bank, produced a certified copy of the account of Huish and Co. opened on December 18 and closed March 25. At one time there was a credit of £45 17s. 8d. From January 30 to March 25 the account was dormant and the final balance was £16s. 6d.

ERNEST ALFRED CORDELL , clerk to Oppenheimer and Blandford, solicitors, Copthall Avenue. In July, 1907, I was in the service of Messrs. Chapman and Wynn Evans, solicitors, Clifford's Inn, and on behalf of a client of theirs I had two summonses to serve upon Harvey Burrows, Gray's Inn Road. I called there several times. On the first occasion I saw the manager, whom I now know as Baker. I effected service of the summons in some manner; I forget exactly how it was served. Immediately after that I had to effect service of a writ upon Burrows. On that occasion I tried the door and found it locked. I looked through the letter box and saw a person inside whom I had met previously as Harvey Burrows (prisoner White). He had been down to our office on some matter or other. I knocked, and he then went out of the general office

into an inner room. Presently the manager (Baker) came up the stair and opened the door with a key. I went inside and told him I was going to serve a writ on Mr. Burrows. He said that Burrows was not in. However, I slipped past and went into the inner room, where Burrows was. I asked him to come across and take the writ. He refused, so I threw it across to him. Then Baker, who was standing behind, pulled me out of the room. I left the writ with Burrows. In January, while I was with the firm of Oppenheimer, Blandford and Co., I went to 124, Minories, on behalf of a client who was making a chum against Huish and Co. I met Mr. Gallico, to whom I handed the letter of application, telling him I must have the money. On two occasions subsequently I saw Baker there. I also saw prisoner White there. He then answered to the name of Rogers, and entered an appearance to the summons in that name. I did not recognise him immediately, though his face seemed familiar. Shortly afterwards I met him in Holborn in company with Baker, and I then recognised them as the people I had seen at Harvey Burrows's office.

WILLIAM JAMES SMUGGS , traveller to A. G. Spalding Brothers, Holborn Viaduct, manufacturers of athletic goods. On March 24 I went to the office of Kalisky and Co., Holborn, and there saw prisoner White, who gave me an order for two gross black and white golf balls and three dozen dimpled golf balls, value in all £258s. Inside each golf ball was a slipwith the initials, "L. S. F."

HENRY MILL , dealer in cycles and athletic goods, trading as Bancroft, Young and Co, 49, Bishopgate Street Within. On September 15, 1908, a man giving the name of T. G." Staples, 118, City Road, called upon me. I identify prisoner White as Staples. I bought some golf balls of him on that and five other occasions. I paid, I think, 19s. 6d. per dozen lees 5 per cent, for cash. I paid partly by cheques and partly in cash, the reason for that being that I keep my account at Walthamstow, and as he wanted some cash I gave him £3 and a cheque for the balance.

EDMUND CHARLES BARRON , clerk to Spalding and Co. In April of this year I went to 49, Bishopsgate Street, and bought two dozen golf balls of last witness. One of the balls was dissected, and the slip with the letters "L. S. F." was found inside. The balls were part of those supplied to Kalisky and Co.

WILLIAM GEORGE PALMER , assistant to Tyler and Co., estate agents, Holborn Viaduct, gave evidence to letting a room on the first floor at 24, Holborn (the premises having also an entrance in Fetter Lane), to a man. who gave the name of Aaron Kalisky (White). He wrote out a tetter of application (exhibit 32), which prisoner White signed in his presence in the name of Kalisky, with an address in Marylebone Road.

Detective CHARLES ATKINS, City. Upon several days at the end of April and the beginning of May I was keeping watch upon the office of A. Kalisky and Co., 24, Holborn. I never saw White there, but I saw Baker twice. On May 8, at 10.45 a.m., Baker entered the building by the Fetter Lane entrance and spoke to the lift man, who handed him several letters. Baker then walked upstairs and entered the office of A, Kalisky and Co. by means of a key. Having stayed there a few minutes he came downstairs and walked on by the Holborn entrance, and walked up Leather Lane and thence to the corner of the "Yorkshire

Grey" in Theobald's Road. While going along the street he took from his pocket several letters and read them. He waited outside the "Yorkshire Grey "until 11.30, when he was joined by prisoner White. They walked down the Clerkenwell Road, where Baker handed to White some letters. White looked at them and put them into his overcoat pocket. They then walked on to the Holbom Viaduct and entered Lyons's restaurant, where I left them. Three days afterwards I was again watching Kalisky's premises in company with Detective Thorp. At 9.15 a.m. Baker entered the building by the Fetter Lane entrance, spoke to the lift man, and went upstairs. Shortly afterwards he came down and crossed Hoi born into Leather Lane, where he met White, who was apparently waiting for him. They walked through various streets of the City for some time and finally entered No. 6, South Street, Finsbury. From there they went into Middle Street, Cloth Fair, where they were looking at empty places. Then they went into Little Britain and entered No. 9 where there are offices to let. On coming out they went into No. 10 where there are also offices to let. From there they went to Messrs. Johnson and Dymonds', auctioneers, Gracechurch Street, and when they came out we arrested them. I said "We are police officers. We are going to arrest you both on a warrant granted at the Mansion House police Court for conspiracy to defraud. "White said, "I do not know what you mean. I do not know anything about it. "Baker made no reply. They were then taken to the detective office in Old Jewry where the warrant was read to them by Detective-sergeant Smith. They were afterwards taken to the Minories police station and charged.

Detective-serjeant HUBERT SMITH, City Police. On May 111 saw prisoners in Old Jewry. Upon Baker I found a penny, three pawntickets and some keys. I subsequently found the keys opened the doors and the safes at 24, Holborn. I also found on Baker a letter from Messrs. Adie Bros., Birmingham, addressed to Kalisky and Co; a hiring agreement in respect of certain furniture in favour of A. Kalisky; and part notice of the service of a writ upon Kalisky and Co. I then went to the office of Kalisky and Co, letting myself in with one of the keys found on Baker, where I found a copy letter book and a diary, but no ordinary business books. Next I went to Baker's address, 91, Falkland Road, Hornsey, where I took possession of certain property, including part of the cutlery identified as belonging to Messrs. Hibbert and one "Marmite" pot.

Detective Constable ARTHUR THORPE, City Police, identified the handwriting of Prisoner Baker on a number of the exhibits.

Verdict: Baker guilty on all counts; White guilty on all the counts to which he had not pleaded guilty.

Detective-sergeant SMITH stated that a very large number of complaints had reached the police. Prisoners had been acting together fraudulently since 1906. Baker in 1898 and 1899 was a porter and invoice clerk. Some property was also found at the private address of White, who formerly travelled the country as a job buyer. This property had been obtained in the names of Harvey Burrows, Hurst, Ladwell, Hammond, and T. and G. Staples. Baker had been a barman at the "Agricultural Tavern," Islington, the "Marquis Cornwallis," Bethnal Green, and the "Brewery Stores," Kensngton, and in all these places his

character was good. After that he was a furniture dealer in Junction Road, Holloway, where he filed his own petition in bankruptcy with liabilities £400 and assets £40. Then he travelled the country for two years with a van selling crockery ware, and afterwards became manager to Mrs. Priddy in Rivington Street.

Sentences, Baker, 12 months' hard labour; White, nine months' hard labour.

BEFORE THE RECORDER. (Monday, June 28.)

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-45
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

SPARROW, Oliver (34, postman) , pleaded guilty of stealing four postal packets each containing one postal order, the goods of His Majesty's Postmaster-General, he being employed under the Post Office.

Prisoner had been an auxiliary postman at the Holloway sorting office for five years, and in consequence of complaints of the loss of letters he was watched, and on May 27 was seen to cash four postal orders at the King's Cross office. He admitted that he had stolen from 20 to 25 letters. He had £25to his credit in the Post Office Savings Bank, which he accounted for by saying that he had received some £60 compensation from the proprietor of a motor car which caused him an accident some twelve months ago.

Sentence, Six months' hard labour.

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-46
VerdictsGuilty > with recommendation
SentencesNo Punishment > sentence respited

Related Material

HANF, Bohumil (21, waiter, a native of Bohemia) ; stealing one Post Office Savings Bank book, the goods of Joseph Teuber ; forging and uttering a Post Office Savings Bank notice of withdrawal requesting the payment of the sum of £710s., and forging and uttering a receipt purporting to be signed by Joseph Teuber, thereby obtaining the sum of £7 108., the moneys of His Majesty's Postmaster-General, in each case with intent to defraud. The latter indictment was first tried. Mr. Förster Boulton, M. P., prosecuted; Mr. Ricardo defended. JOSEPH TEUBER, waiter, 42, Edward Street, Hampstead Road. I have known prisoner since last summer. The Post Office Savings Bank book produced is mine. On April 21 had the sum of £$10s. 10d. to my credit. On the night of that day I saw him at a restaurant at 51, Carnaby Street. He was complaining that he wanted to go to Scotland next day and had not sufficient money to pay his fare, being 10s. short. I offered to lend him the 10s. He accompanied me to my lodgings. I got my deposit book to show him I had the money and told him he must wait till the next day. He said next day would be rather too late for him, snatched the book out of my hands and ran away with it, and I lost sight of him. I did not call out "stop thief" or anything of the kind. On the following Saturday or Sunday I saw him again at the restaurant and he told me he had been to the post office with my book and had drawn out 10s. and had posted the book to Edward Street, where I was lodging. I wondered how he could take out those 10s. and he said he had signed my name. The signature to the withdrawal form is not in my writing. Immediately after he

had taken my book I wrote to the post office. Neither the signature to the withdrawal form produced, authorising the withdrawal of £710s., nor the receipt for the £7 10s. is my handwriting, but the writing is very like mine. It is the hand writing of prisoner. I did not write the signatures Joseph Teuber on the piece of paper produced. It looks as though prisoner had been practising the imitation my signature. The signature to the withdrawal form for the remaining 10d. is not my writing, it is that of prisoner. I gave him no authority to affix my signature to any of the forms. I did not have prisoner detained when he came to the restaurant the second time because I had written immediately to the PostmasterGeneral and thought the withdrawal would be prevented. I discovered that the £810s. had been withdrawn when I went to the comptroller of the Savings' Bank because I could not get any answer. I received a letter from prisoner from Glasgow in which he said; "Dear Joseph, excuse me writing so late but I dare not tell you the whole truth about your book. I have withdrawn all your hardly gained money but, by God, I will pay you back every penny as soon as I shall have a situation. You know that I am not so bad that I would steal from you that money, and I realise that it is a very shameful thing what I have done," &c.

Cross-examined. I have heard that prisoner's father is a large restaurant keeper in Prague, and that the prisoner is over here for the purpose of learning English. I have lent him money on previous occasions which he has paid back. The largest sum I have lent him is 30s. It is not true that I gave prisoner the book for the purpose of drawing the money out., and told him he could draw as much as he wanted. The restaurant I met prisoner at is for Bohemians only. When I wrote to the PostmasterGeneral I said I had lost my book. I did not tell him it had been snatched out of my hand. I had once drawn money from the bank myself, 10s. Prisoner did not ask me to write him permission to get the money. Prisoner did not avoid me when he came to the restaurant the second time. He said he had only taken out 10s.

JOHANNA HARTZEIM . I keep lodgings at 24, Upper Charlton Street Great Portland Street. Prisoner engaged a room on the Saturday before Easter, and after that two letters arrived addressed to Joseph Teuber. I asked him whether that was his name, and he said "Yes" One came on Saturday night and the other on the afternoon of Monday. He paid 5s. for the week, but left on the Wednesday, saying he had to go to Scotland.

Cross-examined. He did not give any name when he came, and I did' no ask him.

FRANCIS GRANT GANE , clerk in the Savings Bank Department of the Post Office. South Kensington, gave evidence as to the withdrawal forms.

LILIAN FRANCES CURRIE , assistant, Berners Street Post Office, deposed to paying £710s. on April 3 to the bearer of a warrant for withdrawal, which was signed in her presence.

Police-sergeant WILLIAM HEXAMER, S. On May 16 I saw prisoner at the Glasgow Central Police Station, and told him I was going to take him to London on a charge of stealing a Post Office Savings Bank book, the property of Joseph Teuber. In reply he said, "How can he say I stole it when he gave me the book to withdraw some money as I wanted to go to

Glasgow?" When he was charged in London he made no reply. I found upon him the sheet of paper produced with "Joseph Teuber "written six times upon it, and also a withdrawal form for the sum of 10d. signed "Joseph Teuber."


BOHUMIL HANF (Prisoner on oath). My father is a restaurant keeper in Prague and owns house property. I am the eldest son, and have three brothers and two sisters. I came to England with the idea of learning English so that I might assist my father in Prague. My father gave me about. £30 when I came over, and he has sent me money once since. When I found myself in trouble I communicated with my father, who has provided me with means for my defence. I was last in employment in Rochester. On the Thursday night before Easter I was at the Bohemian Rest, 51, Cranbourne Street, I had some work in Scotland, but I wanted some money to go there, and eventually Teuber said he would lend me seme. When he produced his deposit book at his lodgings he said, "Look here, here is my post office book and I have some money there. That is the money I have saved in England. I was never going to take any out, but you are my friend, you want help, and I am going to help you. Will you take the book and take to-morrow as much money as you want. "I told him I could not take the money without any permission from him, and I asked him to write me such permission. He said, "I shall not write you anything, but if they will not give you money tell them I am a waiter at the' Gaiety' restaurant, and they can ask me by telephone. "All this took place in the street about quarter to one in the morning. There if no truth in the suggestion that I snatched the book out of prosecutor's hands and ran away. Next day I went to the post office and asked for £1. They told me to write my name down; I wrote Teuber's name and got XI. When I saw him I told him I had only got 10s. He said, "That is all right," and asked where his book was, and I told him he would get the book in three or four days. I saw him again on Monday afternoon and spoke to him about the Glasgow affair. He asked me if I had enough money, and I told him yes. He did not say anything more about the book. I afterwards got all the money out of the Post Office except 10d., and went to Scotland. My object in writing to prosecutor was to let him know what I had done.

Verdict, Guilty, with a strong recommendation to mercy on account of prisoner's youth. The indictment for larceny was not proceeded with.

The Recorder thought that prisoner had better be sent back to Prague, and postponed sentence till next Sessions in order that his friends might be communicated with.

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-47
VerdictGuilty > lesser offence
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

WILFORD, Frank Archibald (29, paper hanger) ; forging and uttering, knowing the same to be forged, two orders for the payment of money, to wit, two postal orders for the payment and of the value of £1 each, with intent to defraud. The offence in this case consisted in uttering cancelled orders stolen from the vaults of the Post Office, the cancellation marks being removed by chemicals.

Mr. Förster Boulton, M. P., prosecuted.

FRANK HEADING FROST , clerk in the money order department of the Post Office, Queen Victoria Street. After money orders are paid they are cancelled by a date stamp and perforation of the King's head. When an order is paid through a bank it bears across the face of it the stamp of the bank without the stamp of the paying office. The orders having been paid are sorted according to number and are then stored away for a time. Some time after last November we missed a bundle of 20s. orders. The order produced is one of that series. It is numbered w/5951305. On that order the issuing date stamp has been altered from May to November. An order is payable for six months after the month of issue, that is to say an order issued on April 25 would be payable within six months dating from May 1. The ordinary rule is that orders are to be paid within three months, but the period of payment can be extended to six months by the payment of an extra poundage equal to the original poundage. The order in question has been paid, I think, through the London and Provincial Bank at Paddington. The stamp of the bank has been erased and the stamp of another bank substituted, showing that the order has been through two banks. As the order had been mutilated by perforation I cannot say how anybody came to pay it again. The number of orders coming in daily is about half a million. It is quite apparent that the issuing stamp has been altered. The order reached us the second time about November 29, 1908. I have been in this department of the Post Office about four years. I have never known a case where by oversight the cancelling of an order has not taken place.

EDWARD PAGE , assistant to Henry Kelsey, bookmaker, 10 and 11 Upper Street, Islington. On November 25, prisoner came into the shop in Upper Street, about 8.30. He was a stranger to me. He made purchases to the amount of 3s. 2d. and tendered the 20s. order produced in payment. I said, I could not change it on my own responsibility and took it to the manager, who said he would change it if prisoner would put his name to it. Prisoner then put upon it the name of" H. H. Bennett. "I gave him 16s. 10d. change. I did not notice that the order had been perforated.

Detective-sergeant JAMES BUXTON, F Division. I was present when last witness identified prisoner, whom I arrested on May 31 on another charge. He said in reply to this charge: "In November, 1908, I first met Dave Jopling, otherwise Daniel Nelson. I was going home to Kent Terrace. He was waiting for me. He said he had some ¿1 postal orders stolen from the Post Office. He told me they were private postal orders and asked me if I would try to pass them. I did so at various places believing them to be the property of some private firm." He said he had not seen Jopling since Christmas.

(Tuesday, June 29.)

FRANK KITTO , cashier, London and Provincial Bank, Paddington. Postal order produced for 20s. was paid into my bank on November 26, 1908, to account of. Robert McKirdy. I branded it with a stamp across the face. The circular perforation shows it is cancelled, and other perforations give the date of cancellation May 20, 1908. I did not notice

it was a cancelled order and credited the firm with it amongst a number of other slips which passed through my hands. I heard no more of it, and it has not been deducted from McKirdy's account. McKirdy and Co. are bootmakers who trade under different names at various branches.


FRANK ARCHIBALD WILFORD (prisoner, on oath). I live at 8, Kent Terrace, Tottenham, and am a paperhanger and house decorator. On November 25, 1908, I met David Jopling, who I knew held a responsible position as storekeeper in the G. P. O. At that time he lived at Mitcham. I met him about 4 or 5 p.m. near my home and walked with him part of his way home. He asked me would I get him a postal order cashed, and gave me one like that produced for 20s. He asked me to buy a pair of boots from Kelsey's, near the "Angel" at Islington, and cash the order. I said to him. "Why should you not take it in yourself." He said, "I am in the Post Office and do not like to do so. "I had no knowledge that it was in any way cancelled. I cashe 1 it, as stated by Edward Page, and gave Jopling the change and the pair of shoes. We had a drink and I left him—it was a long way from where I lived. The next I heard of the order was at the end of March or the beginning of April when the police came to my house to make inquiries. My name is Wilford. I signed the order "H. H. Benham." Jopling told-me it would perhaps be as well not to put my name—I believe he anticipated there would be some difficulty about it the way he was speaking. I did not suspect a person like Jopling, who was working in the Post Office. I am not ashamed of my name. I noticed the large perforation but not the small holes, and I said to him, "What is that?" He said, "That is nothing, only the mark of the file. "I wish to say I had no notion that it had been cancelled or forged or I should not have had anything to do with it.

Cross-examined. I met Jopling close to my home and was walking back with him. The boot shop is about 100 yards from the Angel. I had had no experience with postal orders. Jopling told me to buy a pair of fours, ladies' boots, I said, "Tou had better take it in to be cashed yourself." He said, "It would not do for me; as we work at the Post Office we are not allowed to. "He left it entirely to me to choose the boots. I never dreamt that he had come dishonestly by the order. When I made the statement to Sergeant Buxton a fortnight ago of course I then knew that the order was stolen. I knew that about the end of March, when thepolice came to see me and were making inquiries. A fortnight ago I signed the statement: "He told me they were private postal orders, and would I try to pass them. I said 'Yes.' I did so at various places, believing them to be the property of a private firm." I believed the order was Jopling's property. That statement was made a fortnight ago, and I believed it when 1 found out it had been stolen. Jopling gave me a second order in December, which I cashed. I know Alfred Jones. I said in my statement that Alfred Jones came to me on February 19 and said that David Jopling, alias Nelson, had got some more of these postal orders and wanted me to pass them. That was when I found out they were stolen.

This is my statement, signed June 10, 1909. I wish to have it read: "In November, 1908, I first met David Jopling, alias Daniel Nelson, while going home to 8, Kent Terrace, He had been waiting to see me, he having some £1 postal orders stolen from the Post Office. He told me they were private postal orders, and would I try to pass them. I said 'Yes.' I did at various places, believing them to be the property of some private person. I have not seen him since Christmas week, only Alfred Jones came to me on February 19, saying that David Jopling, alias Nelson, had got 3, 000 17s. P. O. 's more and would I try to pass them. I refused. Later on I heard that Alfred Jones had been arrested while in the company of David Jopling, alias Nelson, whilst trying to pass one of the 17s. orders in Uxbridge Road. I heard afterwards that Jopling had disappeared from Brewery Road, his address, and could not be found. I have seen my wife, and she said she had seen Jopling in Sonning Street, his address. "That was when I first found out that the orders were stolen—when JODES, I think on February 19, told me Jopling had stolen some more. I do not know where Jopling is. I have given every information to the police. It was Jones who told me the orders were stolen and not the police. I went to Leicester at Whitsuntide after I heard that—I went there on business regarding a legacy. I knew or believed the police wanted to see me. I did not leave my address. I was away a month or six weeks. I was arrested in London when I returned home. If I had known the order to have been stolen it is hardly likely I should have passed it, as I had a job then—I was supervisor over nine houses besides being in a regular situation.

Verdict, Not guilty of forgery; guilty of uttering the order knowing it to be forged.

The indictment as to the second postal order was not proceeded with. Prisoner confessed to having been convicted at North London Police Court on May 14, 1907, receiving three sentences consecutive of three months each, for stealing tools: stated to have been since in employment.

Sentence, 18 months' hard labour.

BEFORE THE RECORDER. (Tuesday, June 29.)

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-48
VerdictsGuilty > with recommendation
SentencesImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

MOCKFORD, Frederick Walter (38, 'bus conductor) ; stealing one shoulder of mutton and other meat, the goods of the London Brighton and South Coast Railway Company; stealing one hamper and other articles, and the sum of 12s., the goods and moneys of the Managing Committee of the South Eastern and Chatham Railway ; forging a receipt for one hamper, with intent to defraud.

Prisoner pleaded guilty of the first charge.

Mr. Bodkin and Mr. H, D. Roome prosecuted; Mr. St. John McDonald defended.

ELIZA TREVINIA HERNIMAN , Braunton, near Ilfracombe, wife of William Herniman, farmer. On March 5, 1909, I sent a hamper from Braunton Station on the London and South-Western Railway addressed

to my sister, Mrs. George Packer, Abernethy Road, Lee, containing eggs, cake, and 12s., viz., a half-sovereign and a florin. I have only seen prisoner at Greenwich Police Court.

MAUD MARY PACKER , wife of Geo. Packer, London County Council tram inspector, and sister of the last witness, 29, Abernethy Road, Lee. On March 6 I was expecting a parcel from my sister which did not arrive. I do not know prisoner.

Cross-examined. I received a letter advising the parcel at 8 a.m. on March 6. I expected it to be delivered at my house.

GEO. PACKER , 29, Abernethy Road, Lee, London County Council tram inspector. I do not know prisoner. He had no authority from me to get a parcel or to sign my name. The name "George Packer" in book produced is not my writing.

ALFRED CHARLES DEBENHAM , Inspector, Black heath Station, S. E. and C. Railway. On March 6 at 7.37 a.m. a train which stops at Lee stopped at Blackheath. At 7.50 a.m. I saw prisoner near the parcel office, which was locked. I asked what he wanted. He said he had come from Mrs. Packer, 29, Abernethy Road, Lee, for a small brown hamper containing provisions, which had come from Braunton, on the L. and S. W. Railway. I opened the parcels office, he followed me in, pointed to a hamper there and said, "That is the one." It was like what he had described. I said, "This has come round from Lee." He said, "Yes. They sent me round from Lee here for it, because it is within your delivery." An Abernethy Road parcel would be delivered from Blackheath. I entered the particulars of the hamper in the parcels. counter book and asked prisoner to sign for it, which he did "George Packer," in my presence. He asked me if there was anything to pay; I said "No," and he took the hamper away. On May 8 I picked prisoner out from a number of other men at Brockley Lane police station. He is the man to whom I gave the parcel.

Cross-examined. It is the usual course for a person to give a description of a parcel, and if the parcel clerk is satisfied he hands it over. It in not usual to notify the consignee that the parcel has arrived. This parcel must have arrived in London late on the previous night, been carted to Cannon Street and sent down to Blackheath. We should have delivered it if prisoner had not fetched it. I believed prisoner to be Mr. Packer. It would have been safer to have asked him for an authority for the consignee. I believed he was the right man—I was entirely taken in. When I identified him I did not look much at the others, because I Haw prisoner was the man directly. I entered the doorway and I touched him on the shoulder. It was two months afterwards. I see thousands of people on the railway. I am certain I have not made a mistake. Prisoner could have known the particulars of the parcel by examining the label on a transfer platform. An old railway man could have found it out. I do not know how he followed the hamper up or how he got the information. I did not see any boys amongst the men put up for identification. I knew him at once. No one said a word about the man's description. Prisoner put the hamper on his shoulder and took it off. I thought he was a gardener sent round for it.

Re-examined. If a parcel is sent on from one station to another it would have an additional ticket on it which a person seeing it on the platform might read.

JOHN LARKIN , porter, Blackheath Station, S. E. and C. Ry. On March 6, a little before 8 a.m., I saw prisoner near the parcels office alone. Debenham went with him into the parcels office. On May 10 I identified prisoner among about a dozen other persons—he is the man.

Cross-examined. When identifying the prisoner I saw a man at the other end of the row who was very similar to the prisoner. I said, "It lies between those two," and then I went back and picked out the prisoner. I touched him at once. I touched the prisoner first. Then I was asked whether that was the man. Then I walked right along the other men, and I looked at a man very much resembling the prisoner. The gaoler said, "Can you see him?" I said, "Well, it lies between those two." Then I saw that the other man was shorter and I went back the second time and touched prisoner on the shoulder. The height settled it. Debenham was outside at the time. Debenham identified him on the Saturday. I went on the Monday. I have no doubt he is the man.

SAMUEL JAR VIS , 107, Groundfield Road, Stratford, passenger guard, Great Eastern Railway. On April 13 I was in charge of a train from Liverpool Street to Croydon. At Whitechapel when I got into my van prisoner, whom I had seen before on one or two occasions, got into my van. He had ridden in the van before. He had represented himself as belonging to the South Eastern Railway signalling department and a railway servant, so I did not trouble myself much about him, but allowed him to ride in my van Railway servants occasionally ride in the van with the guard; there is a rule that they should not do so, but it is overlooked. Prisoner said he was employed by the S. E. and C. R. Co., who do the signalling for the East London Railway, over whose line my train was running; consequently their officials are generally moving up and down. I have not seen him since to my recollection. Parcels are carried in the guard's van.

Cross-examined. There is no partition between where I sit and where the parcels are carried. I should be fairly close to the parcels. I believed prisoner was employed by the company, otherwise I should not have allowed him to ride in my van. Railway servants are allowed to ride in the van; strictly speaking we are supposed to ask officials for brake passes. Some are allowed brake passes, others are not. I did not ask prisoner for his pass.

EDWARD BRYANT , 25, Hindsley's Place, Forest Hill, booking clerk Honor Oak Park Station, LB. and S. C. Railway. Í produce signature book containing the signature "G. Martin." It was written by the prisoner in my presence.

Cross-examined. I am positive the prisoner wrote the signature.

Police-constable WILLIAM HARVEY, 352 X. I was formerly in the Hackney Carriage Department, New Scotland Yard, and received applications for omnibus conductor's licences. Fredk. Walter Mockford holds a conductor's licence, number 10, 614, for which I produce the original application dated November 13, 1899. The first licence was granted on December 8

1899, number 3, 653. Conductors have to attend in all cases on the first application, and the first licence is handed to them by the police when they sign the book. The licence is renewed annually. The number of this licence has been changed in consequence of an alteration of the badges in the Department. Mockford is licensed in respect of badge 10, 614 now. The alteration in the number would be about two years ago when he was given a new badge and returned the old one. The name of F. W. Mockford was signed in my presence on the application form which was countersigned by me. I do not recognise the prisoner. I have not seen him for 9 1/2 years.

Detective-sergeant JOHN BLACKMORE, P division. On May 17 I saw prisoner at Greenwich Police Court. I told him he would be charged with stealing on March 6 from Blackheath Station a hamper, and with forging a receipt for the goods. He said, "Very well. "On May 8 he was placed with 11 other men when Debenham picked him out at once. There were no boys put up with him. The prisoner' was not pointed out to Debenham. I took no part in the identification whatever. I did not find any conductor's licence or badge number on prisoner.

Cross-examined. Debenham identified prisoner on May 8 and Larkin and Bryant on May 17. Larkin and Bryant were called in separately. The men put up were as nearly similar to the prisoner as we could get them and about the same age. Prisoner may have been the only one who had an overcoat on—I do not recollect that—he would have an opportunity of removing it if" he wished. Larkin said it lay between the prisoner and a shorter man. Then looking at prisoner he said that was the man.


FREDERICK WALTER MOCKFORD (prisoner, on oath). I was arrested on May 8 and have been since in prison. I was not the man who took this hamper and I was not at Blackheath Station on the morning of March 6. Hive at 48, Dorset Road, Upton Park, Forest Gate. On March 6 I got up at 7 a.m. and at 8 a.m was preparing my son's breakfast. My wife was in bed as we had had a very bad night with my little girl who had been ill, and my son had a little job to attend to on Saturday, March 6, for which he had to leave at 8.30. I remember the date, because on March 5 I went to the relieving officer and asked him for some help. He told me he could not give me any help, but he gave me a labour ticket for five days' work for the next week; also on that Saturday there was a very heavy snowstorm and I was hoping to earn a few shillings at clearing the snow away. Unfortunately it did not lie long enough. I did not leave home till 10.45 and returned at about 1 p.m. My wife was not very well, but she had tea with me at about nine. Just after nine Harris, an insurance agent, called for the insurance money. I told him I was unable to pay as I had done no work since February 10. Harris stood at the door talking to my wife for a few minutes and then left., If I had been at Blackheath Station at 8 a.m. I could not have pot back home by nine o'clock. I produce letter and envelope written to my wife from Brixton prison on June 25 in my writing; also another envelope which contained a letter

written to Harris from Brixton. The signature, "George Packer," in the parcels book was not written by me. The signature, "G. Martin," in the L. B. & S. C. Company's book in my handwriting. Since 1886 I was three-and-a-half years telegraph messenger in the Post Office. Then I was five years ticket collector and porter on the East London Railway Committee. I was discharged on June 27, 1894, for making a representation to the Board of Trade on the long hours worked by the platform staff and for being an active member of the Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants. I then worked for Gilman and Spencer, patent maltsters, Gordon's Wharf, Rotherhithe, for seven years, resigning in 1901. I then took out an omnibus conductor's license at Scotland Yard, which I hold at the present time. I was employed by the Central Motor Omnibus Company on February 10, 1909. Application produced was signed by me. I was out of employment on March 6. I remember riding with Jarvis on April 13. I told him I had been an old railway man and asked if he had any objection to my riding in the van. I had a ticket. When picked out by Debenhain, one or two of the persons put up with me were boys. I had an overcoat on—I did not notice what the others had on. Debenham picked me out at once. Lark in did not. He went down the line and back again, put his hand on my shoulder, did not say anything, and took his hand off, and then went to a man at the end of the line, then came back and said, "It was one of those two. "The gaoler said" Are you perfectly satisfied?" He said, "I think this is the man. "The gaoler said, "You think this is the man," and he tapped me on the shoulder.

Cross-examined. I was five years in the railway service and got into the working of the railway. I was never in the parcels department. I should know how parcels are dealt with. I believe I left the service in 1893. I rode in the van of Jarvis on April 8 from Whitechapel and got out at Honor Oak Park. I noticed a little mat of mutton in the van, and that the address was Devonshire Road to a person of some name like Bonner. 1 told Jarvis that I was in the signalling department—that I had been—and did he mind my riding with him. I cannot answer the question whether I meant him to think I was still in the railway employ—I cannot call it to mind. I like to ride with a railway man because I want to find out whether he is a member of the Amalgamated Society and to try to get him to belong to it. I have left the Society long ago. I cannot answer why I wrote "G. Martin. "'Tis my signature. I can give no answer as to why I wrote it. It was on obtaining the mat of mutton addressed to Bonner. I have pleaded guilty to obtaining the mutton. I went to the booking clerk and asked for a parcel in the name of Bonner, of 246, Devonshire Road, representing myself as the person entitled to receive it, which was not true. I saw the parcel in the guard's van and the address. The "G" in the signature of" G. Packer" is similar to mine, but it is not my writing. The letters written from Brixton were written after I knew that the signature in the South-Eastern and Chatham Railway book bore a resemblance to my writing. (The prisoner was cross-examined on the various signatures which were banded to the Jury.) I wrote to Harris to come here I could not give you the date. He may have called for the insurance money since March 6; it is a weekly

payment made by my wife. I was upstairs when he called, and I called down to him because I recognised his voice. I was not looking for work that morning. I commenced in the labour yard on Monday, March 8.

Re-examined. On March 6 my wife had been crying—she was not in the best of health.

Mrs. MARY MOCKFORD, wife of the prisoner. I remember March 6 quite well. On Friday, March 5, prisoner got a labour ticket to start work on the Monday. My baby had been very ill in the night. I was not very well, and my husband had got up to get the breakfast, I getting up at 8.30. Harris called for the insurance money, and I told him I had not got a penny in the place, so I could not pay him. Prisoner called downstairs and said it was no use his calling as we had no money. That was about five minutes to nine. I asked prisoner not to go out, but he did go out at 10.45 and returned about one o'clock. After my husband was arrested I spoke to Harris and he "aid he remembered coming that day.

WILLIAM HENRY HARRIS , 8, Ashbury Road, Forest Gate, insurance agent. On March 6, at about 8.55 a.m., I called at prisoner's house. It was a very snowy morning. Mrs. Mockford was in very great distress, and she said there was no money in the house and no food. I bought some breakfast for the children and herself. I am agent for the Refuge Insurance Company. The insurance money was a weekly payment for the whole family, including the five children. I did not see the prisoner, but he called from upstairs and said it was very little use my calling any more, that he could not possibly pay me. I know his voice, and am quite certain he spoke to me. I remember it was March 6, because his premium being in arrears I called before giving the final notice that the policy would lapse on the 8th, and I gave that notice on Monday, the 8th.

Verdict, Guilty, with a strong recommendation to mercy on account of prisoner's poverty.

Sentence, Nine months' hard labour.


(Wednesday, June 30.)

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-49
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

ANDREWS, Charles (43, journalist) ; Committing acts of gross indecency with Jack Dean, Fredk. Robinson, Fredk. Salter, and Stephen Foreman. Indecently exposing his person to the said Jack Dean, Stephen Foreman, Fredk. Robinson, and Fredk. Salter, and other.

Verdict, Guilty.

Sentence, 12 months' hard labour.

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-50
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

SPINNEY, Henry (28, tobacconist) ; obtaining by false pretences from Henry James Crouch, one motor bicycle, his goods, with intent to defraud.

Mr. Travers Humphreys prosecuted.

Prisoner saw Mr. Crouch is advertisement of a motor bicycle for sale, and called on him at Wanstead. He said he was prepared to pay £29 for it, but he himself did not understand anything about motor bicycles and wished to take it away in order to show a motor expert friend

of his. Then he said he would bring his friend to look at it. The friend did not turn up, and prisoner was allowed to take the bicycle away by paying cash, and what he called cash was writing a cheque in the name of John Halden on the British Bank of Commerce, Moorgate Street, E. C. The bicycle had not been returned. The cheque was presented and was found to be a cheque from a cheque book which had in fact been handed to prisoner. Prisoner went to this bank at the end of March and proposed to start an account with £2. They asked for a reference. He produced to them what purported to be a reference from a Mr. Hutchinson. The bank wrote to Mr. Hutchinson, and they got what purported to be this reply from Hutchinson, that prisoner was quite a respectable person. This was a forgery. Mr. Hutchinson is a cab driver. Prisoner approached him and asked him if he would give him a reference for opening a banking account. Hutchinson said "Certainly not "; whereupon prisoner wrote out the reference in his name. Having opened this account with £2 he drew out the £2 in the course of the next two days. In opening the account he was W. H. Spencer. He then proceeded to draw cheques in a number of different names.

Numerous previous convictions were proved. There were other warrants out for prisoner's arrest, to the charges in which he pleaded guilty.

Sentence, Two years' hard labour.

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-51
VerdictGuilty > lesser offence
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

EVANS, Joseph (18, painter) ; feloniously wounding Annie Wigmore with intent to inflict upon her certain grievous bodily harm.

Mr. Warburton prosecuted.

ANNIE WIGMORE . I have known prisoner four years. On May 23 prisoner and I were in White Horse Lane. He was with two or three girls, and I goto bit jealous, and I struck him. He had a knife in his hand paring his nails. He went to hit me back and I turned my head. He went to push me like that, and I caught my neck. I bled a little. (To the Judge.) We had a few words over the two or three girls. I struck him in the face. It was Sunday night between a quarter and 20 past 11. He was doing something to his nails when he was talking to the young women. It was a penknife. There were lamps in the neighbourhood.

Police-constable ARTHUR ROBINSON, 478 H Division. About 20 past 12 early morning on May 24 I was on duty in White Horse Lane. I saw prosecutrix and prisoner standing together at the junction of Skidmore Street and White Horse Lane. Prosecutrix was bleeding from wounds in the left shoulder. She said "I will give this man in charge for stabbing me. "I took him to the police station. He said "All right, I will come with you. I reckon this will get me six months." He was searched at the station. The knife produced was found in his pocket. I examined the woman's shoulder. It was bleeding freely. She had been cut through the dress. There were no marks of blood on the knife.

Cross-examined. I looked at her shoulder in the street. (To the Judge.) She showed me her shoulder. There were sufficient grounds to see she had been stabbed, and I arrested him. There was a cut in the frock.

ANNIE WIGMORE recalled. The constable did not look to see if I had been wounded. The blood was just flowing through. He could see I was bleeding without examining.

Dr. GRANT, Police-surgeon H division. I was called at 12.25 a.m. on May 24. I found prosecutrix suffering from three incised wounds, two on the left side of the neck and one on the cheek. She had lost a large quantity of blood. It was quite obvious to the policeman or anyone else. The clothing was out through. I have it here. This is a piece of her blouse with the holes in it. It shows that a knife was used: the fibres are cut across, not torn. One of the wounds was an inch in depth and penetrated downwards, half an inch across. The other wound in the neck was less deep and the same width. The wound in the cheek wan quite trifling; the others were stabs. I examined prisoner. He had a red wet stain on his right hand. He said it was a stain from his employment and he desired that I should examine it. The constable said it was blood. I did examine it. It answered to the test for blood. The wounds were in a dangerous position, where the large arteries are.

Cross-examined. I do not say you caused the wounds. The wounds were bleeding at the time.


JOSEPH EVANS (prisoner, on oath). On the night of May 23 I was in company of prosecutrix and her brother from about 8.30 to 10.30 in a in a public house. At 10.30 I left prosecutrix saying I was going to get some supper. I saw her again about 11.15. She said, "Are you coming home, Joe?" I said, "Yea. "I went about 20 yards. I took out my pocket knife to cut my finger nails. Prosecutrix put her arm round my neck and started kissing. When we bad gone about another 30 yards prosecutrix said, "Let us stop here and talk. "We stood talking about five minutes when I said to prosecutrix," See if I can throw my pocket knife in the board in the wall. She stepped on one side. It caught her in the neck. I asked if it hurt her. She said "No" and gave me in charge. I have never had a quarrel all the four years I have been walking out with her. All I can say is I am sorry it happened. (To the Judge.) I was cutting my nails when I passed the remark. I said, "Do not move; see if I can stick my knife in the board in the wall. "There was a board in the wall; somebody had been making chalk marks. She said, "All right; it won't hit me. "As I threw it she stepped on one side and it caught her in the shoulder.

Cross-examined. I am a rivetter. I only threw the knife once. There could not have been three wounds if I only threw it once. I know she met with an accident at her work before this. That was the wound on her neck. She had another one on her face.

Verdict, Guilty of unlawfully wounding.

A previous conviction of felony was proved.

Sentence, Six months' hard labour.

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-52
VerdictGuilty > unknown

Related Material

EIDINOFF, Marx Morris (34, tailor) : Feloniously marrying Sarah Commissar, his wife being then alive. Mr. Bickmore prosecuted.

MICHAEL SIEGEL , 64, Kremlin Street, Cheetham, Manchester. I was present when prisoner married Rebecca Stigalo on December 25, 1904, at the Central Synagogue, Manchester. This is the certificate of the marrige. She is my sister. She is here. I call myself Siegel because it is easier to write. (To prisoner.) You were not living with my sister in a bad way. She was satisfied with you. You lived together about two years. (To the Judge.) Four months after he left her he sent her a letter (Exhibit 3). I believe he sent another after that. My sister has lived at Manchester ever since.

SARAH COMMISSAR , 1, Hayfield Passage, Mile End. I was married to prisoner at Stepney Synagogue on May 9th this year. I produce the certificate. I was engaged to prisoner five month?. He told me he was single.

To Prisoner. Your friends did not tell me you were married. I do not think if you had known your wife was alive you would have married me. MICHAEL SIEGEL (re-called). This letter (Exhibit 3) is in prisoner's writing.—ROSENTHAL: 1 affirm without any mistake that the letter handed to me was written by the old woman, the ma-in-law; it is not in Hebrew, it is a jargon. The prisoner's letter is undated; posted in New York, May, 1907.

Sergeant JOHN WILLIAMS, H Division. About June 5 last Siegel came to me. In consequence of what he said I went with him to 24, Hanbury Street. He pointed out prisoner to me. I told him I was a police officer and should arrest him for bigamy. He replied. "I am only a lodger here." The witness Commissar then came into the room and I then told prisoner he would be charged with bigamously marrying her on May 9 at Stepney Synagogue. Commissar fainted. Prisoner then said, "I know I married her. I went to America and wrote several letters to my wife, but got no answers. I have been here nine months and so I got married. "He was charged and made no reply.

To Prisoner: Inquiries were made at Manchester. It was found you were a draper's assistant for some time, and after that you had a draper's shop there. You left your wife and went to America. She was pregnant at the time. You left her without letting her know you were going. You were not arrested in your own room. I found afterwards you had passed your own room and gone up to another.


REBECCA EIDINOFF (to prisoner). I was satisfied with you. I do not think you would have married again if you had known I was alive.

Cross-examined. Prisoner lived with me two years and nine months. I have been living in Manchester since, near the same address. He did not tell me he was going. I had one child, he was born after prisoner left. I answered prisoner's letters. The last time I wrote was Whitsun holidays two years ago. He wrote that he would come back to England. I heard he was back in England four weeks ago. I have brothers and sisters in Manchester. The postman delivered the letter that has been read.

MARX MORRIS EIDINOFF (prisoner, on oath). I am a Russian subject. I have been in this country eight years. I came from Amsterdam straight

to Manchester. I was assistant and window dresser to Lewis's in Manchester quite two years. For a year and a half or two years I lived happily with my wife except that her brothers were always against me. I left Lewis's and took a shop for myself. The business was not extra good there, more expenses than income, and I decided to sell it. The brothers all went for me and wanted to know why I wanted to sell the business. They told the people who were going to take my business not to buy it. That was the reason I did not tell my wife I was going away. I was very happy with my wife, never had any argument at all, only with the brothers. Then I went to America. I wrote to my wife and had no answers. I received one letter tamped with the child's hand. I think it was written by the old woman. It says "My daughter is dead and the child is with me. "My first wife could not write. My wife agrees that she did write a letter like that because she wanted me to come home for the child to see. I am not a man to. Get married a second time. I am a business man and am looking after my business. I have been in no trouble in my life.

Cross-examined. I left my wife in Manchester; she was with child. I did not tell her I was going, because I was afraid of her brothers. They were after me. I was always on bad terms with them. I greeted them in the letter. I told them to come over to America; they could make a good living. I did not write to ask about my wife. I did not know where to write. I made inquiries privately of Silverstein, where I had my shop. He did not answer. I have asked him to come as a witness; he said he could not come. Verdict, Guilty. Sentence, Three months' imprisonment, second division.

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-53
VerdictGuilty > unknown

Related Material

DIXON, Ernest George : feloniously marrying Matilda Louise Tye, his wife being then allve. Mr. Forster Boulton, M. P., prosecuted.

Detective-sergeant RANDALL HODSON. I arrested prisoner on June 1 on a charge of bigamy. I had previously made inquiries at Somerset House. I obtained certified copies of marriage certificates. The first is a certificate of the marriage of Ernest George Dean and Sarah Ann Thorne, at St. Pancras Registry Office, on March 11, 1893. The second certificate is of the marriage of Ernest George Dixon and Matilda Louise Tye, at the Registry Office, St. Albans, on December 4, 1902. When charged prisoner said: "It is quite true; I shall be pleased to have it cleared up. When I got married to my first wife I gave a false name, and she knew it, so I thought I was free to marry again." I asked him how it was that he gave a false name; he said it was through having got into trouble and he did not want his employer to know. At the police-court he said his first wife had threatened to charge him, and she intended to ruin him, or words to that effect. In the year 1904 prisoner was charged with regard to maintenance at the instance of the first wife.

SAMUEL MILLINGTON JONES , 206. Goldhawk Road, Shepherd's Bush, assistant clerk and collector to the Guardians of the Borough of Hammersmith. I witnessed the marriage which took place at St. Paneras on. March 11, 1893.

MATILDA LOUISE TYE , 8, Wimbledon Place, Clerkenwell. I have known prisoner eight years. He told me he was married, but he said it was not legal. On December 4, 1902, I went through a form of marriage with prisoner at the Registry Office at St. Albans. Prisoner gave the name of Ernest George Dixon on that occasion. That was the name I knew him by. He came to work at the same firm as I was working at.

To Prisoner: I knew you 16 months before the marriage. You left your first wife in May, 1902, and married me in December. You told me you were married. You told me you had seen in the columns of the "News of the World" that where a marriage was performed for the purpose of deceiving or to defraud with the knowledge of both parties and in a false name it was invalid. That was an answer to an inquiry in the paper It was also in" Whitaker's Almanack." It is three years since I saw the first wife. She then said she had no bastards. I said, "No more have I as I know of. "But," she said, "Dixon is my husband." She said she tore up her certificate as she had children by two men at that time. I tried to find out before we married as to the legality of the first marriage. They all said it was not legal. Since we have been married I have consulted a solicitor, and he tells me there is a doubt. I persuaded you several times to stop with your wife. You said you would murder her if you stopped longer. You have been a good husband to me. I have always been under the impression we were legally married. I have helped to keep the children by the first marriage.


EBNEST GEORGE DIXON (prisoner, on oath). Up to the age of 20 years I have never had one stain upon my character. I joined the army when I was 18. In 1892 I came up on the death of my father. There I met my first wife in Kentish Town. After my father's death I went back to my regiment. My wife begged and prayed of me to leave the service. I deserted. I went to work with a firm at a very low wage and got into trouble there. As I was opening the door of the "Daily Telegraph" to allow a lady to pass through she asked me if I was out of work. She said, "Do you want a job?" I said I did. She said, "Come with me." I knew that I had lost my character and I thought I had better not go in the name of Dixon. I used the name of Dean as the nearest I could think of to the "D. "She said "I will give you 14s. a week," and she heard of the condition of No. 1. She said, "If you will get married I will raise your wages to 21s. a week, and give you a wedding present." With that I went to No. 1, and I said, "What shall we do about this? I am in a false name; she is offering me a big wage and a wedding present. What do you say? We had better show the certificate. We shall have to get married in that name." She said, "We will get married in that name then. "We got married in the name of Ernest George Dean. I led a dreadful life with this first wife. Wherever I went she led me into trouble; incited me to start stealing. When I came to the age of 24 I see the folly I was leading myself into, and going the road to ruin. I was punished for the offences I had committed. I swore I would turn over a new leaf and be a

different man altogether. The money I was earning was not sufficient, earned honestly, so she turned to drink and the company of other men. From that time up to this present moment, I have led an honest life. I left her in May, 1902. I saw her in the company of a woman of bad repute and that same night a policeman came to the house to say she was at Bow Street for being drunk and disorderly in the street and calling the policeman a bastard. I was in court myself. I said "I shall not stand this any longer. I have been looking in the papers and our marriage is not legal. "She said, "A good job too. "I had seen in the columns that where a marriage was performed for the purpose of deceiving or fraud in a false name with the consent of both parties it was invalid. I told her that, and soon after she destroyed her marriage certificate and said, "It is no use to me. "With that I left. I went to work with a firm I had worked for four years previously. Whilst working there I received a warrant to say the children were chargeable to me in the South wark Workhouse. I thought all this time she was with this man with the children in the house. I was taken before Mr. Rose at Tower Bridge and charged with that offence. I had not got the evidence then that I have now, so I was sentenced to six weeks. My firm took me back again. I went on working for two more years when I was charged with deserting from the army on the information of the first wife. She has done all this for me. This is all spite. This is a copy of the letter I sent to Mr. Biron, the presiding magistrate at Old Street at the time. I asked his advice about the first marriage while I was under remand. I was discharged. This is to show I was not keeping it secret. I got no answer. The charge of deserting from the army was not proceeded with; it was 14 years after. The words No. 1 used to me were "I hope your first marriage is proved not legal so that I can marry Mr. West."

Cross-examined. I had two names in the army. I rejoined after I deserted. I first joined in the name of Terriss. My second wife knows I was born in 1872. I changed my name so that I could get this rise in wages and the wedding present.

Mrs. DIXON (to prisoner). I knew you as Ernest Reginald Terries before we were married. When I was in service you told me that you were the brother of Walter Husk, and that you were born in India because you were so dark. I did not quite know your mother's name because your mother was married in the name of Hodges. You kept me away from your mother. You and your mother were on bad terms. You got me into trouble and took another man's reference to get a situation in the name of Dean. I know nothing about the rise in wages. We arranged to get married in the name of Dean because I was in trouble. I did not care what name I was married in. After you had done three months you joined the army and left me to go where I liked. I go by the name of Dixon because I know it is your real name. I did not know it was your real name then. I found it out afterwards through people calling your mother Dixon. I have always put the children to school in the name of Dixon. You told me you had got a better woman than I and you were marrying that woman. I gave you three weeks to come back to me before I went to Newington Work-house.

I was there 11 months. Once I told you if you knocked me about any more and blacked my eyes I would put you away for deserting the army. I was let off at Bow Street. You told a certain party a fortnight after we were married that we were not married. I never asked you to marry me properly.

Cross-examiied. Prisoner told me he was going to leave me. He did not contribute to my maintenance after that. I went to the workhouse three weeks after. I had to go; I had three children. The guardians found his whereabouts. I thought my marriage was a perfectly good one, or I should not have stayed with him.

Verdict, Guilty.

Sentence, Three months' imprisonment, second division.

BEFORE THE RECORDED. (Friday, July 2.)

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-54
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

LAWRENCE, John (33, electrical engineer) ; throwing corrosive fluid, to wit, sulphuric acid, upon Florrie Herbert, with intent to burn her.

Mr. Close prosecuted; Mr. Hawtin defended.

FLORRIE HERBERT , Wellington Street, Camden Town. I am a single woman and an unfortunate. I have known defendant by sight for two months. On Sunday night, May 30, I was in Charing Cross Road about eight o'clock. Prisoner had followed me from Tottenham Court Road as far as the Palace Theatre. He then spoke to me, and asked me where I was going, and I said, "Nowhere particular. "Then he asked me if I would like to go to his flat. I asked him how much he would give me, and he said, "A sovereign." I went with him to his flat in Lisle Street, Leicester Square. It was not a flat, but a dirty little back room on the third floor. had not been there many minutes when we had a bit of a dispute over money, and eventually he told me to clear out and turned out the gas. When I got to the door of the flat he threw something over me. I thought it was water, and took no notice of it. It came principally over my dress and hand. I felt my hand smarting at the time, but I put it down to the heat. I had no gloves on. He said he would kick me downstairs if I did not go. I then went away. An hour or so afterwards I met him again at the corner of Tottenham Court Road. I asked him what he had thrown over me, and said, "Whatever it is it is burning my hand. I am between two minds to give you in charge." He said, "If so, why don't you give me in charge," and walked away, and I went home and went straight to my room. I did not notice the dress till Wednesday morning, when I was going to get dressed to go out and have some dinner. As I took hold of the dress the waist came away from the skirt, as if it had been burnt. (Dress produced.) I also found that a lot of my underclothing, which I had not worn since the Sunday evening, was also destroyed. My hand is still painful, and I cannot

lift anything with it. No one but myself had access to my dresses. When I found my clothing had been injured I went to the police.

Cross-examined. Prisoner asked me if I was a Londoner, and I told him I was Irish. I did not say I was over from Belfast with my parents for a fortnight's holiday. I did not have coffee at prisoners rooms. I was not two minutes in the room altogether. Next morning my hand was all blistered. I did not know whether it was caused by the sun. I could not see whether prisoner throw anything as it was dark. Prisoner did not light the lamp before putting the gas out. I did not know my dress was damaged at the time, not till the Wednesday. We did not go to any public-house together nor had I (been to a public-house alone. I know that recently complaints have been made of stuff being thrown over women's dresses in the streets. On the Monday following (Whit Monday) I went to work at some tea gardens at Hampstead as a waitress.

ALEXANDER MITCHELL , divisional surgeon, Vine Street. I. examined prosecutrix at Vine Street on Thursday, June 3. She complained of her hand, and an examining it I found traces of blisters a few days previously; they had healed, but the skin was not fully formed. The opinion I formed was that the marks had been caused by burning with some corrosive fluid, not very powerful or the blisters would have been greater. I examined the clothing, and found evidence of the presence of sulphuric acid. I went with the police to prisoner's room, where was found a bottle containing a very powerful solution of ammonia, which could not be used without dilution for cleaning clothes. As the clothing showed traces of sulphuric acid, the injuries to the clothing could not have been caused by the ammonia. I also examined the stairs, and found upon them two splashes of some substance, but I would not like to say what they were caused by.

Detective-sergeant GRAY, C Division. On June 2 prosecutrix came to Marlborough Street Police Station, and made a complaint. I went round with her, and ultimately she located 32, Lisle Street, as the place where something had happened on the previous Sunday. We went up to the second floor back room. Prisoner was not in. Subsequently we went up again and he was in. She then gave him into custody. I explained to him the charge, which was that of throwing corrosive fluid over prosecutrix. He said, "If I did, why did not she give me into custody? I saw her again the same night. She wanted me to do a thing I could not tell you about, so I cleared her out. "He was charged at the station, after prosecutrix had seen the divisional surgeon. He said, "I see I cannot have bail; I absolutely deny it, of course. "He then went on to say, "About midnight, after she left me, I saw her outside Tottenham Court Road Tube Station. She asked me, 'What have you thrown on me?' I said, 'What de you mean?' She said she had had some water thrown over her dress, and suggested I had thrown it. I said, 'In that case, why do not you charge me?" She did nothing, did not follow me, and I went home. "Prisoner has a small workshop underneath his bedroom, but I do not know whether he works there or not.


JOHN LAWRENCE (prisoner, on oath). I am an electrical engineer in a small way, but formerly I had a very good business. I was a volunteer in the C. I. V. in the Boer War, and was wounded. Before Whit-Sunday I had never to my knowledge seen prosecutrix. It is true that we met in Charing Cross Road, but not a word was said about money. She said she came from Ireland, and was over with her parents for a fortnight's holiday. We were chatting I suppose for 10 minutes or a quarter of an hour, and by that time we had arrived at Piccadilly Circus. Then she said she would like a cup of coffee; we were outside a tea-room at the time, and I suggested she should come to my room. She absented, and we went, and I made some coffee for her. After that I suggested we should have certain intercourse, and she said she was afraid of the consequences. She suggested a certain alternative which disgusted me, and I told her to leave my room at once. She was there altogether a quarter of an hour or 20 minutes. I did not turn the gas out before she left the room. It is not true that I threw anything' over her. I had no sulphuric acid in my possession, but I had some ammonia which used for cleaning clothes. I saw her again later in Tottenham Court Road. She accused me of throwing something over her which had burnt her dress and her hand, and I told her if she thought I had done so the proper course was to give me into custody. As a crowd was beginning to collect I did not like standing there any longer, so I went home. I heard nothing more of the matter until I was arrested by the police sergeant.

Cross-examined. I have not been doing much as an electrical engineer. I have been singing in choruses. It is. a fact that sulphuric acid enters very largely into a certain type of battery used by a certain type of engineer, but I do not use them at all. When the prosecutrix told me she had come from Belfast with her parents I did not ask her why she was out alone; that had nothing to do with me. If she—an unprotected girl—was willing to come to my rooms, I saw no harm in it; girls nowadays can generally look after themselves. I did say before the magistrate that if I had known she was a prostitute I would not have had her in my rooms at all, for the simple reason that I do not associate with such people. The story of the prosecutrix is untrue in many details; some of it is true and some untrue.

ALBERT MOORE , Associate of the Pharmaceutical Society, member of the Society of Chemical Industry, and of the Sanitary Institute, gave evidence respecting the spots on the stairs at prisoner's flat, that crude sulphuric acid would have charred the, wood for some distance down and that dilute sulphuric acid would leave traces. He examined the stains on five different stairs without finding traces of sulphuric acid. Had sulphuric acid been used there would undoubtedly have been traces of it. Sulphuric acid applied to the skin would cause a sensation of burning instantly.

ANNIE SALTER , charwoman, deposed that there was no trace of charring on the stairs at 32, Lisle Street.

BENJAMIN BUNNELL , landlord of the premises where prisoner lived, gave him a good character.

Verdict, Not guilty.

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-55
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

TAYLOR, John Henry (45, coachman) ; feloniously marrying Annie Peel, his wife being then alive.

Mr. May prosecuted.

Upon the Recorder calling attention to the fact that there was no evidence on the depositions that prisoner had seen his wife for 15 years, Mr. May stated that he had police evidence that he had seen her as lately as 1902 (the second marriage having taken place in 1906), and the case was then proceeded with. The first witness called was the Rev. Thomas Henry Burnett, who deposed to marrying John Henry Taylor and Ellen Lowrie in 1896, but he was unable to identify prisoner as one man he then married.

The Recorder, holding that there was no proof of identity, directed a verdict of Not guilty.

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-56
VerdictsGuilty > pleaded part guilty

Related Material

SKINNER. Ernest Young (24, surveyor) ; in incurring certain debts and liabilities; to wit, to the amount of £100 to James Lyon Thorne, to the amount of £50 to William Henry Hum, and to the amount of £100 to John Davies, unlawfully obtaining credit by means of fraud; being a person adjudged bankrupt, unlawfully making certain material omissions in a Certain statement relating to his affairs, to wit, the said debts and liaibilities; in the county of Kent, forging and uttering, knowing the same to be forged, the endorsement on a certain order for the payment of money, to wit, a banker's cheque for £15 14s. 6d., with intent to defraud.

Prisoner pleaded guilty to the indictment for forgery. In 1906 he was carrying on business as an auctioneer at Gravesend, and received from Mrs. West, a client who was purchasing a house, a cheque for £15 14s. 6d., payable to a solicitor at Dartford in respect of the conveyance. He forged the endorsement to this cheque and applied the proceeds to his own use. When attention was drawn to the fact he offered a cheque on his own account to the solicitor, who refused to receive it, but no action was then taken. Prisoner subsequently becoming bankrupt, the circumstances transpired, and a prosecution was ordered. It was stated that there is also on the file of the Court an indictment charging prisoner with various bankruptcy offences.

Sentence, Eight months' imprisonment, second division.


(Friday, July 2.)

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-57
VerdictsNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

THOMPSON, James (48, traveler), and LEVER, James (42, engineer) ; both receiving three Oliver typewriters and eight other Oliver typewriters, the goods in each case of George Arthur Dutfield and another, well knowing them to have been stolen; FARRINGDON, William (39, cook) ; feloniously receiving four Oliver typewriters, the goods of George Arthur Dutfield and another, well knowing them to have been stolen.

Mr. Huntly Jenkins prosecuted; Mr. Purcell defended Thompson; Mr. Burnie and Mr. Arthur Cohen defended Lever; Mr. Warburton defended Farringdon.

GEORGE PARTRIDGE , shipping clerk to the Oliver Typewriter Company. On March 25 last I transmitted for shipment to Shanghai, by Messrs. Dutfield, 11 cases each containing one typewriter. The three typewriter in Court are a portion of that consignment.

GEORGE T. DEVEREUX , carman to Messrs. Dutfield. On March 25 last I had out a van, mare, and harness. The van contained 11 Oliver typewriters, three cases cocoanuts, and one case stationery. I left my van for a few minutes to have a cup of tea in St. Mary-at-Hill, Eastcheap. When I came back the van was gone. The next I saw of it was next morning in the yard.

ALF MARSHALL , 14, Chadwick Road, Peckham. I have known prisoner Farringdon some years. I kept a baker's and restaurant business at 34, Goswell Road, known as "Ye Old Bun Shop." Farringdon assisted me there. He came about the beginning of March. He was with me seven or nine weeks. When he had been with me about four weeks he asked me if he could have something sent there. I told him "Yes." That day, or some time after, some things came. I never saw them arrive. I cannot call to mind exactly what Farringdon said at the time; my memory fails me a great deal. When they were there he told me they were typewriters. He said, "Those thing have come. "They were put in the top room. I had a look at them. I saw two typewriters. They were similar to those here. I remember a day or two after someone came and took something away about dinner-time. I do not know who it was. I never saw the party; I was busy. Farringdon asked me for a bag to put them in, or something of that sort. He went in and got it. I believe only one typewriter went on that occasion. I think the other went that day or the next. I do not know who took it away. Farringdon told me they bad gone. After that he left my service. After he had been gone about a week I was told something else had come. I found they were two machines similar to the others. They were put in the same place. I do hot know who brought them. I remember a man named Hicks calling with another man. I do not see that man here. I received £3 15s. I gave 2s. 6d. to Hicks. He considered that was what he was entitled to. I brought down one of the typewriters. I was going out of the shop at the time when they first came. I gave it to the man that was in the shop. Hicks was there. When I came back it was gone. I did not see it actually taken away. On the of following Monday I sent the money to Farringdon at Salisbury Plain. When Farringdon left me there were no typewriters there. I sent the money to Farringdon because I was under the impression the machines were his. Before he left he gave me no instructions about

where to send the money or what to do with the typewriters. He left his address. After I sent the money somebody else called on me. I do not know that I could recognise that person; in fact, I never hardly saw him. He came in the busy time. He handed me a piece of paper. There was a signature on it. I do not know where that paper is. It was laid down and destroyed in the sweeping up. It had on it, "Please give nearer machine. "I had it fetched down and he took it away. No money passed on that occasion. I think I communicated with Farringdon by letter what I had done with the machine.

Cross-examined by Mr. Purcell. I am not in the habit of taking in goods for my servants. I have never been asked to do so before. I saw these things in my house. I could not say if they looked rather valuable; I do not know their value; never had one in my possession. I have seen them marked up £10 10s. It is only recently I have noticed. I do not recognise Thompson. Hicks did not say, "This is the man who will buy one of the typewriters," or words to that effect. He came and asked for one of the typewriters. He said, "I have given £4 for one of the typewriters." I did not know Hicks had been employed to find people who would buy typewriters. I will swear the man I cannot recognise did not ask for a receipt for the money paid to me. I did not tell Thompson when he asked for a receipt that I was going out to get some flour and had not time. I was going out-to order some flour. I had known Hicks two or three years before this transaction. I had known Farringdon eight or nine years. People in my service take things in without asking questions. I did not ask Farringdon where they had got these typewriters from. I knew Hicks was a waiter; I know it is usual for some of them to go to sales and buy. I am working at "The Bun Shop" now. I am in the Bankruptcy Court. The police came to me. I do not say it was a pleasant visit. They did not ask whether I had inquired of my friend Hicks where he had got the typewriters from. I did not say I had not asked. The police came before Farringdon was taken. I did not know that Lever and Thompson were taken and committed for trial before Farringdon was taken. The police came afterwards. They did not tell me how they had found out that I had anything to do with typewriters.

Cross-examined by Mr. Warburton. Farringdon was only temporarily assisting me. He had seven or eight shillings a week wages and his food. He came to assist me with the dinners—the trade was only working up. He did not live on the premises. I do not know that he said that somebody wanted him to buy these things, and that he said he had not the money and would get it from me. He has had money from me—£2 and £3; on one occasion £5. I might have lent him some money to get the typewriters, but not when they came. I let him have £4, but I do not say it was for that. I am not the receiver and was not using him as a catspaw. I found the money which bought those typewriters. (To the Judge.) I did not know they were typewriters. I saw them when they came. a I

did not pay the money to the man from whom the typewriters were bought. Farringdon had been at the camp about a week when some other typewriters came. He had left my service and was away under military law. He was arrested at the canteen. The machines that came after he left my service did not come to me as the receiver. I took them in for him.

JAMES HICKS , 2, Rupert Street, Pimlico. I had a conversation with a man named (Bill Leather in April. I said before the magistrate it was the beginning of May. (Later in the same day I saw a man named Collins, and later again I saw Leather and Farringdon; Collins was there also. I did not hear what Collins said to Farringdon, they were a little way away. This took place in "The Shades," King William Street, City. Collins and Farringdon went away together. Next day I met Thompson. He introduced me to Lever in "The Shades. "We met by appointment. I went with Lever and Thompson to "The Bun Shop. "Lever said he had a customer for the typewriters, and we went to "The Bun Shop," where Lever paid £4, I believe, for one. Farringdon and Lever went upstairs. When we got to "The Bun Shop" we saw Marshall and Farringdon. I said to Farringdon, "This is the man that will buy the machines," meaning Lever. Farringdon said to me, "You don't want to come up; you know how they came"—I think those were the words. The conversation took place with Leather, which led to my taking Lever and Thompson there. When Farringdon and Lever had gone upstairs I went out of the shop to "The Charterhouse," where Thompson was waiting for me. That is a public-house in Aldersgate Street. Thompson had left "The Bun Shop" before me. After I saw Thompson I went back to see if Lever was there. Lever had gone away with one of the typewriters. I did not see Farringdon after that; he had left. Thompson said, "I know where to find Lever." We went to Blackfriars and saw Lever He said, "They want another machine; they are so good. Will you go back and get another one. I will give you £1 to pay £1 off. "He gave me £1 and 1s. for the cab. I went back to "The Bun Shop" and saw Farringdon there. I said, "They want another machine; will you take £1, and they will bring the other money back?" He said, "No, if you will wait I will go with you. "He declined to let me have the machine without being paid £4. He went with me to "The Black Friar. "We found. Lever and Thompson there. I did not hear any conversation between them. I think they went back together and got the other machine. They left me there. About a week after that Thompson called at my house. I went with him to "The Charterhouse. "We saw nobody there, and I went with Thompson to "The Bun Shop. "There I saw Marshall. Thompson bought a machine for £3 15s. I do not remember what was said between Thompson and Marshall. Thompson got a cab. I went into "The Charterhouse." He came and fetched me. He said, "I have the machine in the cab; come along. "I went in the cab to Warwick Street, Pimlico." Thompson did not say why he was requiring this machine. I have known Thompson and Farringdon a number of years. I have not known Lever very long. Thompson is

a traveller in wines and spirits. I have not known either of the prisoners as travelling in typewriters before.

Cross-examined by Mr. Purcell. It is not true that acting for Farringdon and Marshall I tried my old friend Thompson to see if he could find somebody to buy a machine. I had been to see Thompson in Brixton Prison. I have not been about with the police looking for people. They came and took me. I paid a visit to Brixton Prison after I was taken and let go. I had been there Before that If I had asked Thompson if he knew anyone who could do with some typewriters it is not a thing I would forget, I think. I will not swear I did not ask him. I will swear he said he. thought the man he was travelling for would buy a typewriter. He did not tell me he had known Lever for a number of years and would ask him. He brought Lever to me. I do not remember him telling me he would ask Lever if he would buy a typewriter. I have a bad memory. On a subsequent occasion Thompson took me to Lever. Before he took me he did not tell me that Lever could do with two machines. It is nor. true that I took Lever to some place and that Lever remained in a saloon bar until Hicks and I came back, and that I said to Thompson that Lever had bought one and had arranged to buy another. I did not tell Thompson that Lever said he had not got enough money to pay for two at a time, or he would have taken the two. Lever went away in a cab with the machine he bought. Thompson and I were left together. It was not arranged that we should meet Lever in "The Black Friar. "Thompson bought a second typewriter. He did not do that because I told him I had got a friend who wanted one. I took Thompson to "The Bun Shop" and saw him pay Marshall for it. I did not hear him ask Marshall for a receipt. I believe Marshall said he was in a hurry. Marshall did not say, "I am in a hurry; I am going to get some flour." I cannot explain how Thompson knew Marshall was going to get some flour unless Marshall told him. When we went in the calb to Warwick Street he left me at the bottom of the street. He was not taken there at my suggestion. I do not know who lives at 119, Warwick Street. Thompson saw me several times. As to telling him I had a friend at Streatham, but he had gone away for a week, I have no friend at Streatham. Thompson did not get angry with me because a typewriter was no use to him. I did not bring Thompson a letter in which a gentleman said he would have the typewriter next Monday. I was first introduced to this typewriter business in "The Shades" by a man named Leather. I have not been looking for Leather. I did not give the police a description of him. I told the police Leather was the man. The police did not ask for (his description. I told the police about Collins and gave a description of him. I have not seen either of them since this case began. I have not looked for them. They wanted me to find a purchaser for the machines. I did not say to either of them, "Go away; I cannot talk to you any more about typewriters. "I did not go to Marshall. Leather brought Farringdon into "The Shades." I went to Marshall afterwards. I was not putting up someone else to do the dangerous work. I would not do it myself.

Cross-examined by Mr. Cohen. I have known Lever about 18 months. I do not live near him. I was in the habit of seeing him at his business at Fulham. I knew him as a man who was carrying on a respectable business. This is the first transaction. I never had a dealing in my life before. I did not understand typewriters and I did not know how they came. I was not assisting to get rid of them. It was Thompson that was pushing the thing. I daresay I was with Thompson 20 times. Lever never said the thing was becoming a nuisance, the way Farringdon and I bothered him. They were doing business in other things.

Cross-examined by Mr. Warburton. I have worked at the Hurlingham Club this last 20 years. I go there three times a week. I have not known Marshall very long. I had no suspicion anything was wrong with these things. I saw Marshall receive £2 15s. from Thompson. He did not give a receipt. I never dreamt of such a thing as that it was safer for Marshall not to give a receipt. Thompson was always worrying me about the matter. I got 2s. 6d. from Marshall when Lever bought his machine. When I first went to "The Bun Shop" with Lever and Thompson I did not know any machines were there. Farringdon said he would be there at 12 o'clock. That is why I went there. I knew it was typewriter business I was on. On that occasion Lever took one away. On the next occasion Farringdon came back with me and Lever and Farringdon went in and got the other one.

DAVID OWEN , Greenberg and Sons, general merchants, Water Lane, E. C. On April 16 I bought two Oliver typewriters from Lever for £19. I have known him some time. He rang me up on the telephone and said he had two typewriters for sale and asked me if I would buy them. I said he could bring them up for me to look at. He brought one. I really didn't look at it; I took it straight up to the firm to whom I sold it and we had a look at it up there. Then it was suggested that two of them should be bought, and the other was afterwards brought along. I had every confidence in Mr. Lever. He is an electrician. I understood from him that his partner who had left him bad bought these two typewriters and they were left on his hands. He did not mention "The Bun Shop" to me. He signed the receipt in the name of Stonnard. I understood that was the party for whom he was acting. The transaction was completed in Mr. Friedheim's office. I did not buy the machines until I had them. The moment I sold the machines I bought them. I then went to Walham Green Station. Lever and Thompson went down by the same train. We were not in the same compartment. We were to go to some hotel at Walham Green. I was paid by cheque for the machines. I had it in my possession until we arrived at Walham Green. Mr. Lever was going to get it cashed, as it was past banking hours. He said he was in want of money and knew a hotel proprietor who would cash it for him. Thompson took no part in the sale. When the cheque was cashed I got £5. That was the difference between what I gave for them and what Mr. Friedheim paid.

Cross-examined by Mr. Purcell. It was through me that Lever got the introduction to Friedheim.

Cross-examined by Mr. Cohen. I did not get £5, I am quite sure. I asked for a receipt. I did not say I had to pay somebody else. It would be silly to say it.

OSCAR FRIEDHEIM (merchant, 7, Water Lane, E. C.). I bought two typewriters through the last witness for £22 on April 16. They wanted the money at once, and I paid by cheque. The machines have been given up to the police.

WALTER PERRY (foreman to Messrs. Dutfield). The mare, van, and contents are Messrs. Dutfield's property. Their value is £309. On May 13 I saw two typewriters at Mr. Friedheim's. Friedheim and Owen made statements to me. On the same day I went with Inspector Mathews and other officers to Dawes Road, Fulham. I saw Lever there. At that time the police officers were close handy, scattered about, looking on. I said, "Mr. Lever, I believe." He said, "Yes." I said, "I saw your friend, Mr. Owen, this morning in reference to two typewriters you sold him. Have you any more for sale?" He said, "Yes, I can let you have two more." I said, "At what price can you let me have them?" He said, "The same price as Owen." I said, "Can you do them a bit cheaper than that?" He said, "No, you see, my pals want a bit out of it; it only amounts to about 30s. each. We had 10 cases of these. They should have gone to Shanghai, but they did not; 10 cases went, but it was old iron, not typewriters." I made an appointment to meet him next day at 11 o'clock in Dawes Road. I arranged to take a van up to bring the typewriters away. I took the van and waited till one o'clock outside the boot shop in Dawes Road. Then I went to the "Salisbury," which is a little higher up in Dawes Road, at one o'clock. I saw Lever standing outside with Thompson. He introduced me to Thompson. We then had a drink, and Lever said the machines were at Ebury Bridge. We then drove to Sloane Square. On the way Thompson said, "I think we are being watched." He was very nervous. We all got out at Sloane Square. Prisoners had some conversation at a distance away from me. Lever went over to the post office to telephone; they both went. Lever then went to Sloane Square station and said he would telephone from there. Thompson then said, "I will go and see where he is; stay where you are." I followed him. He had taken his bag out of my van. I thought he was going to run away. I was just in time to see him jump into a train. I did not see them again till that evening in Woodgrange Road, Forest Gate, quite accidentally. I live there. Thompson said to me, "I have been looking for you." I said, "Why did you run away from me this afternoon?" I had given Lever on the 13th an address at Forest Gate where I was connected with a little business. Lever answered, "You see my pal is very nervous; he is so nervous he could not eat his dinner which I gave him." He was fearfully white and shaking like a leaf. On May 15 I went to 7, Lilyville Road. I saw Lever. I said I had come about the typewriters. He arranged to. meet me at Victoria Station, where he said he would have the typewriters at 11.30. I went there. At one o'clock Lever came

out of the station and saw me waiting there. He said, "I am sorry I could not get the writers here, my pals are so nervous. "We then went and had a drink, and in course of conversation Lever said, cannot get them now, but I will try and buy the lot. I will borrow some money from a publican friend of mine and write you." He said, "There are about eight of the heads up here this morning somewhere, but I don't know where. "I did not see him again until he was in custody. Before we got into the van Thompson gave me a book of instructions for the use of the Oliver typewriter, which he said came from one of the cases.

Cross-examined by Mr. Purcell. Thompson told me he had a typewriter to sell on the 14th. He did not say the purchase money and expenses would cost him £5. He simply asked what I was going to pay for them. I did not bid a price. Before I went to Dutfields I was a gentleman's servant. In the van Thompson said, "I think we have one"; no other words in that connection. I saw that Thompson had other books in his bag like the one he gave me. I used the name of Stevens in this case. I got to know Lever through Mr. Owen. I use the name of Stevens in the Forest Gate business. I knew the oases were going to Shanghai. I thought it very odd when Lever told me about them having the machines, and old iron going to Shanghai. I thought it most remarkable that the man should open up and tell me such things. When Lever said there were eight heads up that morning, I understood him to mean there were eight chiefs of gangs of thieves up there. I know thieves' slang. I understood that there were eight generals, as counsel put it, waking round Victoria Station about one typewriter. There were a lot of them there that morning.

Inspector JAMES COLLING, City Police. On May 27 I was with Inspector Matthews in Fulham Road. We saw Lever there, told him we were police officers, and were making inquiries with reference to stolen typewriters, two of which he had sold to Mr. Owen. He said, "Yes, I sold two to Mr. Owen on commission for a man named Thompson. I have known him about two years; he is a traveller in the spirit trade. I do not know where he lives, but he gave me an address at 119, Warwick Street, Belgravia. I have been expecting to see him this morning. He wants me to find a customer for another typewriter, but I have got a bit suspicious" (or he may have said, "I have got my suspicions"), "I do not intend to have anything more to do with the matter. "I went with him to various places in the neighbourhood of Fulham, where he said we should probably find Thompson. We did not find Thompson. He was then conveyed to the Minories Police Station. He and Thompson were both charged together later in the day.

Detective-sergeant JAMES BBOWN, City Police. On May 27 I kept observation in Warwick Street. At nine p.m. I saw Thompson. I told him I was a police officer, and that I was going to arrest him for stealing a horse and van containing 11 cases of typewriters and other articles, value £344 10s. He replied, "I know nothing about typewriters." He was then taken to Rochester Row Police

Station, where he was detained. On the arrival of Inspector Matthews he said he was to be sent to the City and that 119, Warwick Street, would be searched. Thompson then said, "You will find a typewriter there which I have bought for £5. I bought it from a man whose name and address I don't know; I believe he lives somewhere in Kennington; he has the others there. "When charged with Lever he made no reply. We found the typewriter at Warwick Street. I arrested Farringdon on June 18 at Ludgershall Station, Wilts, on a warrant. He said, "I was led into it." At the station, the warrant was read to him. He said, "I had them, I bought them, I sold them. I was going to clear up here and coming to see you. He was then put in the cells. At about six o'clock I saw him and gave him some tea. He said, "I want to tell you all about these things. "After his tea he was brought out of the cell; he was cautioned and he made a statement which I took down in writing. (Statement read.)

ARTHUR JOHN BOXALL proved the packing of the cases.


JAMES THOMPSON (prisoner, on oath). Hicks introduced me to this typewriter business about the beginning of May. I have known him as a waiter about 25 years. I met him in the City. He said, "Did I know anybody who could do with some typewriters?" I said I would inquire. I don't think anything more was said then. He would not tell me where they were. He told me they were Oliver typewriters. I saw Lever after that and asked him if he knew anybody. He said he would inquire. After that he said he had found a friend who would buy one. I told this to Hicks. Then I went with Hicks to Fulham, where Lever would be found. Lever knew Hicks before this. Hicks telephoned to somebody. He said his friend would want to see one. We then came to "The Black Friar." Lever left us there and came back with two gentlemen, one of whom was Mr. Owen. Lever was in conversation with Owen and the other man. I took no part in it. Then Lever, Hicks, and I went to "The Bun Shop. "I did not know "The Bun Shop" before. Hicks took us. He said, "The typewriters are there. We will go there and see them." We walked to Smithfield Market. We had a drink. I waited in the saloon bar. Hicks came back and said Lever had bought one machine; he did not say from whom. I did not know, where they had gone. Hicks said we had better go down and meet him at "The Black Friar." He said, "That is where I've got to meet him." We found Lever there. On May 8 I found out where the typewriters came from; Hicks told me; he took me there himself after Lever had bought one machine. Hicks wanted me to buy one. He said he had a friend who would buy it, and we could make a few shillings. He said, "You might as well buy two." I said, "No, I have not got money to buy. two." He said, "You can raise some money." I had a diamond ring. I then went with Hicks to "The Bun Shop." Hicks said to Marshall, "My friend will buy

this typewriter. "Marshall brought it downstairs. He said, "I want £4." I said, "It has cost me a lot of money running about to try and sell. I cannot give you £4 for it, I am short of money. I shall have to have a cab to take it away." He said, "I will allow you 5s. for the cab." I asked him to give me a receipt. He said, "I am going out to buy flour." Hicks and I went in a cab to 119, Warwick Street, where we left it. Hicks said he would go and see the gentleman on Sunday morning at his house at Streatham. I met him at two o'clock'on Sunday afternoon. He said his friend had gone away to Liverpool and would not be back for a week. I said, "You have done a nice thing for me. The money is more use to me than buying this typewriter. "I was very angry to think he had got me to buy it. I think I saw him again at six that night. Perry saw Lever and me. I told him I had a typewriter to sell for £7. I took out a book and said, "I took it out this morning." I did not say I had any more books like it. He said he had been waiting since 10 o'clock. I said, "I did not know anything about your coming to meet me." He said, "Get up in the cart and we will go and get it." He kept stopping at every public-house on the road and I was not drinking anything. I said, "I have other business to do; I want to get away." When we got as far as Sloane Square Lever said, "I want to get on the telephone on business." He went to the post-office in King's Road. He was there a long time. I went over myself. The telephone was engaged by a lady. He said, "I am going to get on the telephone at the station." He went to the station to get on the telephone. He was a long time there. I told him I would not wait longer. I believed these typewriters were being taken for some debt. I was introduced to them first of all by Hicks, whom I had known for 25 years and passed them on to Lever. Hicks showed me a letter he said he had received from his friend at Liverpool, saying he would be up next week to buy the typewriter. I said, "Very well, I must let it be at that."

Cross-examined. I heard Hicks' evidence to-day. It is not substantially true. He told me in the first place to find a man to buy some typewriters, and I did so. I have been a waiter myself. I asked him where the typewriters were. I did not think it extraordinary he would not tell me. He said there were two or three for sale. I had another interview with him. I did not go to "The Bun Shop" at that time. It did not strike me as an extraordinary place for typewriters to be. Lever bought two and I bought one. I did not think I was getting a bargain. When we were in the trap going to Sloane Square we were speaking about the horse. I said, "The horse will fall down if we are not careful"—it was a bad horse. Lever knew the typewriter I had bought was in the neighbourhood of Victoria Station. The reason of pulling up at Sloane Square was that Perry got out and had a drink at every place we came to on the road. Lever said he was going to get on the telephone. When I went to the post office to see if Lever was there I asked Perry to stay where he was. He was a long time gone. I told him I would not wait any longer. I got in the train and went to Walham Green.

I wished Mr. Perry good-day—and finished. Afterwards I had business at Stratford. I did not go with the intention of meeting Perry. He had not told me he had a business there. Perry said, "Why did you run away this afternoon?" I did not hear Lever say, "My pals are very nervous." I turned round to Perry and said, I did not run away, and bid him good-day. I was not present when Owen bought the two typewriters. I went in the train but I did not travel with Lever and Owen. I did not see any cheque pass or receipt given. I was going that way on business. I had a drink with Lever. I did not know Owen.

JAMES LEVER (prisoner, on oath). I am in business as electrical engineer at 7, Lilyville Road, Fulham. I have been there about seven years. Before that I was in Lillie Road. I have traded in two or three names. I traded as George Stonnard at Pursell Crescent, 12 or 14 years ago. I have used that name since on several occasions. The name of the Fulham Electrical Installation and Power Company is up at Fulham Road. I had three people working for me at the time of my arrest. The first I ever heard of any typewriters was when Thompson came to me in April. I had known him one to two years as a traveller. He said, "I have some typewriters; can you find a customer?" I said, "I do not know if I shall be able to find a customer." I phoned a friend of mine, Owen, asking him if he could do with a typewriter. He said he could if he could see one. Thompson was outside the telephone box. I told him the answer. I think £8 10s. was the price mentioned to Owen. An appointment was made at the "Black Friar Hotel" for 10 or 11 o'clock the same day. I saw Thompson and Hicks. Hicks took me to "The Bun Shop." I paid £4 that morning to Farringdon. I understood it was storage rent for the machine, £2 was mine, and £2 Thompson's. Farringdon gave me the machine. I went in with Hicks. I went up with Farringdon to fetch it. I tool it in a cab to the "Black Friar. "I got there at 12 or one o'clock. Owen came in shortly after. I had done business with Owen five or six years. I did not go in. Owen came out and said, "I will take the other machine." I told him there were two. I think there was something said about price, but exactly what I could not say. I said there was some rent owing; could he let me have some money to pay for the other machine. I waited outside his place in Water Lane. After about a quarter of an hour Owen brought out either £4 or £5. I gave Thompson his £2 back at Walham Green. Ultimately Owen gave a cheque for £22 at Walham Green. It was cashed by Jack Cook, the proprietor of the "Swan Hotel." He knew me. I think I gave Owen £9 or £10 out of the £22. Owen asked me to make out the receipt for £19. I don't suppose I should have given him a receipt if he had not asked for it. Owen said he had to give something to somebody who introduced him to Friedheim. He said he would tell his friend he had paid me £19. I signed the receipt in the name of George Stonnard, because it was out of my usual business. I have often used that name. The same evening I went with Thompson to

Walham Green. Next day I saw him in Dawes Road, Fulham. I used to see him almost every day. I saw him near my workshop. He asked me if I could find a customer for another typewriter. He was with Hicks. I told him I would try. Stevens met me in Dawes Road. He was a stranger. He said, "Mr. Lever?" I said, "That is me." He said, "I have seen a friend of yours named Owen who tells me you have some typewriters for sale." I said, "I have not any. Some friends of mine have some," meaning Thompson and Hicks. He said, "Will you make an appointment?" I said, "I will endeavour to get them for you to-morrow morning." I telephoned Thompson, and asked him if he could manage two typewriters, as I had a prospective customer. I saw him next morning near my workshop. I said, "Have you got the machines." He said, "I am unable to get them." We went to the "Salisbury Hotel" to have a conversation about it. We may have had two or three drinks. When we had been there two or three minutes Perry came up. I introduced Perry to Thompson. They were talking in a corner. I was standing on one side. I do not know what conversation they had. We got in the van that Perry brought. Perry said, "Shall we go and get the machines?" Thompson had told me he could not get any, but eventually he said he had got one that Perry could have; it was in Victoria. They asked me to go with them. I was to get some commission for the introduction. We pulled up at various public-houses. We had just got round King's Road when Perry suggested we should pull up for a drink. The next one, I think, was at Sloane Square. I wanted to get on the telephone about some business, but could not. I then went to the station to try, but could not get on. I saw Thompson and said, "I do not like this business; I am going back to Fulham." There was so much messing about, I had not time to attend to it. I did not suspect anything queer. I must admit I had a suspicion things were not what they ought to be. I took a ticket to Walham Green. As I stood talking to the ticket collector Thompson came up. I said, "Hullo, what are you doing here?" I was very much surprised to see him. I told him I had got Stevens' address at Forest Gate. He said, "I have to go down Stratford way; suppose we go and see if the address is all right." This was about four o'clock. We went. I was quite willing; I wanted to know if things were straight. We found the place; it was a little shop. The interview between Thompson and Stevens at Forest Gate lasted about a minute. I got back to Walham Green about eight o'clock. Stevens came to my private house next morning, I believe. He said, "I meant to have seen you at Forest Gate, but you had gone. "I was going to see him after he had seen Thompson. Stevens said he had lost half a day's money through waiting about, and hoped I would be able to reduce the price of the machines to compensate him. I told him I could not do anything in the matter, the machines were not mine. I think I mentioned as well that Thompson was a bit nervous, and I did not like it. I told Thompson I could not waste my time. I understood from Thompson that the machines had come from a sale. I told Stevens I only got 30s. out of the last deal, and I could not afford to run about for 30s. I did not say anything

about pals. I did not say, "We had 10 of these, they ought to have gone to Shanghai, but they did not; 10 cases went, but it was old iron, not typewriters," or anything like it. I did not mention Shanghai. On May 13 or 14 I did not know these people had been robbed. I cannot account for Perry's statement.

Cross-examined. On the first occasion Thompson told me he had two and subsequently four machines. I asked him where they were; he said he did not know. He said they were bought at a sale. I thought it was rather funny. I was not suspicious then. I asked him what sort of condition they were in; he said, "Fairly good." I agree they are very good. He said we ought to get £8 or £8 10s. each. I bought one. I paid the money, as I understood, for the storage of the machine at "The Bun Shop. "Hicks took me there. He seemed to be more anxious to find a customer than anyone else. I did not ask Thompson or Hicks why they could not find the money for the charges. They told me they had not got any money. The typewriters were supposed to belong to "The Bun Shop." The machines were upstairs in the top room. I took them away, wrapped in a canvas cover. The machines could not be lifted by the handles, because there were screws short. I took the first machine to the "Black Friar. "I waited for Mr. Owen, who took it to Water Lane. Owen agreed to pay £8 10s. I paid altogether at "The Bun Shop" £8. I understood it was for storage. I paid it to Farringdon. I did not know he was Marshall's assistant. I was selling them for Thompson as commission agent. I sold the two machines for £17. Thirty shillings was all I got out of it. Thompson and Hicks had the balance when it was split up. I deducted my 30s. I did not see any other typewriters at "The Bun Shop" when I took the two away that Owen had bought. When Perry came to me I told him I would try to get him two. I did not get them. I never had them. I did not know where they would be. I did not have the address given me. Thompson told me he had two more. I understood they were at Victoria. I do not remember him saying the others were bought at the same time. Perry asked me if I could let him have them a bit cheaper. I told him I could not afford to do it for less; I had nothing out of the last lot. I said nothing about "pals." I first spoke about nervousness at Sloane Square. Thompson did not seem quite himself, I asked him what was the matter; he said he was sick of the messing about, he had had enough of it, or words to that effect. I saw Perry the same evening at Forest Gate. It was not by appointment. It was 14 years ago when I was trading solely under the name of Stonnard. There was no reason why I should not sign the receipt in the name of Lever. My shop at Fulham was shut about three months ago.

EDWARD THOMPSON . I have known Lever seven years. He has carried out several electric lighting jobs for me, and has been straightforward in all his dealings.

WM. FARRINGDON (prisoner on oath). I am a canteen steward. I left the 3rd Brigade Royal Field Artillery in January. I have always

borne a high character. I was in London waiting for a vacancy to occur at one of the camps, and entered the employment of Mr. Marshall. One of his customers asked me if he could leave a couple of typewriters there. I said I thought he could, but I would ask Mr. Marshall first. Marshall said I could have them left there. About the next day two typewriters came in. They were first put on the first floor and afterwards shifted to the top of the house, a lumber room. They had been there two or three days when the man came in who brought them there. He asked me to come and have a drink with him. I went. He said, "I am in a devil, of a hole; I am pushed for money; can you lend me £2?" I lent it to him. On the other typewriters I borrowed some money from Marshall to pay. On April 24 I had orders to go to Tidworth Barracks. I stayed there from April 24 to June 6, when I went to Ludgershall in charge of the Worcesters, where I was arrested. I had no contract to go back to Mr. Marshall. When I left him there were two machines left behind I did not buy any more. The man who brought them was named Potter. I do not remember saying, "You know how they came"; I. might have said, "You know where they are. "I had a letter to say there was a warrant out for my arrest. I came up to London at night time and went back the next morning by the first train with the intention of seeing the governor and going up to London to surrender to the warrant.

Cross-examined. Potter did not tell me where he lived. He told me he bought the typewriters at a sale; I understood they were out of a wreck coming from Chili. He said, "They are new, but some were broken all up; those that were new were in airtight eases and the water did not get through the tin. Next day he brought them to the shop. After I bought them he told me not to sell them to any shop where they sold typewriters, as if the people got to know the things were sold so cheap it would get the underwriters into trouble, and that would cause trouble with the salvage, or the salvage would have trouble with the underwriters. He said, "We get things like this cheap, because we are in a knock-out"—that he was in the know. I did not write to Mr. Marshall about any of these typewriters. I believe Marshall sent some money to me, but I did not receive it. Marshall knew my address; he gave it to the police. I asked both Thompson and Hicks to find a customer; in fact, I asked 20 people. I made no secret about it. They were supposed to cost £3 each, and over and above £3 I was to split up with Potter. I received altogether £8, £7 of which I borrowed from Marshall. I advanced altogether £10 to pay for the things. Four machines came before I went away. The same man did not bring both lots.

Detective-sergeant BROWN, recalled. Farringdon has never been in the army; he has been attached to regimental canteens. For 12 or 14 years he has been in various employments, and has always borne an honest character. The only thing against him is a conviction for assault, £3 or 21 days.

Verdict in each case, Not guilty.


(Saturday, July 3.)

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-58
VerdictGuilty > unknown
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour; Imprisonment > hard labour; Imprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

SAGE, Frederick (44, bricklayer), CRAWLEY, Mike (25, labourer), and HUMPHREYS, John (25, stonemason) ; robbery with violence upon Patrick Kelly, and stealing from his person the sum of 3s. or thereabouts, his moneys, and feloniously assaulting the said Patrick Kelly, with intent to rob him, and feloniously and violently stealing his goods and moneys. Mr. Bodkin and Mr. Symmons prosecuted.

PATRICK KELLY . I remember Saturday, May 29. I had come out of prison the preceding Monday. In the afternoon of May 29 I was in the "George and Guy," at the corner of Fashion Street, Spitalfields. I had had some drink; there were about a dozen men there that I knew. Prisoners were there, I paid for tome drink. I was there about a quarter of an hour. I remember coming out. Some half a dozen followed me, An altercation arose in the house and Crawley and another man were going to fight. I was persuaded to back Crawley for 7s. 6d. I staked my money. Just before that I had 12s. or 13s. We went down Fashion Court where the fight was to take place. I was considerably the worse for drink. I was hustled and robbed of the few shillings I had left. I remember someone's arm being thrown round my neck from the back. I was held with ray head backwards. While I was being held the others were going through my pockets. I could not really swear who did it. I have a alight recollection of the prisoner Humphreys shaking hands with me when I came out of the public-house. I do not think he followed. The other two followed me down, I remember the officers coming up. What little recollection I have is of the dimmest. I remember a struggle, a great scene going on. There were two policemen there, I was taken to the station for being drunk. On Monday morning I was at the back of Old Street Police Court. Crawley and Sago were there in custody. I had a conversation with them. They were speaking of the chances they stood, There was nothing said as to what I was going to do. I was going to give evidence. I remember saying the money was put into his hand and it was not right he should have to suffer for it. They said they were sorry for what happened, they would not have done it if they had not been under the influence of drink.

Cross-examined by Sage. In the public-house I called for several pots of ale and several drops of whisky, I was drinking whisky, I had about 12s. 6d. when I first went in the house. I might have had more. I said I lost 12s. 6d. It cost me 4s. or 5s. for drinks, A party picked up my jug of ale what the fight was about. Crawley got in front of me to take my part. At the final they wanted to fight. You were supposed to hold the bets. I saw money pass into your hands. When you asked for my bet I told you I had given it to a man in the house. I have a recollection of giving three half-crowns. I could not swear to anyone who was there when we came

out. I got as far as the court. I could not swear you were there at all. If you were arrested you must have been on the scene. As far as I recollect when you were brought in to the police station I said I did not think you had anything to do with it. With that they got hold of me and put me in the cell. I booked no charge.

Cross-examined by Crawley. I first saw you in the "George and Guy. "I could not swear which was there first. If I am drunk how can I recollect these things. I remember a man having a row with you over me. (To the Judge. I was drunk at the time. I do not think the three prisoners are really guilty.) I have slept with you in the same place with £2 or £3 in my pocket. I can say I have never lost anything in your company. I think I accused this man at the station of putting his arm round my neck.

Cross-examined by Humphreys. I do not recollect where I met you. I was partially drunk when we went into that public-house. I was in the "Unction Pot" before I went to the "George and Guy. "I do not recollect that in the former you wanted to pay for two pots of ale and the other man said, "No, I will pay for these. "I recollect saying, "Jack, that is all I have got left out of £2. "; I do not remember how much I showed him. I remember giving Sage 7s. 6d. for the bet. I remember shaking hands with you before this affair started, and saying, "All right, Jack, come back again. "I remember you coming on the scene afterwards and saying, "Happy, what is the matter?" I said I had been robbed. A constable came up and arrested me. You said, "I am going away out of this; I won't be mixed up in it. "I cannot swear you were there when I was robbed, or the other two for the matter of that. At the "George and Guy" there were two women near me. I believe I paid for drinks for them. I do not recollect calling for cigarettes for you. You left me afterwards to go home. I always carry my money in my waistcoat pocket. I do not think you would turn my trousers pockets out when you knew the money was in my waistcoat.

Police-constable PERCY WELLS, H Division. On Saturday afternoon, May 29, I was on duty at the corner of Fashion Street and Brick Lane. The "George and Guy" and "Three Cranes" are at the corners of Fashion Street and Brick Lane. I saw Kelly there; he appeared to be very drunk. He passed me and walked down Fashion Street. The three prisoners and five other men followed just behind him. I spoke to Constable Christopher, who followed with me. Kelly turned into Fashion Court. The other men all followed behind him. I looked down the court. I saw Crawley at the back of Kelly with his right arm round Kelly's neck, at the same time holding his left arm with his left hand. Sage was standing in front of Kelly, with his right in Kelly's left-hand trousers pocket. Humphreys was standing on the right-hand side of Kelly with his right hand in Kelly's right-hand trousers pocket, at the same time holding Kelly's right arm with his left hand. The other men were covering prisoners' movements more or less. Christopher and I turned into the court; someone shouted, "Look up. "They then hustled through

the court towards Flower and Dean Street. I went after them and arrested Sage in Lolesworth Street, at the corner of Thrawl Street. I lost sight of him as he turned into Flower and Dean Street. When I arrested him he said, "What is the matter?" Kelly came up. Christopher had arrested Crawley. Kelly pointed to Crawley and said, "That is the man that arm locked me. "He then pointed to Sage and said, "That is one of them; they have robbed me of 12s. 6d." I noticed Kelly's trouser pockets were turned inside out. Then I told Crawley and Sage they would be taken into custody for robbery and assault. Sage said, "I have only got what belonged to me. If you take me I will give you a rough house. "He became very violent; threw me to the ground. Whilst I was on the ground he kicked me in the testicles. I got up and caught hold of his neckerchief. He bit me on the little finger; it bled freely. Assistance came, and he was taken to the station. I am still on the sick list. I did not see Humphreys after he went into Lolesworth Street. On the Monday he was placed with seven or eight other men. I picked him out. I knew him before. I am sure he is the man who was there.

Cross-examined by Sage. When I followed you down Fashion Street I was 40 yards behind. I saw Crawley when I got to the court; I did not see him when I was 40 yards behind. I could not say how long you had been in the court before you attempted this robbery; you were doing it when I got there. I did not see you take anything from Kelly's pocket. There were three counterfeit half-crowns found on you at the station.

Cross-examined by Crawley. When I first saw you coming down Fashion Street you were behind Kelly. After some one said, "Look out; here come the coppers," you hustled away through the court.

Cross-examined by Humphreys. Christopher did not seize Kelly after he handed one of the prisoners to me. It was another officer.

Cross-examined by Humphreys. You did not assault me. I did not see you when I was arresting the others.

Police-constable DAVID CHRISTOPHER, 487 H. In consequence of what last witness said I went down Fashion Street with him. I saw prosecutor followed by prisoners and five other men. He was drunk, and was walking four yards in front of the others. Kelly turned into Fashion Court. The others followed him. I saw Crawley with his right arm round Kelly's neck and holding his right arm with his left hand. Humphreys was on his right with his right hand in Kelly's right hand trousers pocket and holding Kelly's right arm with his left hand. Sage was in front of Kelly and had his right hand in Kelly's left-hand trousers pocket. Prisoners were the last three to leave prosecutor. When we turned into the court someone shouted, "Look up. "They all hustled through the court. I followed and arrested Crawley in Lolesworth Street. Humphreys went away. I believe prosecutor said to Crawley, "That is the man that armlocked me. "He turned to Sage and said, "That is one of them; they have robbed me of 12s. 6d." I told Crawley he would be taken into custody for assault and robbery. He said, "I have not got a halfpenny on me, and you

are not going to take me. "When I proceeded to arrest him he became violent and gave me a severe kick on the right ankle. We both fell to the ground. Wells was struggling with the other man. Crawley was violent all the way to the station. He was searched there. We found on him 3s. in silver and a razor. I was on the sick list 10 days. I also picked out Humphreys at Arbour Street Police Station. I am sure he is the man that was there. I had known him before.

Cross-examined by Sage. I did not see you take anything out of prosecutor's pocket. Prosecutor was behind you when you were arrested.

Cross-examined by Humphreys. When I came down Lolesworth Street you were not standing talking to prosecutor; you hustled through the court. You went away when I arrested Crawley.

Detective-sergeant by. DESSENT, Criminal Investigation Department. On the Monday morning I saw Humphreys at Arbour Street, and his brother George. I said to them, "I am going to take you into custody on suspicion of being concerned with Sage and Crawley and four other men not in custody in robbing a man named Patrick Kelly on Saturday night. "Prisoner Humphreys said as to his brother, "He knows nothing about it. "At the station he was placed with others and was picked out. He at once said, "Quite right, I am glad you are fair. "I saw Kelly on Monday morning at Old Street Police Court. On going to the back of the court to the waiting-room where prisoners are detained pending going into court I saw prosecutor in conversation with Sage and Crawley. I at once separated them.

Cross-examined by Sage. I did not put you and the others in the cell when you were brought out of the van. The first time I saw you was when I saw you and Crawley in conversation with Kelly. I at once had you separated.

PERCY J. CLARK , Divisional Surgeon. I saw Wells on Monday, 31st, in the early afternoon. He was suffering from an injury to his right testicle. He had also an abrasion on the knuckle joint of his left little finger. It was not a serious injury. He had been on the sick list ever since, but not as the result of that. He had an injury in December, 1907, which no doubt to a certain extent has aggravated the present injury. About a fortnight ago he contracted influenza, and his being on the sick list is somewhat due to that. What I saw was consistent with his having been kicked. The abrasion to the finger was consistent with its coming against a man's teeth. He had a contusion on his head which would be consistent with a fall or a struggle or a blow of any kind. I saw Christopher on the Wednesday; he had a contusion on the inner side of the left ankle. It might have been caused by a kick. He was on the sick list 10 days.


FREDERICK SAGE (prisoner, on oath). On this afternoon we were all drinking. When prosecutor first came in he said he had 12s. 6d. on him; 4s. or 5s. was spent in drinks. Nine pots of ale was called for—that was 3s. there was the whisky to the females, whisky himself,

and whisky me; that must have run to 4s. or 5s. 7s. 6d. he gave for the bet; that makes him close on 13s. After he left the public-house he had not much money to lose. We go out together to see this fight. Prisoner Crawley is supposed to take Kelly's part They get down as far as Fashion Court The constables are not to be seen. They come through Flower and Dean Street if they come through anywhere. There was a bit of a rustle in the court and they all walk away together. Prosecutor and the others are in front of me. When I get to the comer the constable says, "I want you. "I said. "All right, you don't want to hold me. "He threw me on the ground. That was the time I was supposed to kick him. I take my dying, solemn oath, I never touched that man with my foot. Other constables came up and I was arrested. I was searched, and the three half-crowns were found on me which were given me for the bet. I never knew it was counterfeit money till two hours after the charge. I have been tried for that and brought in guilty. This affair with Kelly I am entirely innocent of. It is an old grievance with the police. They know my. character, and they know I stand no earthly chance. Prosecutor in the station said, "Sage there knows nothing about it" If he wit as drunk as he says he would not remember anything. He could not have been so drunk if he could remember all the things he has acknowledged to. I do not know what became of the money be lost. If he gave it away it is not robbery.

Cross-examined. The other five men were perfect strangers to me I should say the one that had prosecutors 7s. 6d. was a sharp. I do not know whether he was a friend of Kelly's. I was imposed on when the three bad half-crowns were given to me. It as not the man who gave me 7s. 6d. that had Kelly's 7s. 6d. I am positive Kelly was not drunk; I do not say he was quite sober. The two officers did not come up in the court. I said they come through Flower and Dean Street, not Fashion Street. I was not still in the court when the officers came up. I did not see anyone turn out Kelly's pockets Crawley pulled Kelly's arm to pull him back to find the man with the 7s. 6d. Humphreys was not holding his arm. At the time Crawley had him round the neck I was going through the court. He did not have him properly round the neck. He said, "Come back and find the man you gave the 7s. 6d. to. "I did not say at the station, "I have only got what belongs to me. "I might have said when arrested, "If you don't leave me alone it will be me and you. "He went for me and threw me on the ground. I did not bite his finger I am sorry I did not complain at the station. The inspector stopped that officer from knocking me about. I did not take the inspector's name.

MIKE CRAWLEY (prisoner, on oath). As I was coming along Brick Lane I looked in at the "George and Guy," and there I saw Kelly with other men and women. I called one man out to speak to him, and with that Kelly recognised me. He said, "Here you are, Mike, have a drink,' I drank out of a pot and stood there talking to him. When I had been there 10 minutes a stranger starts drinking out of

one of our pots; then he picked up another. I said, "Who's payingfor them drinks, you or this man?" He said, "I don't know; I can have a drink as well as you." He shoves me. I ask him why he is shoving. He says, "I don't care about you or him; if you like I will have a fight." I said, "I do not get a living by fighting." He says, "I will fight you for 7s. 6d." I said, "I haven't got 7s. 6d." He gives 7s. 6d. and the other man hands 7s. 6d. We go to fight outside. We go down Fashion Street right through the court across Flower and Dean Street. The coppers come along; Christopher shoves me on one side and arrests prosecutor. Then Wells takes me. I was charged with robbing prosecutor and on Monday I am charged with assaulting Christopher.

Cross-examined. I walked with Kelly from the public-house. Sage held one 7s. 6d. and a man belonging to the other party held the other 7s. 6d. He was a stranger to me. I know what a stakeholder is. It is Kelly's look-out if the other man goes off with 7s. 6d. The man I was going to fight was not much bigger than me. He asked me four or five times before he betted. I did not want tofight. Two or three forced me to fight him. No one robbed Kelly. Nobody held him at all. I did not arm lock him. I wanted him to come back to the public-house, and got my arm round his neck topull him back. I do not think his pockets were turned inside out. At the Thames Police Court on. Monday I only said to him, "I feel miserable after the booze. "I did not say, we were sorry for what happened, and it would not have happened only we were drunk at the time. Kelly does not say I said so. I did not hear Sage say it.

JOHN HUMPHREYS (prisoner, on oath). On the Saturday this robbery was committed I met Kelly at the corner of Flower and Dean Street. I asked him to give me a drink. He said, "Come down to the "Unction Pot." He calls for two pots of ale. While we are there he says, "Come down to the 'Seven Stars.' "We were going there, and he turned round at the "George and Guy" and says, "Come in here; there are some of my pals in here." I goes in with him. He calls for two pots of ale and sits down between two prostitutes and starts talking to them. Then he called for whisky for them. It's his turn next; he pays for three more pots of ale and asks me to have a packet of cigarettes. Then there is the trouble about the man drinking out of the pot of beer. I see the three half-crowns passed to Sage for the bet. I said to Kelly, "I am going home to my tea." He said, "All right; come back again." I went out with the intention of getting out of the row. I was away home three-quarters of an hour; comes back. At Flower and Dean Street I see all the mob. Kelly is halloaing. I said, "What's the matter?" He said, "I have been robbed. "I says, "I am not going to be mixed up in this." On the Saturday night I get arrested for being drunk and disorderly. I am out on bail. On Monday I go to Arbour Street to get fined. Dessent comes up to me and my brother in the square and says, "I shall arrest you as a suspected person and being concerned in robbing Patrick Kelly. "I says, "My

brother knows nothing about it. "I am identified by constables that have known me for a long time. Prosecutor could not have had the money to be robbed of if he spent it in drink. He says I did not rob him; he says I was not there.

Cross-examined. Kelly was not drunk when he met me. He had enough. I do not know who robbed him. I was not there. I came back because he asked me to. I come back thinking the fight was all over. When I came back I went to the public-house and found he had gone. I did not follow on. I looked down Flower and Dean Street and saw them go along. The officers were there. They got hold of Sage and Crawley. I was not upset to see them arrested; I was surprised. I asked Kelly what was the matter; he said he had been robbed. He did not say by whom. I would not know the man who passed the three half-crowns to Sage.

Mrs. HUMPHREYS (prisoner Humphreys' wife). You left home at half-past six or seven after you had tea on the Saturday. I saw you next morning when you were bailed out.

Verdict (all three), Guilty of assault with intent to rob with violence.

Mr. Symmons said that Sage and Crawley were also charged with assaulting the constables, but the prosecution did not propose to proceed with the indictment, as all the facts were before the Court.

Previous convictions were proved against all the prisoners. It was stated that Sage had been sentenced to five years' penal servitude and 20 lashes for robbery with violence and to seven years' for shopbreaking. Humphreys had been sentenced to three years' penal servitude for warehouse breaking.

Judge Lumley Smith said the police thought it better that the prisoners should not all come out of prison on the same day, and he should give effect to that view. He sentenced Sage to two years' imprisonment, Crawley to two years less one week, and Humphreys to two years less a fortnight, with hard labour in each case.

It was stated that Kelly had told the police that if he gave evidence against the prisoners they or their "pals" would murder him.

Judge Lumley Smith said that if any one assaulted or interfered with Kelly he would be severely dealt with.


(Monday, June 28.)

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-59
VerdictsNot Guilty > unknown; Guilty > with recommendation; Guilty > unknown
SentencesImprisonment > hard labour; Imprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

CLARK, Percy (42, engineer), NORGATE, Percival Edward (39, agent), and GREEN, Edgar (30 mortgage broker) ; all conspiring and agreeing together with Reginald Harcourt to obtain by false pretences divers large sums of money from John Thomas Higgins, and to commit the following several offences of forgery, in each case with intent to defraud; obtaining by false pretences from John Thomas Higgins certain valuable securities, to wit, six cheques, value together £237 10s., with intent to defraud; all forging and uttering knowing the same to be forged an endorsement on a banker's cheque for the payment of £120; a deed, purporting to be a deed of mortgage by Campion Watson of all his interest under the will of the late Rev. John Campion, an endorsement on the said deed, and a deed purporting to be a deed of mortgage by the said Campion Watson to the Bedfordshire Loan Company of all his interest in the said reversion, in each case with intent to defraud.

Mr. Bodkin, Mr. Graham-Campbell, and Mr. Symmons prosecuted; Mr. Martin O'Connor and Mr. W. Newberry defended Clark; Mr. E. F. Lever and Mr. S. P. Kerr defended Norgate.

Mr. Bodkin opened the case.

(Wednesday, June 30.)

ERNEST JACKSON LAING , M. D., 7, Old Burlington Street. On July 11, 1907, Clark, whom I had known for some years, brought a stranger for whom I prescribed, and whose name I have entered as "Martin." Prescription produced was given by me to one of them. I know Heppell, chemists, in Piccadilly. I never saw Clark or Martin afterwards about that matter.

Cross-examined by Mr. O'Connor. The prescription would be one given to a person suffering from excessive drink. Clark has probably introduced other patients to me. As far as I remember, Clark introduced Martin as a man who was suffering from drink. I should usually take the name from the patient. I remember nothing to fix the case in my memory. (To Green). This prescription would not turn a man who was considered by an insurance doctor a bad life into a man of good life. It is a tonic.

WALTER ARTHUR TASKER , assistant to Heppell, 169, Piccadilly, dispensing chemists. I produce book containing copy of Dr. Laing's prescription, which was made up by my firm on July 11, 1907, for a man named Martin.

CHARLES ERNEST ELMHIRST , solicitor, York. My firm of G. Brown and Elmhirst acted in reference to the estate of the late Rev. John Campion, of Doncaster. I produce pedigree. The Rev. John Campion married Ann Irving, daughter of John Irving, whose sister married Robert Hugh Watson; they had two sons, Campion and John Steven Watson. I produce probate of the will of John Campion proved July 3, 1894, of which I am the surviving trustee. Campion Watson had a reversionary interest expected and contingent on the death of Miss Wake, who was in 1907 aged 60. I produce probate of the will of John Irving, proved November 18, 1865. Campion Watson had a reversionary interest under it contingent on the death of Jean Graham, who in 1907 was aged 89, and who has since died. On March 8, 1906, I had a letter from Gryce Hutchinson and Co., solicitors, asking for information about John Steven Watson's interest, and I afterwards received from them notice of a charge by J. S. Watson in favour of Charles Samuel Deacon upon J. S. Watson's interest under the will of John Campion. In April, 1906, I received notice

from Joseph Wolff of a further charge of £30 by J. S. Watson. On May 15, 1907, Farman and King, solicitors, Birkbeck Bank Chambers wrote requesting information respecting Campion Watson's interest under the will of John Campion. I wrote stating that Campion Watson owed me £1 5s. 6d. costs. On July 8, 1907, I received a letter from John T. Higgins asking for information with regard to Campion Watson's interest, list of investments of the trust fund, etc., and enclosing; authority, produced, signed "Campion Watson, 80, Sheen Park Richmond," the handwriting of which I accepted as genuine, I having had no communication with Campion Watson since the death of John Campion in 1894. I wrote to Higgins mentioning the £1 5s. 6d. due to me from Campion Watson, and offering to supply the information on payment of that sum and a further fee of £2 2s. Higgins paid that sum, and I supplied the information. I had several notices of mortgages by Campion Watson to Higgins, and also one of July 15, 1907, to the Bedfordshire Loan Co.; and on September 17, 1907, notice that Campion Watson had sold his reversionary interest to Thomas Thorn, Luton. The deed of assignment produced is dated September 16, 1907. In March, 1908, I received a communication from the real Campion Watson and communicated with Higgins.

By Mr. Kerr. I understood the charges and assignment were by Campion Watson, senior, who is about 68 to 70 years of age. I was not aware that there was a Campion Watson, junior. Campion Watson, senior, is the reversioner expectant, Campion Watson, junior, having an interest if his father died before Jane Graham under the will of John Irving and before Miss Wake, under the will of John Campion. If his father survived those two ladies he got nothing.

To Green. I have had no communication with you. The costs, £1 5s. 6d. were incurred by Campion Watson, senior, in 1898; it was a charge for a copy of the will. Campion Watson, senior, had a l-3rd share in securities valued in 1894 at £942, contingent on his surviving Jean Irving; also one-half share in securities, valued at £2, 882, contingent on his surviving Miss Wake. Campion Watson, junior, only taking on his surviving his father, the value of his reversion would be small. The authority signed, "Campion Watson," is typewritten. The signature is somewhat similar to that of Campion Watson.

JOHN STEVEN WATSON , 2, Brandlehow Road, Putney Bridge, fruit buyer, Covent Garden Market. I am a son of Campion Watson, Campion Watson, jun., being my younger brother. In November, 1905, I lived at 72, Lambs Conduit Street, as a fruiterer and got a loan on my interest in the marriage settlement of my mother, whose maiden name was Tabitha Downham. I went to McGregor, who introduced me to the prisoner Green, and Green introduced me to Henry. Green said that he could get me £100 or more through Mr. Grice Hutchinson. I gave Green a copy of my mother's marriage settlement, and he took me to Grice Hutchinson. Green afterwards told me he had been to Somerset House and taken particulars of the will, and that I had a further interest on my father's death. I went with Green to my father at 184, Lancaster Road. Green told him I wanted to raise money and

asked for information. My father refused to help me to raise money and gave no information. We saw Hutchinson, who said he had a client named Deighton who could make an advance. I afterwards received about £18 and a further small sum and signed a promissory note for £60. I signed letter produced to Henry, agreeing to pay him procuration fee of 10 per cent on all sums obtained, charging my interest therewith. I believe the letter is in Green's handwriting. On January 29, 1906, I received writ produced by Deighton against me for £60. I went to Green and showed it him and told him I had got myself into a nice pickle. He said, "I can get you out of that," and introduced me to Norgate. We discussed it and they said they could get Wolff to make a further advance. Green told Norgate I was worth £300 or £400 under my father's will; that I should receive certain money at his death. Green and I then went to see Wolff. Norgate said I could get £50 or £60 more. At that time Norgate was living in Great Ormond Street. We met Wolff in the Strand, and all four went to a public-house kept by McGregor, where I signed a paper and received a cheque, which was afterwards cashed. Letter produced of March 27, 1906, from 4, Great James Street, Bedford Row, addressed to my wife, Lucy Watson, is in Green's handwriting; 4, Great James Street is where I saw Green.

Cross-examined by Mr. Lever. I did not understand the value of my interest and could not give anyone particulars about it. I told Norgate I had a reversion under my father's will and wanted to raise money. Norgate was simply the man who was going to introduce Wolff. He said he could get me the money; Green was present. To Green. Part of the charge for £60 was in respect of a promissory note to John Tucker—the matter was mixed up—I do not know Tucker. On December 9 I believe I signed a charge for £60—that was before I had anything to do with Tucker. I may have signed a charge for £73 afterwards. On March 30, 1906, I gave a charge to Hennen, Edgelow, and Co. You took me there. I never received £15 from Wolff. Altogether I received from £32 to £34, from which was deducted your and Norgate's commission. Wolff advanced me about £4 or £5. You went to Somerset House and came to my shop and gave me a piece of paper with the detail of John Campion's will; also showing how the money was invested. I carried on business in Lambs Conduit Street under the name of Gutteridge.

Re-examined. I showed the writ to Green a few days after January 29, 1906. I had then known him about six months. I paid Green and Norgate various sums for commission. I could not say how much. Henry was dead when we went to Wolff; he died soon after my first transaction with Gryce Hutchinson.

CAMPION WATSON , sen., 184, Lancaster Road, Notting Hill. I am 68 years old, and am a nephew of John Campion, my mother being his sister, Ann Campion. I have two sons, John Steven Watson and Campion Watson, jun. I have certain reversionary interests under the will of J. Campion and J. Irving, subject to the life interest of Miss Wake and John Graham. I have never charged that reversion in any way. In 1905 Green called at my house with John

Steven Watson, and said that my son wanted to get a loan of £30 on his reversion under his mother's marriage settlement, that he wanted information from me; I declined to give any information. Letter produced signed "Campion Watson," 80, Sheen Park, Richmond, letter of July 15, 1907, and assignment of September 16, 1907, are not written or signed by me or by my authority. Bundle of cheques produced in favour of Campion Watson were not endorsed by me. Proposal form to the General Life Assurance Society is not signed by me. Mortgage between Campion Watson and John T. Higgins, and proposal to the Legal General Life Assurance Society of August 15, 1907, are not signed by me.

To Green. I have given you no information. When you called on me John Campions name was not mentioned.

CAMPION WATSON , jun., 4, Hertford Road, Huntingdon, chief clerk Huntingdon Railway Station. I was born June 25, 1871. I do not know Harcourt. In 1907 I was not attempting to raise money on a reversion, and have signed no documents for that purpose. On April 26, 1906, I received from Grice Hutchinson notice produced of a charge on my brother, John Steven Watsons, interest, which I sent on to my father, together with a covering letter from Grice Hutchinson. In January, 1907, I received a mortgage by John Steven Watson to C. S. Deighton, which I also sent to my father. The three prisoners are complete strangers to me.

Cross-examined. I have never given Green any information—I have never seen him.

JANE STAINES , 80, Sheen Park, Richmond, widow. On July 4, 1907, I let rooms to the witness Harcourt in the name of Campion Watson at £1 a week. He came in on Saturday, July 6, bringing a tin box and a hat box labelled "Watson." He paid for the rooms until September 10, 1907, but only occupied them about a fortnight. He called and received four letters. After September 7 I did not see him again until October, 1908.

REGINALD HARCOURT . I am under sentence of five years' penal servitude, passed at this Court on October 26, 1906, for forgery (see (Vol. CXLIX., p. 823). I was previously sentenced to 12 months, hard labour, from which I was released on February 16, 1907. I knew Bartlett in prison, and saw him after coming out in February, 1907, several times. In March, 1907, I was with him in Fleet Street when he introduced me, in the name of Harcourt, to the prisoner Green. I have previously been a clerk and a pianist on a passenger liner. Green, Bartlett, and I went to a public-house, when Green said to me, "Did I wish to make a £100 or £200?" I asked him if it was perfectly straight. Green then asked my age, and I told him Bartlett said to Green, "Are you flunking of the Watson affair?" and advised me to have nothing to do with it. Nothing further was said then, except that Green said I should be just about the age of young Watson. At that time I had arranged to take offices with a view to letting part of them in flats; Bartlett suggested that he and I should start as turf commission agents, and we took offices at 82, Wells

Street, Oxford Street; there were two rooms at a rent of 12s. a week. We carried on business under the name of Levy, Foster and Co. The rooms were only partially furnished, and we obtained about £15 worth of furniture on the hire system from the Service Furnishing Society, Limited, 292, High Holborn. We had cards printed (produced). Green used the offices—he was to find £10 as a partner in the firm. He did not find the £10, but he came daily. One day he brought Norgate and introduced me in the name of Harcourt to him. Norgate said to me, "I suppose you are the Foster and Bartlett is Levy?" I said, "Yes." He said that Green had told him about us, and he understood we wanted addresses of betting people to whom we could send circulars. He gave us one name. Norgate frequently came to Wells Street, and we all went to the Northumberland Arms in Wells Street, kept by Chapman. Norgate asked if any of us could get a cheque changed, and he gave me a cheque in the name of Percy Davis, which he said was the name in which he had a banking account. I asked Chapman to change it. I afterwards changed several similar cheques with Chapman. One of them was dishonoured. I told Bartlett and Green. Green and I went to Norgate's flat, The Drive Mansions, Fulham, and told Norgate. Norgate wrote a note to Chapman saying that he had been out of town, had no idea his account was so low, and that if Chapman presented cheque again it would be met or that he would send him the money. Another cheque was dishonoured, and Green, I believe, saw Norgate about it. After two months the furniture instalments got into arrear. Norgate said he had a cheque for £3 or £4 which he wanted cashed. I took it to the Service Furnishing Company; they deducted £1 or 30s. for the instalment, and gave me the balance, which I handed to Norgate. The cheque was returned, "Orders not to pay. "Green and I asked Norgate why it was stopped. Norgate said he could not afford to lose any more money in Levy and Foster. We continued occupying the Wells Street office for two or three months. On several occasions the Watson affair was referred to between Green and myself, sometimes in the presence of Norgate. Green said to Norgate, "I think we shall have to do something with this Watson business, things are so bad." Norgate said he had too many things on hand at present to go into the Watson matter. At that time I knew scarcely anything about it. About Easter, 1907, Green suggested that as the holidays were coming on we might try to get an advance on the Watson reversion; he knew a firm of solicitors who, he thought, would advance £10 as a temporary loan while they investigated the matter—that would be sufficient to get us over the holidays. He said the reversion was worth £1, 200 to £1, 500; that Campion Watson was entitled to it; that the life tenants were two ladies aged one over 80 years and the other over 90 years; that the Mr. Watson who was entitled to the reversion was too old to borrow money on it; that he had a son of the same name as himself about my age—36, and suggested that I should pass as the son. The following day he took me to Somerset House; Green applied to see the will of the Rev. John Campion, and searched the register for the date of John Campion, junior's, birth. We saw the will, and Green

pointed out to me the parts of it which I should take special note of. There were certain articles left to Campion Watson and others, and particulars of the investments. When we got outside Green asked me to make notes of the various particulars, which I did. He told me also to remember that an amount was owing to the solicitor of the trustees for information previously supplied—he thought it would look more bona fide if I could mention that to the solicitor whom I was going to see. After that the question of how I could be identified as Campion Watson was mentioned at Norgate's flat. After leaving Somerset House Green took me to Farman and King, solicitors, Birkbeck Bank Chambers. Green saw King in his private office, and afterwards called me in. I gave the name of Campion Watson, and told King I wished to borrow some money on a reversion I was entitled to under the will of the Rev. John Campion. King asked my age, the ages of the life tenants, what share I was entitled to, and whether I had borrowed on it before. I gave the ages of the life tenants and said it was a question of only a temporary advance of £10 or so while Mr. King was seeing the will and finding out how much he could lend on the whole. King said he would make a temporary advance if he found my statements were correct. He asked the name of the solicitors to the trustees. I said I fancied it was Mr. Elmhirst, that he would find the name mentioned in the will, that he lived at York; and that a small amount was owing to Mr. Elmhirst. On leaving Green gave his card to King, with the address on it, 82, Wells Street. I gave the address of 40, Smith Street, Chelsea. I signed retainer produced, instructing Farman and King to act for me (Campion Watson) in raising a loan of £1, 200, or any less sum on the security, of my interest under the will of my great uncle, John Campion, who died at Doncaster in 1894, together with a commission of 5 per cent. to Green and charging my interest with the costs. I had made no arrangement with Green as to the 5 per cent After we left Green said, "I have been a fool; I have given the Wells Street address to Mr. King." He said if anything turned up afterwards about it, King would easily be able to trace him at Wells Street, and that he should have to drop it altogether. He said I had better write a letter to King saying I was going into the country and asking him to do nothing until my return. I am not sure if I wrote, but Green said that he would keep the appointment that had been made by Mr. King and would seem surprised when I was not there. I did not go again to King. At the end of June or beginning of July I had a note from Norgate to go to his flat at 10 a.m. the next morning, which I did, and saw Norgate and Green. Norgate said he knew someone named Percy Clark who would find the money to work the Watson affair. I had heard Clark's name before from both Norgate and Green. Norgate said Clark had a good house at Barnes, and he would be very useful to do the identification, Clark came in while we were discussing the matter. Before he came in Norgate told me I must not let Clark know that I had been in trouble or he would have nothing to do with it. When Clark came in Norgate introduced me in the name of

Harcourt. He said, "This is the man we are going to put up as Watson. "Clark asked several questions as to my age, what I had been doing, and so on. Green said I would pass very well for the younger Watson. He was just about the same age. Clark asked if I had particulars of the reversion, and Norgate said that Green would coach me up in all that was required. Clark asked Norgate what he would do about the trustees. Norgate said, "In this case we have not to put up bogus trustees—the real ones would answer. We then went into figures. Norgate said it was necessary to get a copy of the will and a birth certificate, that I should have to take other rooms, that £3 or £4 would be needed. Before Clark's arrival Norgate said Clark would be able to get silver articles if necessary similar to those mentioned in the will. I mentioned my handwriting—whether the difference between it and the writing of the real Watson would be noticeable. Green said he thought not, as Mr. Watson had had no communication with the trustees for some considerable time. I think, in reply to a question of Clark's, Norgate said they (had obtained particulars of the Watson reversion when they were dealing with Steven Watson. I think Norgate said the Campion Watson reversion was the same amount as that of Steven Watson. While Clark was there Norgate said there was one good thing about it—after it was over I could take up the post of pianist on a liner again and get out of the country if necessary in that way. The question arose about altering my appearance. Clark said I ought to change my moustache, alter my appearance, and wear glasses, which he would supply. Clark gave me £1 or 30s. for paying a deposit on the rooms I was to take. I suggested Richmond, and they agreed. Names of lenders were mentioned. Norgate said it was no good going to anyone who had had dealings with the Steven Watson reversion. I was to look in the "Telegraph" for advertisements of moneylenders. The next day, at Norgate's flat, I told Norgate, in the presence of Clark and Green, that I had seen in the "Winning Post" an advertisement of Mr. Higgins. Norgate said he would be just the man, as he was very good at arranging temporary advances and that we must get some money quickly. He also said he "owed Jack Higgins one" and it would give him a very good opportunity to get even with him. In the meantime I had taken two rooms at 20s. a week in the name of Campion Watson at Mrs. Staines, 80, Sheen Park, Richmond, paying a deposit, I think, of 10s. I selected the rooms on a Thursday afternoon in July and the following Saturday I took possession. On the Thursday evening I met all the prisoners at Norgate's flat and told them the address I had selected. Norgate said he would take me to a place where I could order some visiting cards and we could obtain a copy of the will at Somerset House. The next morning we all met at Norgate's flat and went to town together. Norgate took me to Bird's shop in Duke, Street. Villiers Street, Strand; I went in and ordered 50 or 100 cards in the name of "Mr. Campion Watson, 80, Sheen Park, Richmond. "Green went to order a copy of the will; he was given the money to pay for it by Norgate, and he came back and

said it would be ready the next or the following day. I think the birth certificate was obtained later. On the Saturday I went to Richmond, taking a black tin trunk and leather hat box which Norgate supplied. Green wrote labels with the name of "Campion Watson." Norgate provided new shirts and collars; he said it was very necessary that anything taken should be free from any laundry mark.

(Thursday, July 1.)

REGINALD HARCOURT , further examined. One morning in June Green and I went to Norgate's flat; he said, "It is just as well you did not come earlier. I have just had a message from a gentleman who is very anxious to find you," meaning both Green and myself. He produced Sergeant McEvoy's card, and said McEvoy had called with reference to the cheque which had been stopped—could we find any of the money because it would have to be met, and he (Norgate) did not want men of McEvoy's vocation coming round to his flat if he was going to work the Watson affair; that McEvoy had asked him what transactions he had had with Levy, Foster and Co.; he had said he had ordered some stationery of us which had not been delivered, and therefore he had stopped the cheque. Once Norgate, Green and I were standing at the top of Villiers Street when Green told me to "guy"—i. e., clear or go away. I went into a public-house; Green and Norgate came in afterwards and Green told me Detective McEvoy was on the other side of the road. Norgate said, "I don't want McEvoy to know you as Foster, or to see you with me." On July 8 I went to Higgins' office, leaving the three prisoners in a public-house close by. Before my going in the whole affair had been roughly sketched over and the replies I should gave. Norgate told me to ask for an advance of about £300, not to apply for the whole amount at firSt. I gave Higgins a card in the name of Campion Watson, said I wished to borrow £200 or £300 on a reversion to which I was entitled, under the will of the Rev. John Campion, who was my uncle. He asked me the names of the life tenants and their ages, which I told him, and if I had a copy of the will. I said, "No." He asked value of the reversion, and how much I was entitled to, which I told him. He said he would go to Somerset House and see the will, and he asked me to sign a letter to the trustees' solicitors. I signed letter produced to Elmhirst of July 8, 1907, authorising him to give information, and signed it "Campion Watson. "I told Higgins that I owed Mr. Elmhirst a small amount for information he had supplied before; that was to make the affair look more bona fide; that was Green's idea. Norgate and Green had given me the particulars of the will, etc. I signed agreement to pay Higgins commission 10 per cent, on an advance of £300, and also a charge on the reversion, and an undertaking to execute a legal mortgage. Before going to Higgins the arrangement was made that I should take onethird of the money received; Clark one-third; and Green and Norgate one-third between them. Between July 12 and 24 I received open cheques produced, drawn by J. T. Higgins in favour of Campion Watson,

and endorsed by me: July 12, 1907, £15; July 13, £50; 19th, £12 10s. 19th, £10; 20, £120; 24th, £30; making £237 10s. in all. I cashed them at the National Bank, Limited, Strand, in notes and gold. I then went to a wine bar in Ludgate Hill with the three prisoners. Norgate did the dividing; he would take the gold and leave me the notes; in the case of large notes, such as £100, Green and I would go to the Bank of England and cash them. On one or two occasions Norgate deducted money he said was owing from Levy and Foster. On July 12 Higgins said it was necessary, as the reversion depended on survivorship, that I should insure my life to cover the amount of the indebtedness. He took me to Dr. Bliss, who was in the same building as his offices. I signed proposal form, produced, to the Legal and General Insurance Company two days before. Dr. Bliss did not pass me. I discussed this with prisoners, and told them Higgins had told me to come back in a month or two. Norgate said did I know any doctor who would examine me privately. I said, No. He asked Clark, and said, "We shall have to get him passed somehow. I know an office who will do the business if we can only get him fit," that if he could see Captain King he would try and get it done through the General Insurance Company. I telephoned or saw Higgins, and he agreed to accept the General Insurance Company. This conversation took place in a public-house in the Strand; we all four went on to Glasshouse Street, where Norgate arranged to see Captain King and make an appointment for the next day at the Grand Hotel. Clark took me to Dr. Jackson Laing and introduced me in the name of Martin, asked him to give me a thorough examination, which he did, and prescribed for me, and I got the medicine at Keppell's, Piccadilly. Clark told me he had seen Captain King instead of Norgate, and that I was to go to the Grand Hotel and introduce myself to King in the name of Martin, which I did. I signed proposal form, produced, in the name of Campion Watson for an insurance of £2, 000, and gave as a reference, the name of J. Armstrong, 19, Veeden Road, Hammersmith (a newspaper shop, which Norgate had suggested). The next day Norgate and Green took me there, I got a letter, we went into a public-house and took out form (produced) which Green filled up in my presence at Norgate's dictation, and signed it "J. Armstrong." On July 15 I went with my wife and Green to Margate; we stayed at Fort Terrace. Green had relations at Margate. On one day we came to London, and I lent Green two £5 notes to telegraph to his friends at Margate. He afterwards repaid me £3. He asked me if the notes came from Higgins's cheque, as he did not wish to get his relatives into trouble. I told him, No. In July I proposed to Higgins to buy the reversion outright; he had an estimate from the Legal and General Life Office, and on August 15, 1907, I signed proposal for insurance produced in the name of Campion Watson, J. Martin, 3, Ossulston Street, and R. Watson, being given as references. Both were addresses I did not know—they were given me by Green, and he took me to them. I went to Ossulston Street with him, asked for a letter which they gave me, and which I handed to Green. It is filled up in a handwriting very much like Green's. The negotiation to sell to the

Legal and General fell through, and Thos. Thorn was substituted as the purchaser. Higgins told me that Thorn required that I should be identified. I gave him the name and address of Percy Clark. I saw all the prisoners, and we made an appointment for me to go to Woodlands Road, Barnes, with Smith, Higgins's clerk. He drove down there. Clark opened the door and said, "Hullo, Watson, what are you doing down here?" I said we were just having a run round, would he give us a drink. Smith said to Clark, "I suppose you know Mr. Watson?" Clark said, "Yes, I have known Watson for years." He afterwards asked me to stay to dinner, and I saw Smith off in the taxi. Thorn eventually bought the reversion. Mortgages, produced, are signed by me in the name of Campion Watson to the Bedfordshire Loan Company and to Higgins; promissory note for £140 and receipt are similarly signed, also various cheques produced. It was in connection with the signing of these documents that I pleaded guilty to charge of forgery at this Court.

Cross-examined by Mr. O'Connor. I never disclosed to Clark that I had been in any trouble. I continued to meet Green and Norgate until a month or so before my arrest in July, 1906. I think I saw Clark on two or three occasions after obtaining the money from Higgins; at his office and his house. I once went to his office to see Green. Clark had nothing to do with any of the references given to the insurance companies. I swear I was introduced to Green in the name of Harcourt. I cannot swear in what name I was introduced to Norgate. I was introduced to dark in the name of Har-court. Giving evidence at the police court I said, "I was introduced to Clark, as Harcourt, I believe. "The jury may believe exactly what they like—they will listen to the evidence. "Harcourt" was not the name I was convicted under. Reginald Harcourt is not my name—I have used it for 10 or 12 years. I have told Green and Norgate my real name, also McEvoy since my conviction—I cannot say when or where. I object to give the name, but I will write it down. (Witness did so.) Dr. Laing examined me—I stripped to the best of my recollection. Dr. Laing advised me to put myself under his care for two or three months. Clark said, "It is impossible for him to do that. Can you give him anything that will fix him up temporarily?" Clark introduced me as Martin. I am not aware that I was in danger of delirium tremens. I was not drinking heavily; the prisoners were very careful that I should not drink. I did not meet Clark until I met him at Norgate's flat. I once went to the Patent Office with Green—I did not then meet Clark. Green explained that Eli had pledged or mortgaged a patent lamp—I never heard that Clark had purchased that patent. Eli came to the offices in Wells Street and spoke to Green about a patent motor lamp which he had pawned, (but which Norgate and Clark had got out of pawn. I cannot say whether that was the first time I heard the name of Clark. I decided on taking the name of Campion Watson about May 15. I was in constant communication with Green and Norgate until we left Wells Street, which I think was before we went to Farman and King on May 15. I was frequently

introduced to persons by Green—always in the name of Harcourt. I think I was at Clark's house twice (before going with Smith. At Norgate's flat Clark suggested that I should go to his house so that the servant might know me in the name of Watson. I did not visit him prior to July 6. The visit with Smith was much later—in September. I had bills accepted by a relative which I wanted to get discounted; I may have told Clark that I had one bill. I did not. ask him to lend me a small sum. I never mentioned the discounting of a bill to Clark or the borrowing money on it. The first time I went to Clark's house would be soon after July 5—which is the date of the first interview at Norgate's flat. I saw Clark at the flat on July 4 and 5. Clark had the share arranged out of the money obtained from Higgins. Green had made an appointment with me which he did not keep, and I went to Norgate's office at Savoy House, Strand, and asked for Green. Clark said he did not wish to have me at the office and struck me. He did not knock me down. I did not say anything. I did not say after he assaulted me that I would be even with him if it took me 10 years. The arrangement was made that after the fraud was over out of the proceeds a certain sum should be put aside to enable my wife to take a house and let apartments, and I might go again as pianist on a liner, and in case of my arrest they promised to find money for my defence and to look after my wife, which they did not do. There were many reasons for my giving information. I was not actuated by any feeling against Clark because he had assaulted me. I did not make a disturbance in his office. He told me that he would not have me there—that he did not want me to come to the office.

Cross-examined by Mr. Lever. I was acquainted with Norgate inconnection with Levy and Foster. It was a betting business. Norgate was not a partner, but he was supposed to give us names of people to write to. We sent circulars out. I only got one name from Norgate. We were getting stationery from Haycock; Norgate ordered some—I cannot recollect what it was. I think Norgate came first to Wells Street about June. The business of Levy and Foster hasnothing to do with this charge. Norgate came to Wells Street one day and said, "Can you get a cheque cashed for me," and I took it over to Chapman. There were a number changed in that way of small amount—£4 or £5 was the largest. The cheques were all cleared eventually, or practically so. Levy and Foster have nothing to do with this case. Levy and Foster was finished up in June. Up to that time Norgate was often at the offices. The Watson business was mentioned before then—it was not being hatched then. When I went to Farman and King on May 15 the information that we gave them would have to have been considerably augmented before they could have made an advance. Sufficient particulars had been given to get a temporary advance of £10. Up to that time Norgate had taken no active part in it; he constantly spoke about it. I had particulars from Norgate as well as from Green of the Watson affair before we left the offices; it was discussed in Norgate's presence, but I had no particulars from him before May 15. Green said we did not want

Norgate in it, we could work it ourselves. Norgate introduced Clark and saw King, the insurance agent; he supplied me with the luggage; he gave one address for the references, I think two and an address for Higgins; he shared out the proceeds. I could not say that was all Norgate did without going through the whole case. I had heard Clark's name on several occasions, but had never met him before going to Norgate's flat. I did not know King before Norgate sent me to him. I knew Lieut. Rathbone; I have heard the name before; he wanted to borrow money; I did not know he was insured in the General Life office through King. I brought a parcel of clothes to the flat, Norgate gave me a black tin box and new linen shirts and collars without any laundry mark on them. I cannot say how the things came to the one flat. Norgate suggested the address of L. Armstrong, to the best of my knowledge. I merely did what I was told, unwillingly at times—I went into it willingly enough. The address of Armstrong was given me by Norgate in a public-house outside Higgins's office for the purpose of my going to Higgins, and I made a note on my cuff of the name and address; it was given me for the first insurance form I had to fill up, and I used it for the second. I never knew Veeden Road before Norgate took me there. Norgate told me where to get the cards printed. The money was shared out by Norgate every time I got any from Higgins. I believe the first cheque was three guineas. All the cheques were cashed by me, except those that were sent out from Higgins's office to be cashed. The cheque of Abrahams was the largest; because out of that he paid to Higgins all that he had lent. About four cheques were shared in the "Essex" public-house, near Clark's office. Ordinary customers were there, but no one that I knew. Norgate has never made advances to me on bills; he never lent me £5 in August, 1907. In August, 1906, he came to my flat with Clark and Green and asked if I could get a cheque changed, and drew one in my favour for £5. I took it to the stores, where I owed an account, paid it and took Norgate the balance. The cheque was dishonoured, returned by me to Norgate, and Norgate sent Green down to pay it. There was another one of which I forget the amount, which was also dishonoured. I cashed that at a public-house. I got credit for my account £1 8s. out of the first cheque; the proceeds of the second were given to Norgate. In August I went to Margate and afterwards to Brighton with Boggis.

Cross-examined by Green. Green has never been connected with me in any crime besides the Watson fraud; until Bartlett introduced us I had not seen him before. I had arranged to meet Bartlett before I came out of prison; he came out a few weeks after me. I may have met Green first in the "Punch Tavern." Bartlett may have told me the had met Green that morning; he must have had a reason for asking me to meet Green; it certainly was not for the purpose of my borrowing money. I was introduced in the name of Harcourt; it is untrue that I was introduced as Campion Watson, the brother of the man for whom Green had obtained a loan. I do mot. know that Bartlett was in prison for a similar fraud to this. I did not tell Green that I would not deal with my reversion as I had a small

hill that I could get cashed. I may have mentioned a small bill and Green may have said it was too small for the people he dealt with, and suggested my going to the Metropolitan Credit Company—but I do not think that was at the first interview; it may have been. I did take a small bill to the Metropolitan Credit Company, they discounted it, and with the proceeds we started the Levy, Poster and Co. offices. At the first interview Green asked whether I was ready to make a hundred or two hundred pounds. From what Bartlett had told me I concluded it could not be honest. He did not say Green had been in prison, but that he (had been mixed up with a funny lot. Bartlett said, "I suppose you are referring to the Watson (business"—to Green not to me. That is the first time I heard the name of Watson. Green asked my age; it is about 36; I am not sure to a year. I have used other names besides Harcourt; Foster, and Watson. When I committed my previous offence I had a suite of rooms at an hotel, and I used a printed form of attorney. I forged the names of two non-existent persons to the power of attorney. Green bad part of the proceeds from Norgate's cheques. Green told me as he had given the Wells Street address to King the business would have to be dropped. The Watson business was discussed on several occasions at Wells Street—more frequently after we went to Farman and King. At the time I went to Farman and King Green told me that a sum was due to Elmhirst for information supplied. Green said he knew it from Campion Watson. Farman and King did not mention the fact when I went there with Green. Green did not ask me what those costs were; he did not stay away from Farman and King's. because I could not explain—it was because he had given the Wells Street address. The object of going to Farman and King was to get about £10 to see us over the holidays. I did not agree to pay Green commission. I signed the note because King put it in front of me. If I got £10 Green was to have half of it. I found out afterwards that Green and Norgate were acquainted with moneylenders. I had never had anything to do with reversionary or money lending business 'before. I did not select the moneylender. Higgins told me it was necessary for me to insure before going on with the £300 loan. I think before the cheque of July 12 I had £3 3s. I cannot bind myself to July 8 as the first time I saw Higgins. I was not officially declined by the Legal and General. The proposal form to the Legal and General was in Higgins's possession. I gave the references when I filled in the form. I said at Norgate's flat that if it came to a question of insurance I was very doubtful about passing. Norgate dictated to Green the answer to the Armstrong reference in a public-house saloon bar near Hammersmith. Broadway, in the evening, just after I got the letter from Veeden Road. I went in the name of Martin to Dr. Laing, and I used Martin as a reference; I also used "Martin" with King. The reference signed "R. Wallace" is in Green's writing. He has several handwritings; he is an adept at the pen. I met some of Green's relations at Margate, who he told me had been there for some months; they left while I was there.

Green did not tell me he was going to check an inventory. The reason Green gave me for sending £10 to Margate was that there were things in pawn his relatives wanted to get out before they left. To the best of my knowledge I lent him £10—not £5. Norgate had suggested that I should pawn my watch and chain. I did not tell Green the money I went to Margate with was from bills I had got from a relation. I had bills from a relation—I cannot tell the amount; I got one discounted and gave another to a firm. I had three or four bills. I swear that only one of them was discounted at the company which Green sent me to. There was a bill of £10 to £15, it may have been given by my relation, and used to start the Levy, Foster, and Company's office. I did not introduce Bartlett to the acceptor. I think I saw Bartlett at the office in Queen Victoria Street, of the firm who were proposing to provide the money for capital. There was talk of their providing capital for the business. The acceptor of that bill may have threatened proceedings. My father had to meet that bill. I saw Green and Bartlett about it. I obtained a police court summons against Green for assault and for smashing in a door at my flat; he sent round and stopped the matter. I had friendly relations with him after that. He apologised for what had happened. He stayed at my flat about a month, but he was mixed up in some blackmailing business with Norgate, and I asked him to go and stay with Norgate instead of with me. I forget the date of the summons. A second bill I discounted was a forgery 'on my father; it was done by Bartlett. Bartlett and I did not divide the proceeds—there were none. I tried to discount it hot I got nothing for it. I was with Bartlett when he forged it. While the Watson affair was on I saw Bartlett twice in Green's presence. I may have been once at Goldington Street with Bartlett. The forgery on my father's name was while I knew Green. I heard the statement that this swindle did not require bogus trustees on many occasions at Wells Street. I did not know that Bartlett was in prison for a reversionary fraud in which there had been bogus trustees. I understood from Bartlett that he was in prison for some cheque business at Southend. I knew Bartlett had race tickets. I had nothing to do with them. It was agreed between all of us that Bartlett should know nothing about the Watson affair being done. I never used the name of Harcourt as an agent. It was used in connection with Butter in the insurance frauds—for obtaining money by false pretences, commissions on premiums for forged policies, for which I was sentenced to three years' penal servitude last October, and at the same time for five years' penal servitude for the Watson fraud. I do not think the General Life Office came into it. I was arrested on the insurance case, and then identified as the man who impersonated Watson by Mr. Read, the manager of the General Life Office. I have no grievance against Green. I introduced the Hon. Reginald Capel to Green and I believe Green obtained advances for him. I cannot say whether Butter wrote letters to Green demanding money. (Letters handed to witness.) I have never seen these before. One is from Mrs.

Rutter. I signed two charges to Abrahams for £100 and £425. He was only repaid £500. It was agreed between Clark and Norgate and Green that Clark should identify me—it took place for the sale to Thorne. Thorne purchased the reversion for £910. I did not receive £905—it was about £600, roughly speaking. Thorne bought the reversion, and, of course, had to pay all the charges. The amount I received when Thorne purchased may have been £20 or £30.

(Friday, July 2.)

REGINALD HARCOURT , further cross-examined by Green. When I lent Green £10 I told him the notes had not come from Higgins, although they had. I did it because Green would not have taken them had he known they came from Higgins. Before going to Farman and King's I went with Green to Somerset House. We were there half-an-hour or more. Green returned to Margate, wired me for 30s. to pay a bill. I had not the money, and I gave Green my wife's bracelet which he pawned. I had a bill of sale on my furniture dated April 7, 1905. I do not know that the furniture was surreptitiously removed. Bartlett introduced me to Rutter. I have heard since he was acting as agent for the General Life Office. I had an interview with Haycock as to a bill of sale he required. Green was interested the same as the other members of Levy, Foster and Co. I know the name of Henry Tatham—I have not used threats to him about Green.

Re-examined. When Bartlett introduced me to Green he was living at Goldington Street, St. Pancras; Green was living in Bloomsbury. I was never introduced to any of the prisoners in the name of Watson. I went to Margate after, the Watson affair was completed. I never went to Veeden Road, except to get the Armstrong letter. Any information about myself Green must have got from me. I only had two cheques from Norgate in August, 1907; they were both returned "R. D." I gave Clark as a reference to the Legal and General because he had agreed to do the identification. When I saw the prisoners in a public-house and told them, there was a terrible row about it and Clark said I must alter the form. I told him there was a note made of the address by Higgins's clerk. Clark said the best thing to do was to try and get his shorthand book in which the note had been made, and tear the page out. I began to do business with Rutter some considerable time after the Watson affair was finished. It might have been in the latter part of 1907. I never came into touch with the General Life Office before the Watson affair.

WILLIAM CHAMBERS BECK , accountant to the Service Furnishing Company, Limited, 292, High Holborn. My firm supplied furniture in March, 1907, to Levy, Foster and Co., 82, Wells Street, to the value of £14 17s. 9d., payable by monthly instalments of 25s., agreement for which is produced. Two payments of 25s. were made. On May 14 we received cheque for £2 2s., drawn by Percy Davis on London and Provincial Bank, Munster Park, in favour of Levy,

Poster and Co. It was paid to us in respect of 5s. 6d. further goods, £1 16s. 6d. being given in change. It was returned by our bank, "Orders not to pay. "We communicated with Levy, Foster and Co. several times. Norgate came to see me. He introduced himself as Mr. Davis. He said, "I ordered some stationery from Levy, Foster and Co. I do not know very much about them, and as they have not delivered the goods I stopped payment of the cheque. He then paid the two guineas and had the cheque back. We had communicated with the police at Bow Street directly the cheque was returned, before Norgate called upon me.

Cross-examined by Mr. Kerr. I only saw Norgate once—that was in July. He paid the money when he called. (To Green.) I do not know you at all.

GEORGE CHAPMAN , licensee, "Eton Hotel," Chalk Farm. In 1907 I was licensee of the "Northumberland Arms," Wells Street, Oxford Street. I have seen Norgate and Green there with a third man whom I knew as Foster (Harcourt). I have cashed several small cheques for Harcourt, drawn in the name of Davis. I had no idea Davis was Norgate. I paid them to my butcher. The last three came back dishonoured, and I spoke to Harcourt about it, and Norgate came to see me. He said, "Well, governor, I hear you have been twisted for some cash. If you will give me the cheques I will see that you have your money back." I gave him the three cheques; about a quarter of an hour afterwards Harcourt brought me £2. A quarter of an hour afterwards Norgate came in and said, "Well, you got that money, governor. "I told him how much I had received, and he said, "Oh, that is not right. I will go back and make him pay you." I did not get any more money that I can recollect. Cross-examined by Clark. I do not know you. Cross-examined by Mr. Kerr. I had never heard the name of Norgate, and never cashed cheques for him personally. I had three cheques come back, I do not recollect the amount—I do not know if one was £7 2s. 3d., or another £5 7s. The third one was not re-presented, I am sure of that. I believe the amount I received was £2, the £5 7s. was not re-presented by me—I gave the cheques back to Norgate. I think there is about £8 unpaid—I do not think any of the cheques were so large as £7; they were three small cheques.

WALLACE G. H. C. KING , solicitor, 40, Bank Buildings, Kingsway. I was formerly in partnership with Mr. Farman at Birkbeck Bank Chambers. On May 15, 1907, Green called on me with Harcourt, whom Green introduced as Campion Watson. Green gave me card produced, "Edgar S. Green, 82, Wells Street, Oxford Street. "The address is in my handwriting. Green introduced Campion Watson as a man who had a reversionary interest on which he wanted a loan of £1, 200 or £1, 300. I made notes at the time (produced), "Borrower, Campion Watson, 40, Smith Street, Chelsea; mother, Ann Watson; testator, Rev. John Campion, uncle. Will, April 1, 1890, died 1894, at Doncaster." The other notes made in pencil were made afterwards, "Trustees, Elmhirst, solicitor, York, and Rev. Sandford; Trustees'

solicitor Elmhirst. Tenants for life, Miss Wake, aged about 70, Miss Irving, aged about 60, in equal shares. Charge, none. Legacy £1, 200. Entitled to half the whole residue, which is estimated at £3, 000. Brother John Steven, heard of last in California about three years ago. Loan, £1, 000 or £1, 200." I said I would write to the trustees' solicitors. I took commission note, produced, "I hereby instruct and retain you to act for me in raising a loan of £1, 200 or any less sum you can arrange on the security of my interest under the will of my late uncle, Rev. John Campion, who died at Doncaster in 1894"; agreeing to pay costs and a commission to Green, and signed, "Campion Watson. "That was drawn up by me and signed in my presence by Harcourt on May 15. I searched the will at Somerset House and wrote to Elmhirst for information, which I received, and the matter seemed all right. I wrote on May 16 to Campion Watson at 40, Smith Street, Chelsea, and to Green, 82, Wells Street, and got no reply. On May 17 Green called at two p.m. He asked if Campion Watson had been, and hearing that he had not been he went away. I think I saw Green once on another matter after that; I saw Harcourt no more. Elmhirst replied, saying that he had a small claim for costs. I afterwards received a communication from Higgins.

Cross-examined by Mr. Kerr. When I put the undertaking to pay a commission to Green in the retainer I have no doubt I asked Harcourt about it.

Cross-examined by Green. I believe I had seen Green before. I have had experience in reversion matters. This was a contingent reversion. I should not have advanced the money. I should not have advised any client to do so without insurance. The reversion is to "My nephews, Campion Watson and Steven Watson, sons of my late sister, Ann Watson. "If a birth certificate was handed to me of a man, the son of Tabitha Downham, I should have required an explanation, and should not have advanced any money, as it did not accord with the description in the will. I should have wanted the borrower identified by declaration as the' Campion Watson referred to in the will. The ages of the persons mentioned in a will could be verified by referring to the birth register if one had the supposed year of birth.

ALFRED WILLIAM BIRD , 1, Duke Street, Adelphi, printer. I have known Norgate five or six years; I have done work for him, and he has brought me work from other people. On July 5, 1907, I have an entry of "50 gentleman's cards, 2s.," in the name of Watson. Card produced, "Campion Watson, 80, Sheen Park, Richmond," I think is the card ordered and paid for on that date. I do not know who ordered them.

BEET ARTHUR CHADWICK , clerk in the Principal Register, Somerset House. Original wills are filed in my office, and are open to the public on payment of 1s.—they can see either the original of the will filed at Somerset House or a copy of those proved in the provincial registry. The applicant receives a ticket; he has to search for a will first in the calendar; he points out the will Which he wants, and it is brought to him. Ticket sheet for May 15, 1907,

contains the surnames of the wills searched for on that date. There is an entry showing that someone paid 1s. on that day to look at the will of "Campion." On May 27, 1907, an inspection was also made of the will of "Campion. "After searching a copy may be bespoken of the probate, and a payment is made for it according to the number of folios. On July 3 a copy of the will of the Rev. John Campion was ordered; 16s. 6d. was paid. The name of the person ordering it is not stated. In inspecting a will the person has it at the table and is permitted to examine it and take certain notes, but not to make copies.

JOHN THOMAS HIGGINS , Regent Street, registered moneylender. In 1907 my office was at 222, Strand. In July, 1907, Harcourt called on me giving the name of Campion Watson, and handing me his card in that name with the address, 80, Sheen Park, Richmond. That was the first I heard of the Campion Watson business. He stated he desired to borrow money on his reversionary interest under the will of the Rev. John Campion, deceased. I asked him particulars, which he gave me and which appeared satisfactory subject to investigation. He filled up commission note (produced) undertaking to "Pay J. T. Higgins 10 per cent, commission on his negotiating a loan of £300 upon the security of my interest under the will of my uncle, the Rev. John Campion, who died at Doncaster in 1894," also undertaking if required to furnish a valuation and to insure if necessary to protect the security. He afterwards executed charge produced on the security, "As per particulars under clause l." That is dated July 8, 1907, signed "Campion Watson," and witnessed by my clerk, Walter Smith. I agreed, subject to my being satisfied by inquiry at Somerset House, to give them a temporary advance pending the completion of the larger one, provided I got a satisfactory letter from the trustees. Harcourt gave me the name of Brown and Elmhirst, York, as solicitors to the trustees, and signed in my presence authority produced to them to give me information in the name of "Campion Watson." I communicated with Elmhirst and made inquiries at Somerset House. I found there were life tenants. I saw Harcourt the same day and he gave me the ages of the life tenants. I told him insurance would be necessary. I generally deal with the Legal and General Insurance Company, and I suggested it would be better to have him privately examined by a doctor with whom I am well acquainted, and who also acts for the Legal and General. He was examined, and I had a verbal report. I subsequently had a communication from the General Life Office, and paid the premium on Campion Watson's life. I got birth certificate produced from Somerset House, showing that Campion Watson was born at Sunderland, June 26, 1871, the father being Campion Watson, accountant, the mother being Tabitha 'Watson, formerly Downham. The copy is issued September 18, 1907. I received a reply from Elmhirst before I had made a temporary advance to Harcourt. Bundle of cheques from July 12 to July 24 are cheques given by me to Harcourt: £50, £50, £12 10s., £10, £120, and £30, amounting to £237 10s. They have all been cashed

and are for the amounts I advanced. He wanted a further advance about the end of July or beginning of August. I think I had taken a mortgage already, but the mortgage produced, dated August 6, was executed by Harcourt. The first mortgage is the one produced dated July 20, by Campion Watson, 80, Sheen Park, Richmond, mortgagor, to J. T. Higgins, 222, Strand, mortgage and insurance broker and financier, mortgagee, in consideration of £120, he grants all his interest, expectation, contingent, etc., under the will of the late Rev. John Campion, and also the policy in the General Life Assurance Company for £2, 000. That was signed by Harcourt in my presence as "Campion Watson. "There is a further charge dated September 13. A further advance was asked for, and I introduced Harcourt to the Bedfordshire Loan Company. Bundle of cheques and promissory notes produced are signed by and in favour of Abrahams, the first cheque being one for £350, signed by Abrahams and endorsed "Campion Watson," in respect of which there is a promissory note from "Campion Watson" to the Bedfordshire Loan Company. There are a number of cheques which represent further advances made to Harcourt. There is a mortgage of August 6 from Campion Watson to me for £140 and a promissory note at three months of the same date for £140. On the back of the document there is the acknowledgment of another £25. Then there is a mortgage of £425 and a promissory note for £425 from Campion Watson to the Bedfordshire Loan Company. After so much had been advanced, the question arose of selling the reversion, and I found Mr. Thomas Thorne, of Luton, who agreed to purchase it. The deed produced is an absolute assignment of Campion Watson's interest. It recites the will of John Campion, refers to the executors, William Sandford and Charles Elmhirst. recites the particulars of the bequests, and the various charges to mo and to the Bedfordshire Loan Company, and then sells the entire reversion for the sum of £910. It states that there is £468 duo to me; that I agreed to take £380 for it; £525 due to the Bedfordshire Loan Company; that they agree to take £500 for it, making £880 against the £910 for which Campion Watson assigns his rights, leaving £30 to come to Campion Watson. That is signed by Harcourt in the name of Campion Watson, by mo, and by Abrahams, trading under the registered name of the Bedfordshire Loan Company, and dated November 16, I was not obliged to, but I refunded to Thorne the whole amount I received from him, and Mr. Abrahams did the same. I believed Harcourt's story to be true and that I was dealing with the real Campion Watson. Of the prisoners, I only know Norgate by sight. I took one precaution of having Harcourt identified and sent my clerk Smith with him to an address given by Harcourt, which I forget.

Cross-examined by Mr. Newberry. In September, 1907, Harcourt said he had a friend at Barnes who could identify him. He called in the morning, and I requested name of the person. He said he would come back later in the day, which he did, and gave me the name and

address of a person who could identify him. I hardly ever take declarations of identity.

Cross-examined by Mr. Lever. I have never had any business transactions with Norgate, as far as I know. I am not aware that I ever did him an ill-turn. I cannot possibly understand why he should suggest he owes me one or owes me a grudge. I had never seen Harcourt until he came in this matter. I knew Butter and now know that he and Harcourt were convicted together. I told Butter on one occasion that I should have him locked up if he repeated certain conduct.

Cross-examined toy Green. I have never seen or heard of Green before these proceedings. The Bedfordshire Loan Company made a rebate of £25. But for that the balance due to Harcourt would only have been £5. I think he stated that unless a rebate was given him there would not be sufficient margin to induce him to sign the document. That was within a fortnight of his signing it.

ISAAC ABRAHAMS , 9, Castle Lane, Bedford, trading as the Bedfordshire Loan Company. In July, 1907, Higgins communicated with me, and I went to 222, Strand and saw him with Harcourt, who was introduced to me as Watson. Higgins told me that Watson wanted to borrow £350 on a reversion. I asked Higgins whether he had examined and found that everything was right; he told me it was perfectly in order and that he was identified. I drew cheque produced dated July 15 for £350, which is endorsed "Campion Watson," and took a promissory at three months of the same date for £425. About a fortnight after I saw Harcourt at 36, Bloomsbury Street, a place I use as an office. He came with Smith, Higgins's clerk, and I advanced him a further £50. On August 9 I lent him £50 more, taking a promissory note for £100. On August 12 I saw him with Smith—he wanted £100 or so more. I communicated with Higgins, who told me I could let him have another £25, which I did. I took the mortgage produced of August 12. Subsequently, in March, 1906, I paid back to Thorne the sums which he had paid to me. I believed that Harcourt was Campion Watson.

THOMAS ANDREW SPEED , clerk in charge, London and Provincial Bank, Munster Park branch. I knew Norgate as Percival Davis, in which name he had an account in my bank in 1907, of which I produce certified copy between February 23 and September 30, 1907. That is the whole of the account. On April 6 there is a cheque to Levy; on the 16th another, and on the 23rd one for £5 5s. May 16, £3 10s. July 2, 1907, "Harcourt, £1"; June 5, Green, £1 10s." On July 6 there is a credit balance of 19s. 8d. I produce list of cheques returned. On May 14, Levy, "R. D.," £5 7s. May 15, £2 2s., "Orders not to pay"; May 22. Levy, "Refer to drawer," £7 2s. 3 d.; July 1, Clark, "N. S.," £6; August 20, Harcourt, £5; August 21, Harcourt, £6 10s. August 23, Harcourt, £6 10s. those are all marked "R. D." The second £6 10s. is not the first presented a second time.' I think they are two separate cheques.

Cross-examined by Mr. Kerr. Cheque for £5 7s. to Levy, May 16, has been paid I cannot say if it was presented a second time and whether it is the cheque returned on May 14 marked "R. D." On May 16 there was money enough to pay. There was also money enough to pay the cheque for £2 2s., which was returned, "Orders not to pay." That was not paid on instructions from, the drawer.

ROBERT KING , insurance superintendent, General Life Assurance Company, 1, Waterloo Place. I know Norgate. On July 12 I received a proposal form (produced) from a man who represented himself to be Campion Watson. On July 11, the day before, I met Norgate casually in the Strand. I knew him as a business acquaintance. He mentioned that 'he had an insurance to be effected, and made an appointment for me to meet him at the Grand Hotel Buffet at four p.m. the next day. He did not keep the appointment, and when I had been there some time a man came forward and addressed me by came. He gave the name of Martin and claimed my acquaintance as having met me before, but I did not remember him. I appointed for Martin to meet me the next day at 11 a.m. at 1, Waterloo Place, the West End office of the company. I cannot recognise the man who gave the name of Martin. We only had a few minutes' conversation, and he said he would bring his client to me the following day. The next day Campion Watson, whom I recognise as Harcourt, came without Martin, saying he was sent by Martin, and filled up and signed the proposal form dated July 12, which I witnessed. I have not seen Martin since and cannot identify him or say what he was like.

Cross-examined by Mr. Lever. I have met Norgate occasionally. I do not think I ever did any insurance business with him. I think the Watson insurance is the first matter that he mentioned to me that resulted in business. I very seldom have seen him, and then it was only a meeting in the street. I think there was one life that he introduced of the name of Ross, but that was many years ago. Some other business was mentioned, but it came to nothing. I remember his introducing me to a solicitor about six months before—that came to nothing. At the time of the Watson business there was no other business mentioned—I am not quite sure, but I think not. I never asked him if he knew a man named Martin. I never saw Harcourt before July 12. I knew Rutter, but I do not know that he is the friend of Harcourt. I have heard since that Rutter and Harcourt had been convicted for insurance frauds. I have formerly assisted Rutter with business when he was respectable. We dropped him when he was not respectable. Rutter may have brought a case to the office in April, 1907, but I did not see him then. I know Leftwich. I sent Norgate to Leftwich, who is the manager of an insurance office, to do a business which my own office declined in connection with a lady—I think it was an issue policy. That was some time previous to July—about two and a half years ago. I had nothing to do with it after introducing the lady. It is not an unusual thing for some one to come up to me in a public place and offer me business.

ALFRED WM. READ , West End manager, General Life Assurance Company, 1, Waterloo Place. I received application of July 12, 1907, from Campion Watson (produced) containing as a reference J. Armstrong, 19, Veeden Road, Hammersmith, to whom a form containing written questions was sent, and which was returned to me filled in and signed, "J. Armstrong. "Campion Watson was medically examined, the proposal was accepted, and half-year's premium paid by Higgins on July 15. A suggestion was afterwards made that my company should purchase the Campion Watson reversion, but it fell through. On March, 1908, I received a communication from Higgins; the policy was cancelled, and the premium returned.

Cross-examined by Mr. Lever. I do not know of any issue policy to Miss Reilly being spoken of about July, 1907, either with Captain King or with my company. I had an interview with a solicitor in Gresham Building; I think King mentioned it, but no proposal was put before the office. It may have been in the summer of 1907—or the summer before.

FLORENCE GRIGG , 19, Queen's Road, Hammersmith, newsagent. In July, 1907, I received letters in the name of Armstrong. I recognise Harcourt, but I do not know whether he called for those letters.

Cross-examined by Mr. Lever. I recognise Harcourt as a man who came about four times for letters, and I think he received two or three.

CLARA SULLIVAN , Eade Road, Finsbury. In 1907 I was living at 33, Goldington Street, Somers Town. Bartlett lodged with me. I know Green and Norgate. Green came to lodge with me at Easter, 1907, paying 5s. 6d. a week for a room and 3s. 6d. a week for breakfast. Bartlett brought him. He used to pay his rent when he first came, not very regularly; he was not very well off, and in July he owed me £3 or £4. On a Saturday about July 13, he had new clothes and a straw bat, and gave me 30s. on account. On the following Tuesday he came home in a cab with Harcourt, whom I did not then now. He packed some clothes and was going away, when I asked him if he could let me have some more money. He went to Har-court, who was in the cab, and brought me £1. They both left. In about a fortnight Green returned and told me they had been to Margate and had spent about £75. He has since paid me up. He left in August. Norgate came to see Green before he went to Margate. In 1908 he came to stop at my house with Mrs. Norgate.

Cross-examined by Green. 30s. was the largest amount I received from you at one time.

JESSIE ROSE BREWSTER , spinster. In July, 1907, I was living with my brother at 17, Fort Crescent, Margate, when Green came to stay there with Mr. and Mrs. Harcourt. Harcourt paid £4 4s. a week. They stayed a fortnight. Harcourt and Green went twice to London during that time.

Cross-examined. Harcourt engaged the rooms. Green did not pay anything. I did not see him after he left.

FREDERICK WILLIAM CARR , manager, National Bank, Strand. I produce certified extract of the account of J. T. Higgins. On

July 14, 1907, £30 was paid by cheque of Higgins to Campion Watson in six £5 notes, Nos. 13680 to 13685, dated October 5, 1906.

STAPLETON FULKE GREVILLE , clerk in the Bank of England. I produce two £5 notes, Nos. 13682 and 13683, dated October 5, 1906; also £50 note, number 78818, cashed at the Bank of England on July 20, 1907, endorsed "Campion Watson, 80, Sheen Park, Richmond"; also a £20 note, No. 14727, endorsed "Campion Watson, 80, Sheen Park," cashed July 20; also £5 note, No. 13684, endorsed but partly cut away, and showing only the words "Watson" and "Park," bearing P. O. stamp, "Ludgate Circus, July 31, 1907"; I also produce £10 note, No. 42745, cashed August 6, 1907, endorsed "Campion Watson, 80, Sheen Park Road"; also six £5 notes, numbers 80396 to 80, 401, cashed August 6, for gold, endorsed "Campion Watson, 80, Sheen Park, Richmond"; also two £10 notes, numbers 42744 and 42746, cashed, at the bank August 6, endorsed "Campion Watson."

FRANK FREDERICK HOLGATE , clerk in Accountant General's Department, General Post Office. I produce telegraphic in oney order requisition form, dated July 24, 1907, handed in at. he Walham Green Post Office, signed by Edward Green, 30, Goldington Street, payable to C. Green, 16, Warwick Road, Cliftonville; also receipt for £10 signed by C. Green.

MARTHA TERRY , clerk, Walham Green Post Office. On July 24, 1907, I received requisition order produced from a man whom I cannot positively identify, but believe to be Green, and who admitted at the police court having given me two £5 notes in payment of this order. The two £5 notes produced have the number, 6199, of the money order given to Green on them, and are those which I received from him.

Cross-examined by Green. If asked to change notes I should always ask for them to be endorsed. In the case of a money order, we consider the numbers sufficient. The endorsement on one of these notes is "R. Wells, 27, Dawes Road, Fulham." That might be an endorsement before you had it.

THOMAS THORNE , auctioneer, Luton. In August, 1907, I negotiated with Higgins in reference to the Campion Watson reversion, and eventually purchased it for £910. I wanted the seller identified, and Higgins assured me it had been done. Completion took place on September 16, Higgins's managing clerk, Smith, the prisoner Harcourt, my solicitor, and myself being present. The document produced was executed after having been explained by my solicitor. I paid £500 to the Bedfordshire Loan Society, to Mr. Higgins £380, and to Harcourt £30, £15 in gold and £15 by cheque. Subsequently I discovered that I had not been dealing with the real Campion Watson. Mr. Higgins and Mr. Abrahams had given me their word of honour that they would pay me back if it turned out wrong, and they returned me the sums I had paid them. I have lost the £30 paid to Harcourt, the interest and solicitors' costs, besides being put to a great deal of trouble in addition.

WALTER SMITH , manager to J. T. Higgins. I know Harcourt in the name of Campion Watson. In September, 1907, negotiations were going on with Thorne for the purchase of his reversion, and I was instructed to go with Harcourt for him to be identified by a friend of his—I do not remember hearing the name mentioned. Har-court and I walked to the Gaiety Restaurant, took a taxi-cab and drove to 5, Woodlands Road, Barnes, a house which I have since pointed out to Sergeant McEvoy. Harcourt knocked at the door. I believe, a man opened it whom I cannot swear to. The man said to Harcourt, "Hullo Watson, what are you doing here?" I do not recollect what Harcourt replied. I said to the man that I had come down there with the object of getting Campion Watson identified—would he tell me if he was Campion Watson. He said, yes, that he was—that he had known him for some years—I think the man is dark. It was the first time I had seen him.

Cross-examined by Mr. Lever. Harcourt gave the name to Higgins in the morning, came back after lunch, and made an appointment to go to Barnes, and we went there in a taxi-cab.

Cross-examined by Mr. Newberry. Harcourt did not leave me until we got to Woodlands Road. It is a cul-de-sac, a quiet road, so that the approach of the taxi-cab would be heard. I cannot remember whether the man I think was Clark was in the passage or in the garden. He was in the passage when we went in. Harcourt did not say he had brought me merely to have a drink—he might have done so. We had a drink. I was there about a quarter of an hour. It was an informal interview, except that I said I wished him to identify Campion Watson, and I think I said it was a matter of life assurance. I am certain that I asked him if he could identify him. He asked me to stay to dinner, and I declined. I do not remember his saying that it was lucky I found him in, or that he was going to the railway station to meet a friend. I may have said, "Have you always known my friend as Mr. Watson?" It is two years ago, and I do not exactly recollect. I cannot swear to Clark.

OSWALD TALBOT , 39, Sheen Lane, Mortlake, house agent. In the summer of 1906 I let 5, Woodlands Road, Barnes, to the prisoner Clark. He stayed there till the third week in October of 1907. He took the house at £55 a year under agreement (produced) for three years, from June, 1906, but in October, 1907, I had to distrain for rent, and he left.

Detective-sergeant JOHN MCEVOY, New Scotland Yard. In 1907 I received a communication from the Service Furnishing Company with regard to a cheque for £2 2s., and on July 3 I saw Norgate at No. 1, The Drive, Fulham, where he occupied a flat. I had known him for seven or eight years, frequently seeing him in the West End. During the last two years, from the beginning of 1907, I have seen him frequently with Green. On July 3 I gave Norgate my card, said I was a police officer, that I was making inquiries respecting the firm of Levy and Foster, and that I understood he had given them a cheque which I produced. I went there to see Mr. Davis, when Norgate represented himself as Davis. He said he had some betting transactions

with the firm, and that he had ordered some stationery from them; there being some question about the delivery of it he had stopped payment of the cheque. He said he had only known Levy and Foster slightly, he was introduced to them by a friend, and he would let me know anything he heard about them. I went to Wells Street several times and found Levy and Foster had left three or four weeks before. After Norgate's arrest on April 16, 1909, I found at his then address, 85, Rosebery Avenue, receipt (produced) from the Service Furnishing Company for £2 2s., for amount of cheque returned. I was one of the officers engaged in the Harcourt case with regard to the Campion Watson reversion. Before the trial I went with Walter Smith to Barnes, and he pointed out the house, 5, Woodlands Road. I have been to 1, Great College Street, Camden Town, and 3, Ossulston Street. I found no one named R. Wallace or J. Martin living there. On April 16, 1909, I arrested Clark in High Holborn. I told him I was going to arrest him upon a warrant for conspiring to defraud J. T. Higgins, 222, Strand, of £312. He said, "All right, I will go quietly. I know nothing about it, but still" and then he broke off. He subsequently said, "I do not know Higgins." I took him to Bow Street Station, where he was seen by Chief Inspector Stockley, who read the warrant to him. He replied, "I know nothing of it." Stockley explained that it was in connection with the case in which Harcourt was sentenced to five years for fraud in representing himself to be Campion Watson. I did not take him to the cells, but as he turned away to go in the direction of the cells he said, "I suppose he has given the others away as well. "At 2.30 p.m. the same day I was in the Haymarket and saw Norgate and Green together. I told them who I was, and that I should arrest them upon a warrant for conspiracy to defraud J. T. Higgins of £312. Norgate said, "What is your name?" I told him. He said, "Yes, I know." Green said, "I do not know anything of it, I do not know who Higgins is. "I took them to Bow Street, where they were detained. Norgate then said, "I know nothing about the business at all, but I suppose I will when I have heard it all." I was in Court when Hollamley produced P. O. Order, as to which Green said he admitted sending that £10. I know Green's handwriting. In my opinion the answers given in the name of Armstrong are written by him; there is an attempt to disguise the writing in the signature. The body of letter signed by John Steven Watson appears to be in Green's handwriting; also the letter to Mrs. Lucy Watson. The answers to questions signed, "R. Wallace, 1, Great College Street," are in Green's handwriting disguised.

Cross-examined by Mr. Newberry. When Clark was brought before Stockley we were all three close together. Stockley would probably hear the first part of what Clark said, but at the last statement he made Stockley had practically reached the door of the charge room. I am absolutely certain I heard Clark say, "I suppose he has given the others away as well." Clark asked who he was charged in connection with. I did not mention that before as I did not make a note of it. but left it to Inspector Stockley, who read the warrant. I cannot remember seeing Clark and Norgate together. (To Mr.

Lever.) I did not make a note of the interview about the cheque. Substantially what Norgate said was, "I gave them a cheque for some stationery, which I ordered, but as it did not arrive I stopped the payment of the cheque."

Chief-Inspector JAMES STOCKLKY, Criminal Investigation Department, New Scotland Yard. On March 20 I received a warrant for the arrest of the three prisoners. On April 16 I saw Clark at Bow Street and read the warrant to them, omitting the names of Green and Norgate. I told him he would be charged with conspiring with other persons to defraud Mr. Higgins. He said, "I know nothing of Mr. Higgins." I said the charge had reference to a man named Harcourt, who some months "before had been sentenced to five years' penal servitude, mentioning the circumstances. Clark said, "I know Harcourt. "He asked me who the other persons were mentioned in the warrant. I refused to give them and told him he would know 1 after. After he was asked for his address and he refused to give it. The same night Green and Norgate were detained at Bow Street. I had all three prisoners brought up and read the warrant. I told them it had been granted at the request of the Director of Public Prosecutions. None of them replied. They were formally charged and made no reply when the charge was read over.

Cross-examined by Mr. Newberry. I did not hear the remark about giving the others away—I was not in a position to hear it.

Re-examined. After I had read the warrant to Clark I went to one part of the charge room and he would be at the other end—six or eight yards away.

(Saturday, July 3.)

JOHN MCEVOY , cross-examined by Green. In October, 1906, this case was fully reported. I have seen Green about. I could not say if he was trying to keep out of the way. I received the warrant on March 20. I have no reason to say that Green was keeping out of the way. I have ascertained that he (had relations living at Margate in 1907, and they left there about July 31. Harcourt was convicted with Rutter for obtaining money by false pretences. He was arrested originally on that charge and identified in connection with this charge when 'before the magistrate. The name of Reginald Har-court was given on the telephone to the General Life Office as the introducer of certain business on which he would get commission. Mr. Read, the manager of the General Life Office, in giving evidence against Harcourt and Rutter, identified Harcourt as Campion Watson. I say the handwriting in the Armstrong document is undoubtedly Green's. Others are undoubtedly in his handwriting, but disguised. I have no reason to say that Green knew me before his arrest except from his association with Norgate. I saw Green write at the police-court. I have compared the documents produced with Green's writing and have no doubt they are his.

Cross-examined by Mr. O'Connor. I know Bartlett. He is not now wanted by the police. He was outside this Court yesterday. He has been convicted of false pretences in June, 1906, a very similar class of crime to this; there were three or four men, one alleging that he had. a reversion and the others that they were trustees, and they obtained money from a firm of solicitors. I have heard of Jellicoe. I have not heard that Bartlett attempted to get money from Jellicoe in the same way.

Re-examined. It was publicly known, prior to the arrest of the prisoners, that Harcourt had made a statement. I heard it mentioned within a week of his statement being made at Exeter Prison. I met several people who told me of it; I have compared the three references said to be in Green's handwriting, with the requisition for the telegraphic money order and other documents in Green's handwriting.

Mr. O'Connor submitted that there was no case to go to the Jury against Clark there being no corroboration of Harcourt.

The Common Serjeant. There is plenty of evidence of corroboration against Clark.

Mr. Lever submitted there was no corroboration against Norgate.

The Common Serjeant said he should not stop the case against Norgate at the present moment. There might come a time when the question could be farther considered.

(Defence of Clark.)

PERCY CLARK (prisoner, on oath). I am a mechanical engineer and inventor. I carried on business at 5, Woodlands Road, Barnes, and at Savoy House, Strand. I was connected with a clerical publication, for which it was necessary to have the Savoy Office. In May, 1907, I bought and paid for the patent of a rear motor lamp. I paid £10 together with Norgate for the option from the patentee Eli. Norgate introduced me to Green, who was acting for Eli. Harcourt recalled to my recollection yesterday that the models were pawned. I met Harcourt in May, 1907, when I was seeing Green about this—he made an appointment to meet me in Holborn and Harcourt was with him. Green introduced him as "Watson," and I knew him by that name during the whole of our acquaintance. As I said at the police court, up to the time of my arrest I had never heard of the name of Higgins I never advised Harcourt to wear glasses or to change his appearance. I never met Harcourt at Norgate's flat in my life. To my knowledge I have never seen Green at Norgate's flat. I never gave him money to get a copy of a will. I received no money obtained from Higgins. I have never been in Harcourt's company with Norgate and Green in my life. I have lent Harcourt small sums of money; he is indebted now to me about 35s. or £2. He gave me 30s. back on account and I paid Dr. Laing out of it. He represented to me that he had some bills from a relation which he was getting discounted, and he borrowed from me small sums of from 5s. to 10s.; 10s. was the largest sum I ever lent, and. that was only on one occasion. In November, 1907,

he called at my office for Green; I afterwards understood he had an appointment with. Green which he had not kept. When he called Green was with me in the inner office. I heard loud voices in the outer office; I went into the outer office and the clerk said it was somebody for Mr. Green. I went out and saw Harcourt there, and said, "What are you doing here—what are you making all this row about?" He said, "I want to see Green." I said, "If you want to see Green you can make an appointment to see him." Previous to this I said, "Have you come to pay me the money you owe me?" He said, "You had better get it from Green. ". I said, "Why from Green?" He said, "Green owes me money." I said, "I am not going to collect your debts from Green. If you are not going to pay me you had better go." One word led to another, and, as he said, I hit him; I knocked him down, as a matter of fact. He picked himself up, and ran downstairs, shouting as he went downstairs, "All right, I will get my own back with you." I said, "Don't you ever come up again or I will throw you downstairs." He shouted out again, "All right, my gentleman, I will get my own back with you if it is after 10 years' time"—as near as possible these were his words. I was in a very bad temper. From that day I have never spoken to him nor seen him until he appeared against us as a witness in the police court. He never asked me to pay for defending him. I never arranged to go to King in the name of Martin, and never saw King at the Grand Hotel Buffet. I have never seen King until I saw him at the police court. I took Har-court to Dr. Laing and I remained in the outer waiting-room which we were shown into. Dr. Laing came out of his consulting room. I said. "I have (brought a friend of mine—I think he has been on the tiles"—meaning that he bad been drinking heavily—"he wants you to give him something to put him right. I think he is in a very bad way—he is all of a shake." Dr. Laing said, "Will you step this way?" and he took him into the consulting room, I remaining in the waiting room with another patient until Dr. Laing and Harcourt came out, when Dr. Laing said, "I have given him something to put him right," or words to that effect. He shook hands with me and we came out. I should like to explain how it was I took Harcourt to Dr. Laing. Harcourt said in his evidence that he had called two or three times on me. As a matter of fact, he was a pretty frequent visitor when he was living at Richmond, and I at Barnes, and he came to me one morning early and said, "I have come to see if you are going to give me a drink. I have been up playing cards all night—I am very shaky." I gave him a drink—I believe he had two. We came up to town together. He borrowed 5s. and wanted to have a drink at the refreshment bar at Waterloo. I said, "If you want to get rid of that 5s. why don't you go to a doctor." He said, "I will go to a chemist." I said, "I should not go to a chemist—why don't you go to a doctor?" He said he did not know a doctor. I took him by the Waterloo Tube to Piccadilly and on to Old Burlington Street, and introduced him to Dr. Jackson Laing, whom I have known for many years. When he came out he said that

the doctor had given him a prescription, and I gave him a further 2s. 6d. to get his prescription made up, but I did not go into the chemist's with him. I did not hear the name "Martin" used at all. Harcourt used to drink very heavily—he could drink as much as almost any man I know. I remember his coming to my house with Smith. Woodlands Road is a cul-de-sac and a very quiet road, with about 30 semi-detached houses in it. I was in the front garden when I heard a taxi-cab drive up and the man I now know to be Harcourt and Smith got out. So I said, "Hullo, Watson, what are you doing over here?" or "doing in a taxi?" He said, "Oh, only having a run round. I thought you would like to give us a drink; I have got a friend with me." I said, "Bring him in with you. "He came in with Smith, and they had a drink. Smith remarked on the nice quiet place it was, and so on. Harcourt said, "Clark is very fond of gardening—he has got a nice garden at the back. "They had a turn round the back garden with me and we came back into the room, when I think they had another drink. Smith turned to me as he was going, and with the door of the dining-room in his hand said, "You have always known my friend as Watson, have not you?" I said, "Yes. Why do you ask?" He said, "Oh, nothing; I only wanted to know if you had always known him as Watson." I said, "Yes. "Previous to this I may mention that I had told Smith and Harcourt that they were lucky to have found me in, as I was going to the station to meet a friend, and I asked them to stop and have dinner with my friend. Smith declined, and Harcourt told me he was going back to Richmond. We all came out together, Smith got into his taxi, and Harcourt walked over the Common to the station with me. I said to Harcourt, "What made him ask me if I had always known you as Watson?" He said, "It was about those bills. "Harcourt then went off by train from Barnes Station. I saw him several times after that. What McEvoy says happened when he arrested me is about right. I was taken to Bow Street and said, "I know nothing of Mr. Higgins. "When he says I said, "I know Harcourt," what I actually said was both to Stockley and McEvoy, "I know of Harcourt. "I knew from Green that Harcourt had got into trouble—that Watson had taken the alias of Harcourt. I learnt that in November, 1907, from Green when Harcourt came to my office and asked my clerk for Green some months before his arrest. In August, 1908, I was run over and laid up for three months—I had three lbs. broken. When the warrant was read over to me at Bow Street Stocklev's statement is about correct. I asked who I was charged with. He said, "You are charged with two other men." I said, "Who are they"; he refused to tell me, and said, "You will be told later. I made no reply when formally charged with Green and Norgate. I never said, "I suppose he has given the others away as well. "I cross-examined McEvoy about that at the police court. As soon as we came out of Court I asked Inspector Stockley in front of Green and Norgate, "You heard what McEvoy said. You were in the room the whole time. Could you have heard if I had made that statement?" He said, "I suppose so." I said, "Did you hear me make that statement?" He said, "No." I was

not at Norgate's flat on the morning of July 5, 1907. I was at the offices of W. H. Hobson, Limited, 29, Vauxhall Bridge Road, trying to sell a car vulcaniser from 10.30 till 11.30 or 11.40. From there I went by the 'bus to West Strand P. O. and sent telegram (produced) at 11.55 a.m., to Shearer, an engineer, who has made models for me for 12. some years, and who was a partner with me in that particular vulcaniser. 13. I had no idea that Harcourt was obtaining money from 14. Higgins, or that he was using me to identify him for any fraudulent 15. purpose.

Cross-examined by Mr. Bodkin. I have known Norgate for some years as Norgate, and that he was living at the flat for matrimonial reasons in the name of Davis. I knew he had a banking account in that name, and had a returned cheque dated July 1 for £6, which he paid me for half-cost of a model. The money was afterwards repaid, I think within three or four weeks. I was introduced to Green by Norgate at the end of 1906. I do not think I saw Green again, or only once, until May, 1907. I was not on intimate terms with him. Norgate has been to my house, and I think Green once. I have never been to Green's house. I have been to Norgate's flat at Fulham, and I know that his wife lived at Brighton—I once visited him in Brighton about September, 1907. When Green was introduced to me I understood he had passed for the bar, but had never practised. I afterwards knew that he was connected with moneylenders. To my best recollection I did not ask Watson about him. About May, 1907, I knew that he was a person who introduced borrowers to moneylenders—reversions were not mentioned. I do not understand much about reversions; I think Norgate does. I was first introduced to Norgate in Holborn—I had an appointment to meet Green in "The City of New York," a public-house near Bedford Row—I met him in the street with Harcourt, and Green introduced him as Mr. Watson—nothing was said as to where he lived or what he was. I was anxious to go about my business, and left them, and met Green about two hours afterwards about a patent. I met Harcourt, I think, twice casually after that before he came to my place. I never asked him or Green what he was. I met him at Waterloo and took him to my house. I never met him but that he was more or less shaky from drink. On that occasion—a Saturday afternoon—he had got into the wrong train for Richmond—a train that only went as far as Barnes, and I took him to my house. That would be in July. The next morning—Sunday—he called again. I had a servant, but I very much doubt if the servant opened the door. He frequently called afterwards—always in the name of Watson. I do not recollect his telling me where he lived in Richmond—I did not know of the Sheen Park address until I heard it at the police court. Early in July he borrowed a small sum from me, and I lent him small amounts up till September, sums of not less than 5s. On two or three occasions he took a bottle of whisky, which he afterwards paid me for. He repaid me 30s., and there is a little owing. I have lent him money since July 11. I have no memorandum. I have known Dr. Laing nearly 20 years.

I did not hear Harcourt called Martin. I did not look at the prescription. Dr. Laing had told him where to get it made up. That morning he called at Barnes and came up to town with me. I had lent him 5s. I think he did not want to spend the money in going to a doctor. I afterwards paid Dr. Laing. I entirely deny that the conversation with Norgate and Green that Harcourt alleges took place. I saw Harcourt afterwards—he seemed steadied by the medicine. Nothing was said about going to an insurance office. I have been at the Grand Hotel Buffet, but I never saw Captain King there. At the police court King could not recognise me, and McEvoy said, when I was going to ask a question, "He does not recognise you." King came close up to me. He said that the man had a moustache, and I said, "Well, I am the only one here with a moustache." I have been to Norgate's flat four or five times at the most. I was not meeting Green in July. I do not think I saw Green twice from May to the end of October, 1907. Green spoke to me about Harcourt in November, 1907, after the fracas at my office. That was the first time I knew he was called Harcourt. I said I considered him a bad lot. I told Green about his borrowing: money, and that he had not paid me, and asked Green to meet him somewhere else. He then gave his name to the clerks as Harcourt to see Mr. Green. I believe Green said that he went in the name of Harcourt for business purposes; that he was doing loans; that Green was finding the lenders for some clients of Harcourt's. That was the last time I saw Harcourt until he was a witness against me. I am positive that I first met Harcourt in May, 1907. I did not. say to Smith that I had known him for some years as Watson; I said, "I have always known him as Campion Watson." McEvoy has stated what occurred on the arrest nearly enough. After my interview with Inspector Stockley I was taken away by a policeman to the cells, and I said nothing to the effect of "I suppose he has given the others away"—I said nothing approaching it—nothing which could be mistaken for that. The rest of Harcourt's story is a complete invention, out of malice because I knocked him down; I can think of no other reason.

Cross-examined by Mr. Newberry. Harcourt undoubtedly forced his company on me. He made more attempts to borrow money than were successful. I am in the habit of lending small sums to friends—I believe I could call myself fairly generous. I have been to consult Dr. Laing on many occasions for myself, and I have never been in the consulting-room with another patient in my life. I suggested Harcourt's going to a doctor because he suggested going to a chemist. He had been drinking very heavily, and I should not have been surprised if he had D. T.—he was all of a shake. I paid Dr. Laing—I have had several accounts with Dr. Laing. I have been to the Grand Hotel Buffet, and also to the "Golden Cross" opposite. After Eli had pawned the motor lamp, as Harcourt reminded me, I had no occasion to meet Green again, because the man he was acting for had charged the motor lamp to a man named Kelsey. Smith said to me, "Have you always known my friend

as Watson," or" Campion Watson?" and I said, "Yes. "That was as Smith was leaving. I did not saw I had known him "for many years," nor "for some years. "(To the Judge.) Smith did not say they had come in order that he might be identified; he was introduced as a friend of Watson's. What Smith said at the police court was right.

MAURICE SHEARER , 809, Old Kent Road, mechanical engineer. I have known Clark since the beginning of 1907 as an inventor. He has taken out patents for inventions, for which I have made models. I gave him the option of working one of my patents for a vulcaniser. A number of telegrams and letters during 1907 to 1908 have passed between us. The vulcaniser was started about the middle of June. I received telegram (produced) "Peckham, High Street, July 5, 1907, handed in at West Strand at 11.55 a.m., received at 12.20 p.m. To Shearer, 809, Old Kent Road. Had one appointment satisfactory, only question price, have another meeting this afternoon, will let you know result. Clark. "That was in reference to the vulcaniser. I also received telegram, "July 5, 1907, handed in at Vauxhall at 4.24 p.m., received at 4.36. To Shearer, 809, Old Kent Road. Definite proposal, Monday. Certain to take it up. Only question of price. I asked £500. Will try and call to-morrow. Clark. "I have seen Green in Clark's office, but have had no business dealing with him. Clark was trying to place the vulcaniser in two or three directions. I believe he was negotiating with Sir William Armstrong. The first telegram referred to Hobson's, Limited, the motor engineers, of Vauxhall, with whom Clark was also negotiating. I went to the expense of constructing the model of the vulcaniser, and I was to have a third share of what it was sold for. I constructed a model of a closing door attachment for Clark—he paid me for the work I did—I do not know if anyone else bore a share of the expense. Clark always paid me satisfactorily. I could not say if I saw Clark on July 5. I have received many other telegrams and letters from him.

Cross-examined. I believe all the other telegrams are after July 5. (Bundle of telegrams and letters put in.)

(Monday, July 5.)

HAMILTON HOBSON , managing director of H. M. Hobson, Limited, 29, Vauxhall Bridge Road, motor manufacturers. In July, 1907, I was negotiating the purchase of a patent for a small hand vulcaniser for tyres with Clark, and was the member of the firm dealing with the matter, which was interesting to me at the time. I cannot remember the dates when Clark called upon me. I usually made appointments for special business of that kind at 10 a.m., before dealing with other business. Clark called on several occasions before I could give him an appointment, as I had to see other members of the firm before I could come to a conclusion. He certainly called more than once before I could go into the business at all. Clark ultimately saw me and the other directors, and gave a demonstration of the working of the model. I believe on one occasion he saw me in the morning, and afterwards again in the afternoon—I believe that occurred only once.

ALBERT ALEXANDER , managing clerk to C. Sharman, 13, Bedford Row, solicitor. I was formerly managing clerk to Fowler and Co., 13, Bedford Row, who were engaged in the prosecution of Bartlett. The firm was formerly Mear and Fowler. They dissolved partnership in 1898. I was managing clerk to Mr. Mear up to the time of his death in 1905 and then I went to Mr. Fowler. I know Thorpe; he was introduced to Mear by Bartlett when he was in partnership with Fowler. Thorpe obtained advances from Mear on a supposed reversion; there was a bogus trustee; I do not recollect the name. It was somebody at Midhurst, in Sussex, who represented himself as a trustee to a will under which Thorpe said he was entitled to money. Mr. Mear inserted an advertisement for Walter Bartlett and Thorpe after he had parted with 'his money. He did not find Bartlett. Mr. Fowler was defrauded after 1905 by a man calling himself Inch; that was also a bogus reversion. I have heard that Bartlett was sentenced to 15 months in connection with that fraud. Jellicoe introduced that usiness to Fowler; I believe it was a case of bogus trustees. I believe Jellicoe acted in good faith. He was not prosecuted.

Cross-examined. I believe Thorpe's fraud was in the summer of 1904; the money was advanced a week after he was introduced. After we had been defrauded we sent down to Midhurst and found that somebody had called for letters; there was no such person down there, so we inserted the advertisement to try and find out where Bartlett was. About a month or two afterwards the advertisement appeared—in the autumn of 1904. We found it out pretty soon. The advertisement mentioned Walter Bartlett and Thorpe by name. I am not certain whether there were other alias names advertised. The fraud by Inch Was 18 months or two years ago. I am only speaking from hearsay. I heard it was Bartlett. I do not know when (Bartlett-was convicted, or when he came out.

GEORGE WILLIAM GRICE HUTCHINSON , 30, Bedford Row, solicitor. In 1905 and 1906 I was in practice at Birkbeck Bank Chambers. A small reversion of John Steven Watson's was introduced to me by Henry. I first became acquainted with Green in that matter about May, 1906, when he called upon me with J. S. Watson. Watson told me that he had a further interest. In 1905 I had nothing to do with the will of the Rev. J. Campion—it was money coming from another family. In May, 1906, I think I read the will at Somerset House and had a copy. I may have asked Green to go; I certainly wrote to the trustees and obtained certain information, which did not justify me in advising my client to advance any money. I should say that John Steven Watson's interests under the will of the Rev. J. Campion are practically nothing—certainly of no marketable value. I told J. S. Watson so. I had had the will and the information from the trustees about the ages of the two life tenants. I know Hennen Edgelow and Co., solicitors. Green mentioned that they

wanted some information about J. S. Watson's interest and I saw them on the subject. I know Joseph Wolff. I have seen him once on this matter. He wanted some information, and lie came to see me about May or June, 1906, soon after Green had brought J. S. Watson to me the second time. I did not know that Campion Watson senior, owed costs to Elmhirst's—there would be no reason for me to be acquainted with that fact. I was requested by Green's solicitors to lend him my papers relating to this transaction, which I did. The copy will recites that Rev. John Campion had reversionary interest under the will of the Rev. John Irving. I did not have particulars of John Irving's will, but I got a letter from the trustees. I think the reversion has fallen in. Mr. Elmhirst stated that one of the tenants for life was an old lady aged 89. I was on the Irving side. I did not know that then I only got the funds. The trustees' letter gave me particulars of the investment. I assumed that what the solicitors told me was correct. I know Bartlett by sight. I know a man who called himself Thorpe who was engaged in a reversionary swindle. Bartlett and Thorpe got a small advance of £5 from me; I ascertained that Bartlett impersonated a trustee. I remember a man called Inch. I was not called to identify Bartlett. I once went to try and identify Thorpe. I never ascertained the age of Campion Watson junior; it was not necessary for me to have that.

Cross-examined by Mr. Bodkin. I have not been subpœnaed for the prosecution in this case. I happened to be at Bow Street on one or two occasions when it was on and answered inquiries made by the detective-sergeant in charge of the case. I first got to know Green about February, 1906, after the death of Henry. I had seen him before, but had no business with him. I think Green and Henry were carrying on some business called McGregor and Co. I used to do business with Henry in mortgages. Henry died in January 1906. Writ produced against-J. S. Watson is by Charles Samuel Deighton, a moneylender. It was in connection with a loan which Henry introduced to me to J. S. Watson against which he gave a promissory note and on which he was sued. I was pressing for payment on behalf of Deighton. A few days after the issue of the writ I saw Green—so that it would be February and not May, 1906, when I first saw Green. His suggestion was that J. S. Watson had a much more valuable interest Under the will of the Rev. John Campion, out of which this small matter on which he had had £50 could be repaid—I was to find out what it was. I think I went and read the will myself. In the course of the interviews with Green I went thoroughly into the matter and came to the conclusion that practically J. S. Watson had no interest—none that was marketable, but that he had a contingent prospect after the death of two tenants, for life, and only if they died in a certain order. Of course, his age would be material, as it depended on his surviving his father. I had ascertained the age of the father on the previous occasion. I think Green understood those matters thoroughly. I know Norgate.

Mr. Kerr objected to the evidence about Norgate as irrelevant: held that the question was admissible as possibly material.

Cross-examined. After I had been to Somerset House I told Green I could not recommend any advance at all, because J. S. Watson had no interest of any value in my opinion. Deighton made a further advance and took a mortgage for the whole amount. After that Norgate came to the office, I think with Green, told me that Green had mentioned the matter and that he thought he had a client named Wolff who had agreed to purchase J. S. Watson's interest at, I think, £250, and he asked me to give the. necessary information to his solicitors. I gave him the information I had. I pointed out the nature of the reversion, both under the will and the settlement. His client's name was Wolff and Wolff called upon me also. I had two or three interviews with Norgate about it. I did not go into all the details with Norgate—I dealt with Wolff's solicitor. I was very anxious for the matter to go through. I have no doubt I gave him particulars of the age of Campion Watson senior. I do not think Campion Watson junior was mentioned. I think Norgate knew that J. S. Watson had got his first advance from Deighton on the reversion under the marriage settlement. I did not charge Norgate; he was not my client. I was only too willing to give information so as to get my client paid. Wolff bought both the reversions of J. S. Watson, subject to Deighton's mortgage and to a claim of Hennen, Edgelow and Co.; they were solicitors who had also a charge of which I had had notice for £10 and some costs. Wolff did not pay anything off—he bought the equity, and he had the chance, if Campion Watson senior and the tenant for life had died, of getting the reversion after paying off Deighton and Hennen Edgelow. I think Wolff bought at £150 and paid about £80 or £90. I had nothing to do with the completion. I have seen Norgate since, but not done any business with him on reversions. I have dealt with mortgages through him. I have handed all my letters from Elmhirst to Green's solicitors—in fact, all documents they wished to have. To the best of my recollection I did not know that Campion Watson, of Huntingdon, owed Elmhirst a small amount for costs. I paid some costs to Hier-Evans, Green's solicitors. I am almost certain Elmhirst did not mention that Campion Watson owed him anything. I know I paid him £2 2s. Wolff, the purchaser of J. S. Watson's reversion, became bankrupt about six weeks after he bought it—about the middle of 1906, and I foreclosed on it against Wolff and Hennen Edgelow to get the property into Deighton's hands.

Cross-examined by Mr. Kerr. So far as this transaction with Norgate was concerned it was perfectly bona-fide, so far as I know.

Re-examined. I did not obtain a copy of John Campion's will at the time. The copy produced was obtained on January 21, 1907, and is the only copy I had—I got it when I started my foreclosure proceedings. I read the will at Somerset House, and I got information from the trustees. I drew the assignment to Wolff. I did not complete the purchase; he took the assignment away.

GEORGE WOOD , assistant to Brabington, 27, Wardour Street, pawnbroker. On July 24, 1907, a metal watch, chain, purse and a coin were pledged by E. Green, 16, Warwick Square, Margate, for £5,

and were redeemed on December 7, 1907. On July 27, 1907, five necklets, four lockets, one bracelet, albert chain, brooch, pair of earrings, purse, two gold watches and a ring were pledged for £22 by C. Green, 1, Albion Villas, Sydenham. The agreement is in a lady's handwriting. The interest has been paid three times, and we still hold the goods.

Cross-examined. I do not know Green. I was present when the goods were pledged.

JAMES ERNEST BURRELL , commercial traveller. I know Harcourt. I remember the breaking of a window at Harcourt's flat at Crookham Road, Fulham. I should think it would be about November, 1907. I called on him that evening; he had been referring to Green, who came in, went away and returned again with me. Harcourt had said something about Green which I repeated to him; we returned, and Green being refused admittance put his umbrella through the glass panel of the door. I thought there was some disagreement about Harcourt's wife. I heard there were police-court proceedings. I think it was late in 1907.

EDGAR STANLEY GORDON GREEN (prisoner, on oath). In 1905 I was using an office with Elmslie Henry at 4, Great James Street, Bedford Bow. Henry, who was very ill at the time, had introduced J. S. Watson to Grice Hutchinson. Hutchinson had written to the trustees and had received no reply. Watson called on Henry, who asked me to go and see J. S. Watson's father and get information they wanted. I went with J. S. Watson to his father on Sunday afternoon. I explained that his son wanted to-morrow some money for his fruit business. Mr. Campion Watson refused to give any information at all, and practically ordered 'his son out of the. house. I had nothing further to do with the matter until early in 1906, when Steven Watson called at 4, Great James Street and asked for Henry. I told him Henry had been dead about a fortnight. He produced a writ which had been served by Grice Hutchinson, said he had a further interest, and wanted to know if he could raise some more money on it. I took him to Hutchinson, Watson gave particulars, and Hutchinson said he would make enquiries and let him know. Ultimately Hutchinson said he could only advise his client to advance another £5 as there was no security except pure speculation. I mentioned the matter to Norgate, who said he knew a man named Wolff who might have a gamble. Wolff was taken to Hutchinson's, eventually agreed to buy the interest, and instructed Hutchinson to draw the assignment. I knew no more of the matter until early in 1907, when I met Bartlett in Holborn. I knew him through Henry; he was a frequent caller at Great James Street, and used to write letters, etc., for Henry. Bartlett told me that he had been in the country buying willow trees and wanted to know if I was doing anything in the moneylending line. I told him Henry was dead and said "Yes, if you have anything, bring it along." He said he had a small matter which he could introduce to me, and made an appointment for the next day, which I did not keep. One morning Bartlett called on me before I was

up, asked about the appointment, which I told him I had forgotten and said he had to meet the man at eleven o'clock; would I meet him at the "Punch Tavern" in Fleet Street. I went there and he then introduced Harcourt as Mr. Watson, the brother of the man with whom Henry had had some dealings. Harcourt said he wanted to borrow some money, but he would not do so on the reversion, as his brother had upset his people; he was expecting to get a bill from a relative for £15; could I get it discounted for him. I told him it was too small for the people I dealt with, but if he took it to the Metropolitan Credit Company in Chancery Lane they did that small business. He did take it there and it was discounted. At this interview they said they (had taken offices at 82, Wells Street. I said, "I have not an office now, and if you don't mind I will use your office as an address for my letters. "I met them there and arranged to pay a quarter of the rent and cleaning expenses. As I was going up one morning I met Norgate, told him about it, and he came with me. The office was closed, with a ticket up, "Return in ten minutes. "We went across to the "Northumberland" and there found Bartlett and Harcourt. I introduced Norgate to Harcourt, saying, "This is a brother of Steven Watson, he is now known as Mr. Foster. Bartlett knew Norgate. I used the office till about March, 1907, when a distraint was put in. I saw Harcourt, who told me about the distraint and said, "I suppose I shall have to borrow some money on my reversion now"; did I know who it was best to go to. I said it would be a matter for a firm of solicitors, and mentioned Farman and King, with whom I had just had some dealings. I took him there that afternoon. I told him I should want 10 per cent, commission; he would not agree to that, but eventually agreed to pay 5. per cent. We saw King, who said he would make inquiries and let him know. I received a letter from King, called there, and he told me he had written to the trustees for information and they wanted some costs. On seeing Harcourt I said, "You owe the trustees' solicitors some costs; have you been trying to borrow before." He said "No"; that he did not think the trustees' solicitors would have been communicated with, and as he did not want his people to know he would have nothing more to do with the matter. The office in Wells Street was closed up. Harcourt kept away for two or three weeks prior to its being closed. I have got a letter from him asking me to meet him, which I did. He said, "I have another small bill I want discounted; the Metropolitan Company has already discounted two and they will do no more" did I know anyone else. I told him to try the London and Westminster, of St. Martin's Lane. He told me he had left Chelsea and was living in Crookham Road, Fulham. I wrote to him there asking him to lend me a portmanteau. He sent me a postcard and I met him, when he told me he could lend me the portmanteau, and at the same tune paid me £1 15s., which he said was 5 per cent, commission on a bill of £35 which he had discounted with the people whom I had recommended him to go to; it was arranged he should pay me a commission. I told him I was going to Margate. He said he was taking

his wife for a holiday; he wanted to go to Brighton, but she wanted to go to Margate; if I would wait till the next day we would go together, which we did. I went to my people's place and arranged to meet him at the Arcadian Hotel, where 1 had taken a room. When we met he said, "It would be cheaper for you if you come and have your meals with us. "I did so on several occasions. My people were leaving Margate on Thursday, July 25; they had some jewellery pledged there which they wanted to redeem, but had not sufficient money. They asked me if I could get it until they came to town, when the. things would be repledged and the money repaid. was coming to town to see that the place at Sydenham was ready for their reception, and I mentioned to Harcourt that I was coming to town; he said he was coming up, and we came up together. I had already written to Norgate. We met him, and I asked him whether he could get me £5 for a couple of days. He said the man who usually did that for him was away on a holiday, and Harcourt said, "I can do that for you if you come with me to Fulham—my wife has some money at the flat." He walked with me to Brabington's, where I pawned my watch and chain for £5. We then went on to Fulham, he went into his flat, came out, and handed me a £5 note. We went to the post-office so that I could wire the money. As I was going in he said, "I shall want some change, give me the gold and take this other note." I gave him the £5 in gold for which I had pledged my watch, took the other note, and wired the £10 to Margate, saying I would be back that night. My people left Margate that night, after my seeing them away, and on the following Sunday morning I received a letter enclosing the £10. I then paid Harcourt £7, and asked Harcourt to let me leave the £3 as I was rather short, and was staying in Margate. Har-court left Margate; I was down there for some time afterwards, and I wired him asking him to send me 30s. to pay my hotel bill. He did not reply, so I came to town leaving; my 'bill unpaid. I saw Harcourt. He said he had no money but he could lend me a bracelet I could pawn, which I did. In September, 1907, Harcourt told me he was doing business with a man called Rutter, who was sending out moneylending circulars. He could put some 'business in my way; they had a young gentleman who had just come of age who wanted some money—could I obtain it. I said "Yes," met this gentleman, and got him an advance of £200. We went back to Harcourt and Rutter, and there was a question about the commission. They went away with the gentleman to get the cheque cashed, and came back and told me they had got £15 commission, which was divided. I got a letter from this gentleman, and I got him some more money, when he told me that he had paid Harcourt £25 and not £15. I continued to do business with this gentleman to a very large amount, and I did not give Har-court and Rutter one penny—I told them they had cut me up for a tenner and now I would fret a little bit of my own back. That was the cause of Harcourt's visit to Savoy House. I made quite a £100 or £150 over this matter. Harcourt was well aware of it, and was always threatening to do all sorts of things to me. In 1907, while

Levy, Foster and Company's business was going on at Wells Street, I was doing some business with Clark over a patent, and was going to the Patent Office to look at the specification. I told Harcourt to meet me, and he did, when I told him I had an appointment with Clark in the "City of New York" public-house. I had to go to the office with the models, and I left them together. I introduced Harcourt to Clark saying, "A friend of mine, Mr. Watson." At this period I had never heard the name of Harcourt—the name he was using then was Poster. I knew nothing of Higgins or any moneylending transaction with him until I saw it in the papers when I was arrested. I wrote to Bartlett at 33, Goldington Street, and the letter was returned, marked "Gone away, address not known. "After Harcourt was sentenced, about Christmas, 1908, I met Bartlett and asked him about it, when he told me that he never had a penny out of it, and did not know that Harcourt had done this swindle. I had a row with him over his allowing me to take it up to Farman and King's, and Bartlett then told me that the reason for Harcourt not going on with the matter was because of Farman and King mentioning about the costs; that Harcourt had said "I should be a thick if they asked me what those costs were for."

Cross-examined by Mr. Bodkin. I have done some law; I am not a barrister, and have not so described myself to my knowledge. In 1906 and 1907, besides commissions on loans, I received occasional remittances from my people in Demarara—presents of £25 a year or a little more. I was receiving altogether about £250 to £300 a year. In 1905 I was not a partner with Henry, but was very intimate with him. I and Henry used the office of McGregor, 4, Great James Street, an estate agent, now of 3, Finsbury Square. I have subpœnaed him. The names of "Henry," "Green," and "McGregor" were on the door of 4, Great James Street. I knew Norgate then. I think he lived at Pitt Street, Tottenham Court Road. I know he lived in Great Ormond Street afterwards. I called on Hutchinson after Henry's death and took J. S. Watson there. I took the business up. He showed me the writ, and told me that he had some further interest. He did not say he was in trouble, and ask me to get him out of it. He told me he had some interest under the will of an uncle—could he borrow any money on it. I took him across to Hutchinson, and Hutchinson took the particulars from him. I have frequently been to Somerset House. I went with Hutchinson to see the will; he told me the result afterwards. I met him two or three times. Since I have known Norgate I have met him about two or three times a week—sometimes a month might elapse without my seeing him. He did not have letters sent to an address which I was connected with. I mentioned the matter of J. S. Watson to Norgate, because Hutchinson told me it was a gamble. Both I and Norgate do business of this kind as agents, and we often mention things to one another. Norgate said he knew a Mr. Joseph Wolff. I did not tell Norgate all about the interest of John Steven Watson—I took him to Hutchinson to get information. I told Norgate that Watson had a little reversion on which Hutchinson's clients had lent some money, and that Hutchinson said it was a gamble for

anyone of a speculative turn of mind, and did he know anyone who would buy it. It was a gamble, because if Campion Watson survived, the other man would get not a penny; it could not be insured against. I was present when the money was paid by Wolff to J. S. Watson—it was at Patrick McGregor's wine shop in the Strand. Wolff, Norgate, Muldoni, Hedley (Mr. Johnson's clerk), myself, and J. S. Watson were there—a balance of £12 was paid, and some documents were signed. I did not see Watson again that day. Wolff did not give him a cheque. I first lived at 33, Goldington Street, at Easter, 1907. I bad met Bartlett just before that—he introduced me there. I was not very hard up—I was a little short of money. I bought a suit of clothes about July. I got £5 from my sister, Constance Gordon Green, who lives at Croydon. The jewellery was pawned in her name. Mrs. Sullivan did not know that my friend's name was Harcourt from me—I take it she had it from Bartlett, who was there after I left. I then believed Harcourt to be Campion Watson. I do not remember whether Bartlett was there when we drove up in the cab. Sullivan could have learnt that from no one except Bartlett. I never told her I had spent £75 at Margate in a fortnight. I mentioned to Bartlett that Harcourt had discounted a bill and been spending some money at Margate. I may have said we had spent £25, and then it would be very far fetched. We did not spend £75 there. When I was in town and was going back to Margate I went round to 33, Goldington Street to get some clean linen. Norgate came with me. I packed a bag and he saw me off at the station. I met Bartlett early in 1907. I knew him pretty well, he used to run errands for Henry. I believed he had been buying willow trees, because all his family had been bat-makers, and I understood he had gone back to them. He said he had a small matter of business; we met at the "Punch Tavern" the next day, and he introduced Harcourt to me as Watson. I did not know Bartlett or Harcourt had been in prison. It is absolutely untrue that it was mentioned that Harcourt had just come out of prison. I do not think the Christian name "Campion" was mentioned; it may have been. He was introduced as a brother of J. S. Watson. I thought he resembled him. When I introduced the matter to Norgate I simply told him Hutchinson had advanced some money on a reversion. That it was no good to his client because it was merely a speculative matter—did he know anyone it would suit. I went to Wells Street a few days after. I did not know the name was Levy, Foster and Company until I went there. I gave my card to King, and he wrote the address on it which I gave him, "82, Wells Street." I knew of the cheque transactions with Chapman. I knew Levy and Foster's business was a failure—it never was a success. There was no suggestion that I should join it—I know nothing about bookmaking. I heard of the £2 2s. cheque being stopped. I know Norgate had ordered some stationery from Haycock through Levy and Foster. Harcourt was doing all sorts of things at the time, acting as agent for fire offices and furnishing firms. When the landlord distrained Harcourt disappeared from Wells Street. I next met

him when I sent him to the London and Westminster. I did not inspect the will on May 15. I take it that it was Harcourt, because it was on that day he asked me if I could take him somewhere to borrow money. When I went to Farman and King Harcourt was living at 40, Smith Street, Chelsea—that was the address he gave—I have never been there. I never said that the brother Steven was heard of last in California about three years ago. The particulars that King wrote down were all wrong. I did not know that he was asked for £1, 200. I gave my address "82, Wells Street," because it was an address I was using. That address had nothing to do with my dropping the matter. In July, 1907, at Margate, Harcourt passed as Harcourt; he always did in his private life. His wife or apparent wife came to Wells Street, and I knew it then. The distress at Wells Street was before May 15. We went to Farman and King's on May 15. Harcourt has sworn lots of lies. When at Margate I wrote to Norgate to meet me for the purpose of obtaining a loan for a few hours. Harcourt only lent me £5. I had borrowed some money before of him while at Margate. I owed him something like £8 or £9. I received £10 from my sister. I gave him £7 and asked him to let me keep the other £3. He did not tell me he had just got some more money. I was a guest of Harcourt's at Fort Terrace, Margate. I remember Norgate making the remark to Harcourt when he was intioduced as a brother of J. S. Watson, "Are you a brother of that little rotter?" or something of that sort. Harcourt rather agreed with him. Harcourt told me nothing about insuring his life. He seemed respectable, but he is a very hard drinker. He was undoubtedly a drunkard; he was always shaking. I do not know Veeden Road or Ossulston Street. I know Great College Street. Pocket boot produced is mine. I do not think the document taken from it is my writing. I believe the Service Furnishing Company's furniture at Wells Street was distrained on——it was never paid for. I have never attempted to get furniture from them. I lived at 22, Waldemar Avenue, Fulham. I did not write application produced for furniture. A gentleman I was going into partnership with in some. offices at Craven Street, Kingsway, was named Walter Henry—Harcourt introduced me to him and he wrote this application in my name, describing me as a barrister-at-law, income £1. 500. I never saw the document until at the police court. In 1908 I met Mr. Henry and he wanted some offices started for working a patent. I had some money and I agreed to go into it with him. He said, "Where did Clark get has furniture from." I told him, and afterwards he told me he had been to the Service Furnishing Company, had inspected some furniture, and signed an application for the furniture to be supplied. I said it was too expensive; I preferred to go to a second-hand place and get the furniture, which I did at Siemens, in Euston Road. My friends have called me a barrister because I was articled to a firm of solicitors in British Guiana and I came over here to become a barrister. I made rather a hash of it. In January and February, 1908, I made about £100—I suppose he gauged the £1, 500 from that. I met Clark in 1906—Norgate

introduced me to him. Before the Wells Street office was given up I casually introduced Harcourt to Clark. I knew he was living with a woman in the name of Harcourt. I may have then known he was using the name of Harcourt—it might have been March, April, or May. I met Clark about a patent—Harcourt was with me. I said, "A friend of mine, Mr. Watson"; I may have said "Captain Watson." I have been once in Clark's company since, when Harcourt was present—it was in the Strand. I have been several times to Norgate's flat. I met Harcourt there once in the Easter of 1907. Norgate gave Harcourt, Clark, and myself an invitation to his fiat—that is how I fix the date. When Clark knocked Harcourt down at Savoy House, Clark told me that he had borrowed money of him, that he had taken him to a doctor when he was in a state of D. T. I do not know anybody named Martin. I have been once to Clark's house at Barnes. At the time of the episode at the Savoy House Clark told me that someone had been down to get him to identify him as Campion Watson, and that it was about some bills. I said, "That may be all right," because he had been discounting some bills. I knew there was a moneylender called Higgins, but I never knew that Harcourt was getting money from him.

Cross-examined by Clark. I was acting for Alexander Eli in connection with a patent motor lamp. Clark paid £10. There were several interviews about it, and the lamps were pledged with Pollington. I saw dark twice the day I met him in Holborn with Watson; both times Watson was present. I believe Clark had dealings with Norgate over a patent hinge, and he introduced Clark to Arthur Mason, the man who acted for Lord Armstrong. A model was made and Norgate was to find half the cost of making it, and he gave Clark a cheque for £6 for his half share.

(Tuesday, July 6.)

Mr. Lever submitted that there was no case against Norgate as the evidence of the accomplice Harcourt was not corroborated in a material particular. See R. v. Everest, 73 J. P.)

Mr. Bodkin submitted that the evidence of Bird with regard to the cards, that of Laing with regard to the consultation, and that of King with regard to the appointment was sufficient corroboration of material particulars.

The Common Serjeant decided to leave Norgate's case to the Jury, as he could not say that there was no corroborative evidence.

Verdict: Clark, Not Guilty; Norgate, Guilty, with a recommendation to mercy; Green, Guilty.

Norgate was stated to have been known to the police for twelve or thirteen years. He was articled to a solicitor in 1894 and came in contact with Victor Honor; in 1898 he was arrested with Honor and Monson, Norgate having forged his father's and mother's names to bills in favour of Honor. Norgate was made a witness against Honor and Monson, who, with another man, were convicted, Norgate admitting his guilt, but was not tried. He was said to have not followed any respectable employment since.

Sentence: Green, Two years' hard labour; Norgate, twelve months' hard labour.


(Tuesday, July 6.)

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-60
VerdictGuilty > with recommendation
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

BAXENDALE, Arthur (16, van guard) ; on June 2, 1909, stealing one letter containing a certain valuable security, to wit, a bankers' cheque for £11 10s., the goods of Charles Thomas Glanville and another; on June 2, 1909, stealing one letter addressed to E. T. Ashby.

Mr. Kyffin prosecuted.

ROBERT LAWDONNY , house-keeper, 1, Union Court, Old Broad" Street. On June 2, at 8 p.m., I saw prisoner going into the doorways of several buildings in Union Court. He came out of No. 2 opening a letter (produced) addressed to E. T. Ashby and Company, 6, Union Court—they are builders and have offices there. The occupiers of the offices had left at about six p.m., and the front doors were open for the purpose of cleaning. I went out to prisoner, and said, "Where did you get that letter from?" He said, "I picked it up. "I told him I had seen him in different doorways, and should take him back to No. 6, Messrs. Ashby's place. The door of No. 6 was open; Ashby's people had gone. There is a letter-box behind the door, which was unlocked; there was a lock upon it, but it was out of order; anybody could put his hand in. I called the house-keeper of No. 6, who lives on the premises downstairs, and who sent for a constable, and I repeated in the presence of prisoner what I had already said to him. He had not opened the letter to Ashby—he had not taken anything out.

Police-constable GEOFFREY BEASLEY, 923 City. On June 2 at about 8.20 p.m., I was called to Union Court, where I saw the prisoner with 9. the last witness, who charged him with stealing letters out of letterboxes. 10. I took a letter from the prisoner and asked him where he 11. got it from. He said he had picked it up in the court. I asked him 12. if he had any more. He then produced from an inside pocket five 13. cheques and a bill of exchange. I took him to the station, and found 14. in his possession two envelopes, one addressed to Telford and Company, 15. 7, St. Mary Axe, and another to Douglas and Company, 7, St. 16. Mary Axe, also a letter. Among the cheques was one for £11 10s. in favour of Nelson, Donkin and Company (produced). The total value of 17. the bills and cheques found upon him was £170. There is also a 18. memorandum to Messrs. Nelson enclosing a cheque for £11 10s.

ERNEST GEORGE KLEEK , book-keeper, Nelson, Donkin and Company, 38, Great St. Helens, shipowners. Charles Thomas Glanville is the senior partner in my firm. Cheque produced is dated June 2 from the Mutual Steamship Insurance Association, Limited, to my firm for

£11 10s. We have received it from the police and cashed it. Letter produced is dated June 2, 1909, and is from the Mutual Steamship Association to my firm. There is a general letter-box in the outer door of the office. I could not say whether it was open or shut at 8 p.m. on June 2.

Prisoner's statement before the Magistrate. "I did not steal either of the letters. I was walking through Union Court at eight o'clock when I noticed this letter of Ashby's on the ground. The letter was already opened. I pulled out its contents and found another envelope inside that letter. There are two envelopes of Ashby. I was examining the letter to see the name in it, and then I went into several offices to see if I could find out the place. The cheques and envelopes were all inside the letter to Ashby."

Prisoner (not on oath). I have no witnesses here, but there were two ladies from Union Court, to whom I took the letter directly I found it.

Verdict: Guilty, with a recommendation to mercy on account of prisoner's youth.

Prisoner was convicted at this Court on May 20, 1909, of stealing a banker's cheque for £45 (see page 143), and bound over, the Church Army undertaking to find him employment. He was stated to have immediately run away from the Army, and to have been wandering about. He had been injured in the head, and was possibly not responsible. His father being a respectable labouring man with nine children, was unable to be responsible for him. Being just over 16, he was not under the Probation Act. The Common Serjeant passed a sentence of 12 months' hard labour, and said no doubt the Prison Chaplain and Medical Officer would see what could be done with him.



(Wednesday, June 23.)

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-61
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

POLE, Adam (33, tailor) , pleaded guilty of stealing one purse containing the sum of 15s., or thereabouts, the goods and moneys of Ethel Potter, from her person; Being an alien in whose case an Expulsion Order had been made, was found within the United Kingdom in contravention to such Order. Two previous convictions were proved.

Sentence: Six months' hard labour; recommended for expulsion under the Aliens Act.

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-62
VerdictGuilty > pleaded guilty
SentenceImprisonment > hard labour

Related Material

HOWARD, Lily (36, singer) , pleaded guilty of stealing the sum of 10s., the moneys of Charles Sharp; the sum of 7s. 6d., the moneys of Charles Harwood; and the sum of 13s., the moneys of George Cottis.

The following convictions were proved: March 16, 1904, South London Sessions, five years' penal servitude and three years' police supervision, for stealing from children; October 16, 1907, South London Sessions, six months' hard labour for obtaining money from children by fraud; December 31, 1883, Lambeth Police Court, two months' for stealing money; December, 1884, Central Criminal Court, two months for stealing a wrapper; July, 1885, Bow Street, six months, stealing money from children; 12 months' at South London Sessions, 1889, stealing perambulators; 12 months', Central Criminal Court, October 31, 1895, stealing trousers three years' penal servitude, Central Criminal Court, 1899, stealing money from children.

Sentence: 18 months' hard labour in each case, to run concurrently.

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-63
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

WOODROFFE, Horace Samuel ; being entrusted with £6 15s., the moneys of John William Saddler, in order that he might apply the same for a certain purpose, fraudulently converting the said sum to his own use and benefit.

Mr. Austin Metcalfe prosecuted; Mr. Forrest Fulton defended.

JOHN WILLIAM SADDLEE , 264, Dalston Lane, Hackney, credit draper. I first knew prisoner on March 30, 1906. I received a letter from him. There was a circular in it. He called on me a few days after that. I gave him the names of a number of people to apply for outstanding accounts. He made his own list and took it away. On April 25 I got this letter: "Dear Sir,—Mr. Woodroffe wishes me to say he is issuing summonses on Tuesday next, including your lot this day. We shall be glad to receive Court fees," with an account showing that the plaint fees, inquiry fees, letter, etc., would come to £2 8s. 6d. I gave him a cheque for that amount. On May 251 got this letter: "The hearing fees, etc., for your cases in hand will amount to £2 15s. I shall be glad to receive a cheque from you for this amount at your convenience." On June 10 I gave him a cheque for £2 15s. Some time after that prisoner called on me. I asked him about these cases and he then told me he had issued the summonses. The cases had been heard, and he had obtained judgment. When he called on me in the first instance I said, "In the event of you having to summon these people you must try and arrange to have the cases put through at the several County Courts on Thursday or Friday, to suit my convenience." He said, "I do not think there will be any occasion for you to attend the County Court. What we do is to get an admission in writing from the debtors and in that case there will be no occasion for you to attend the Court whatsoever." He said, "In a disputed case you, of course, will have to appear. "He has not told me of any disputed case. I have received no money in respect of that first lot. I gave prisoner a fresh batch of persons to sue, and got this letter on Octoher 15: "Sir,—We have to-day issued on your behalf the following summonses. Number of cases 8. Court Shoreditch. fees for plaints 11s." "Three Edmonton, fees for plaints 6s." is incorrect. "Two Whitechapel, fees 3s.," were not issued. "Eight Clerkenwell, 15s.," is correct. On October 201 gave him a cheque for £1 15s. in respect of these. On November 161

got another letter from him, "We have pleasure in sending you statement to date, etc., and enclosing a list. Number of cases same as before,. date of hearing November 20, 1906, Clerkenwell, fees £1 8s. date of hearing at Whitechapel November 27, 1908, fees 6s. date of hearing at Shoreditch, December 3, 1908, £1 9s. fees, and December 4, 1908, for Edmonton 15s. I sent him £1 8s. in respect of Clerkenwell first. On December 7 I gave him a cheque for £2 10s. and a cheque for £1 15s. on November 23 for Clerkenwell and Whitechapel hearing fees. I have not been paid anything yet in respect of that batch, nor had any account. Notwithstanding that treatment I gave him a third batch. On January 4, 1909, I got this latter: "Dear Sir, I herewith enclose you list of cases down for Wednesday, January 6. I shall be glad to have your cheque for £2 9s. not later than Tuesday next, January 5. P. S.—A full statement of your account to the end of the year is now being prepared, showing list of sums received, etc., up to date, and will be posted to you on Wednesday, with your receipt for the above cheque. "With that was a statement showing the names of the cases that were entered, as he said, for hearing on January 6. I wrote and told him I wished to see him particular. I sent him a cheque on the 5th for £2 9s., because he told me he was very sorry it would be impossible for him to come and see me. He put me off. Altogether I have given him £15 1s. 6d. on account of forty-nine cases at the various Courts. He has written making two appointments which he has never kept. He has never sent any accounts whatever, or any money. I saw him on June 7 at his house. He was on remand. He opened the door very violently and asked me inside. I said, "Well, Mr. Woodroffe, why did you not see me on Friday night, as you made an appointment with me. He said, "I am vary sorry; something turned up. I wrote you a postcard this morning. I have just posted it two or three hours ago, apologising." I said, "I have come over here; now I want a settlement." He said, "I am very sorry I cannot do that; my books are at my solicitors; I shall be able to settle with you to-night." I said, "Yes, you have made promises before. "He said, "On my word of honour, I will call on you to-night between seven and nine, it may be ten." I said, "Very good," and with that I said "Good day. "He did not call that night. Next morning I received his postcard, "7.30" post-mark on it—Forest Gate"—which he told me he had posted before two o'clock midday and I also received a letter from him in which he made an excuse for not seeing me on the Monday night.

Cross-examined. On June 7 I asked him why he did not keep his appointment on Friday night. I said, "It is quite time I had a settlement. "I wanted a settlement. I should have been very glad to see tie balance he had in hand. I made no other appointment; he made all the appointments. He made no appointment after June 7. The settlement I wanted was the sum of £6 15s., which he is charged with fraudulently misappropriating. I have given prisoner forty-nine oases. I paid him £15 odd. He has taken out twenty-six cases, which leaves twenty-three not taken out. He has expended £5 12 s.;

his enquiry fees and attendance fees have been £1 6s. Then there was a case of the name of Huggins which I gave to him—afterwards I asked him to withdraw it—2s. which I have given him credit far, which leaves £6 15s. During a period of twelve months prisoner has made a very large number of enquiries at my request, quite apart from the forty-nine cases. Unless I gave him the names and addresses he would not be able to make enquiries on his own account. It was arranged that he should have 1s. for each enquiry and 6d. for each letter written; not 1s. when he attended the court. He did not tell me about the attendance fee. I do not know what he calls his attendance fee is at all. The £1 6s. was for enquiry and attendance fee. I knew perfectly well that his charges were 1s. for attendance fees. The 20 per cent, commission was on moneys recovered through the County Court he told me. The cheques I paid him from time to time were payments on account, first, for his enquiries, 2nd, for the letters he had written, 3rd, for any plaints he might take out, and then for his attendance at the County Court. I have never seen the books. kept by prisoner. Before commencing proceedings against prisoner I went to Bow County Court to see what he was doing on my behalf, and at Bow County Court I was sent to a solicitor. I told him I wanted a settlement with this man. This was on June 7, the same day I asked for a settlement from prisoner and had not obtained it. Then I went to West Ham Police Court. There I gave evidence. I had no conversation with defendant at the police court. I do not remember when I last instructed him to make enquiries for me. They extended from March 30, 1908, to the present day.

Re-examined. When I asked prisoner for a settlement I did not know that he had not entered or paid fees in respect of several cases in which he had received money from me. The settlement I wanted was with regard to moneys that he had received for me out of court. That is quite a separate matter. What he is charged now with is getting money from me for payment of these fees and not paying them.

(Thursday, June 24.)

JAS. R. CRACK , clerk, Shoreditch County Court. I have searched the records of Shoreditch County Court from March 30 up to the present time for plaint notes in the name of Saddler. I find eight were taken out on May 1, 1908. On October 23 eight more were taken out.

Cross-examined. I have known defendant for some time as a collector at the Court. I am not in the office where the summonses are taken out. I have examined the books to see whether there are a large number of other names besides Saddler, in which he has acted. There are. I should not think there would be 50 to 100 a week, quite apart from Saddler.

Re-examined. I was asked to search for plaints issued on behalf of a Mr. Baird, as well as Saddler; nothing else.

WM J. CAIRNS , 37, Richmond Road. Leytonstone. I searched the records of Bow County Court from March 30 to about a fortnight

ago for plaints issued in the name of Saddler. I found two, issued May 20, 1908.

LESLIE HARPER , clerk, of Clerkenwell County Court. I have not searched the records for cases where Saddler was plaintiff. I have had my attention drawn to eight cases in which they were issued. The registrar said he could not spare the services of his clerks to search, but he allowed a search to be made.

Cross-examined. In all the eight cases, the names of which were brought to my attention, I found the defendant had taken out plaints.

CHARLES WEBB , clerk of the Whitechapel County Court. I have searched the registers from March 30 up to a fortnight ago. I find no plaints issued in the name of Saddler.

Cross-examined. I have know defendant as collector for different tallymen, quite apart from Saddler.

REGINALD WHITE , Clerk of Edmonton County Court. I have searched the registers from March 30, 1908, up to a fortnight ago. I find no record of any plaints issued in the name of Saddler.

Detective-sergeant BUY MERCER, E division. I was present when defendant was arrested by Inspector Yeo and charged in this case. He said, "Did he tell you I called on him yesterday, but he was out. I saw him at the Court here last week. I did not think he would do this. "They gave me an opportunity of searching the books at Clerkenwell County Court. I found eight plaints notes had been issued in the name of Saddler.

Inspector ALBERT YEO, K Division. I took defendant into custody. I was not present when he was charged.


HORACE SAMUEL WOODROFPE (prisoner on oath). I have been acting for some years past as debt collector and general agent for credit drapers and tallymen. My uncle is engaged in that business, and I first started by acting for him. About two and a half years ago I set up on my own account at 68, St. George's Road, and have remained there up to a fortnight ago. I was always to be found at that address. In April, 1908, I first acted for Mr. "Saddler. The books in Court are what I kept in the course of my business. The terms upon which I was to act for Mr. Saddler were is. in each case for inquiries, 6d. for each letter written, 1s. for each attendance at County Courts, 20 per cent, commission on amount recovered from the debtors, and 1s. 6d. in each case for expenses in tracing debtors. These various charges in relation to Mr. Saddler are shown in my books. I nave prepared an account showing the number of cheques and amounts I received from Mr. Saddler. They amount to £15 1s. 6d. My books show that I collected from debtors £4 7s. I have given him credit for £19 12s. 1d. Apart from fees, expenses, and so forth, that is the whole amount I have received on his behalf. My letters and notices would come to £2 12s. 9d., inquiry fees £3 16s., fees for tracing lost debtors £1 5s. tracing £1 11s., serving 8s. My commission upon amount recovered is £1 0s. 9d., court fees £4. That totals £16 3s.,

making the credit balance due to Saddler £3 9s. 1d. It is suggested that the money was sent to me in each case to enable me to pay the County Court fees. There were two or three cases in which I paid the County Court fees before I had received the money. I was subsequently reimbursed by prosecutor. I have seen prosecutor two or three times this year about business matters. I have had discussions with him about the cases in hand. He never complained of the way the business was conducted. He has not asked for a settlement. The day he called at my office in the morning he asked how the accounts were getting on, and I fold him I should get out a statement and let him have it. This was after I was arrested. I have had conversations with him at different times when I called on him. Until he gave evidence against me at the police court it never entered my head that I was being accused of any criminal practices, and I do not think it did his. Until this case came on at West Ham Police Court I have never been charged with any criminal offence. I have acted for 200 or 300 people, apart from Mr. Saddler, and upon similar terms. I have taken out sometimes 200 plaints a week. Confusion cannot be avoided.

Cross-examined. Nobody else has made complaints of my conduct. Chandler and Sons have not complained, nor McDowell, McNaught, Kerr, or Swan. I acted for them all. I do not know Bland, moneylender, of Barking Road. I never heard the name of Humphreys. I have acted for Freeman, a bootmaker of Upton Lane. He has made no complaint to my knowledge. Mr. Dowell sued me in the County Court, but no complaint was made against me. I was sued for a copy of a statement they had already had. He complained I had not given him an account. That case is not pending; it was settled at the time. I gave him another copy of the statement. I did not take out the three plaints at Edmonton or the two at Whitechapel, because in our opinion they were not satisfactory to have summonses issued at that time. In some of the cases where I wrote Mr. Saddler asking for fees I made a mistake as to the date of hearing. In January. 1809, I got a sum of £2 9s. from him in respect of claims against several of his debtors. I have not entered one single one of those cases. The hearing fees in respect of those were used for other purposes for him. The arrangement I made with Mr. Saddler personally was that I should draw these fees and issue the plaints at my discretion. In the letter in which I say, "I enclose you a list of cases down for Thursday, 6d.," I possibly might have meant to say the 6th of the following month. Possibly they were down for February. The reason of asking for hearing fees for cases which were not down at all is because we should have them at all times in hand. I have not entered those during the months of January, February, March, April, May, or June. In a postscript to a letter I say, "A full statement of your account to the end of the year is now 'being prepared, showing list of sums received, etc., up to date, and will be posted to you on Wednesday with receipt for above cheque." I forwarded the account. I heard Mr. Saddler swear he had never had one. I gave him a

statement on several occasions. I used to leave them when I called. I do not know that I promised to meet him personally. I might have said I should endeavour to call or something like that. If he got the postcard of March 8, 1909, saying, "Shall have pleasure in calling upon you on, Friday next, etc.," I must have sent it. I might have called; I cannot say. I will pledge my oath I called upon him between January 5 and the time I was taken into custody. I have not called on him recently. I cannot say why I did not. Evidently I was busy elsewhere or I should have been there. The account I hive now was made up to March 25; they are made up on the 10th of each month.

Re-examined. I have given Mr. Saddler credit for the £2 9s. cheque entered on January 5. I have not charged him with any of the hearing fees in the month of January. (Account book handed to witness.) (To the Judge.) This book was produced at the Police Court. It was ready there. I had no banking account.

Verdict, Not guilty.


(Saturday, July 3.)

22nd June 1909
Reference Numbert19090622-64
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

WOODROFFE, Horace Samuel ; being entrusted with £2 11s., the moneys of Samuel John McKeand, in order that he might apply the same for a certain purpose, fraudulently converting the said sum to his own use and benefit.

Mr. Austin Metcalfe prosecuted; Mr. Forrest Fulton defended.

SAMUEL JOHN MCKEAND . I am a credit draper and now carry on business at 298, Burdett Road, Limehouse. Previously I carried on business at 417, East India Dock Road. In September, 1907, I saw prisoner at the former address and gave him the names of a number of persons who owed me money. He took them down from my dictation and he produced that statement to me when I paid him the cheque. He put down the list of plaint fees and hearing fees which would be required in each particular case, amounting in all to £3 4s. I gave him £1 12s. in cash for the plaint fees. he came into my place on October 12, gave me this document, and I paid him a cheque for £4 3s., being the amount of hearing fees and the allowance for himself that he would require. I did not see him againuntil after the cases had been heard. That would be November 23 or 24. He told me then that all the cases had gone through. I did 25. not ask for the plaint notes at the time, but he has promised often 26. enough to let me have them. I got eleven out of eighteen in June 27. of last year. From first to last he never told me that he had only 28. issued eleven plaint notes out of eighteen. He never returned me 29. the money in respect of the balance of the seven cases. I got what 30. purported to be an account of how he had expended the money, I 31. think about April 23, 1908. Included in it were sums which he

claimed as having paid on my behalf in respect of executions against Gary, Wittenbury, Finchback, Bailey, and Fairhall, altogether 12s. Wittenbury is credited as having paid 10s.

Cross-examined. I could not say whether the first time I made any statement about this case was when I had to make a return to the Drapers' Association with regard to debtors. Besides the eighteen names summoned I gave him the names, perhaps, of four or five more. The first step with all these debtors would be to make inquiries, and if they had gone to another address to trace where they had gone to Prisoner's charge for writing to people would be 6d., but I never paid him any money for making inquiries; I never employed him to do it. He had nothing to do but write these letters. He was to have a commission on the amount collected. I first made a charge in this case after consulting with two other men in the trade, about a fortnight or three weeks ago.

WILLIAM JOHN CAIRNS , clerk, Bow County Court, gave evidence that only eleven cases in which Mr. McKeand was plaintiff had been entered, out of a list of eighteen or nineteen.

Inspector ALBERT YEO, K., deposed to arresting prisoner near Stratford Police Court, and handing him over to Sergeant Mercer.

Sergeant MERCER stated that he was present when the charge was read. Prisoner said, "He (McKeand) could have had the money if he had applied to me for it. He has moved from his old address and I have been trying for months to find where he has gone.


HORACE SAMUEL WOODROFPE (prisoner, on oath). I have been engaged in business as a collector of debts about two and a half years on my own account, and 'before that I acted for my uncle. Mr. McKeand is not my only customer by a long way; I have approximately 290. Until the proceedings at Stratford no charge had ever been made against me. I have received from prosecutor £6 6s. Against that I have expended writing letters £2 2s. plaint fees and hearing fees, £1 9s. I have not charged him with summonses which were not, in fact, taken out. Enquiry fees amount to £1 3s. and my own fees have been admitted at 12s. Then there are attendance fees. I have not charged attendance fees on each of the eighteen summonses. I have called upon every one of the debtors to ask for payment. Entries are made in the day-book (produced) of events as they occur. The amount entered for calling on debtors is 12s. The item for tracing 1s. 6d. refers to one debtor only. The commission on the money recovered amounts to 14s., and there is a balance standing to the credit of prosecutor of £2 19s. The reason I omitted to take out some of the summonses as directed to was that had I done so it would have been waste of money, as the debtors were not in work; either they were not in work or in very irregular work, and it would have been of no use issuing summonses in cases like that. I had to exercise discretion. In such cases I charge nothing but the enquiry fees.

Cross-examined. I first heard of this charge when I was attending the West Ham Police Court about three weeks ago. Similar charges, have since been made against me by a Mr. Saddler and Mr. Baird. Mr. McDowell sued me in the County Court, as we had a dispute about commission. I did not hear him say that he could not get an account from me. I paid him the amount that was due to him. I swear that I have sent an account to Mr. McKeand a good many times. My books do not show when accounts are sent in. I debited him with amounts for execution against Gary 3s., Wittenbury 3s., Finchback 3s., Bailey 1s. 6d., and Fairhall 1s. 6d. Neither of those was ever issued. In most cases our lists are sent out from the 3rd to the 10th of each month, and if there are any summonses we propose to issue on the following Monday we enter them in that month's statement previously to the issue of them; that is our usual rule. If the summonses were not issued the customer would be credited with the amount next month. I received 19s. for attendance fees if it is in that statement, £3 4s. hearing fees, and £1 12s. plaint fees in respect of eighteen cases. I did not tell Mr. McKeand that all the cases had gone through. I told him that all the cases that were ready had gone through; no names were mentioned. Mr. McKeand did not ask me for the plaint notes; it is not usual to hand them over. A customer can always inquire at the respective courts if he is doubtful, If the debt collector had not the plaint notes how can he search every month and take other proceedings if necessary? It is true that I have never paid Mr. McKeand a shilling. I never attempted to pay; that was not the arrangement. The arrangement was not that I should take all the money I could get and keep it. I cannot say from memory that I ever paid Saddler a shilling. I do not know that there are hundreds of people making complaints against me at this moment to the police.

The Jury at first were unable to agree, but eventually returned a verdict of Not guilty.

View as XML