The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1869-04-24 00:00:00

A REMARKABLE CASE.

At the Mansion House, in London, a respectably-
dressed young man, named Sydney Thomas Webb, a
clerk in the office of the Provincial Banking Corpora-
tion, Edgware-road, has been charged before the Lord
Mayor with being concerned, with another man, in
forging and uttering a cheque for £397 10s., with in-
tent to defraud.

It may, perhaps, be recollected by newspaper readers
that, a few weeks ago, a young man, who gave the
name of William Walker, was apprehended in the act
of uttering a cheque for £327 10s., purporting to be
signed by Messrs. Neumann, Sons, and Co., of Lon-
don, at the bank of Barnette, Hoares, and Co. On
the previous day he had obtained the page-book of that
firm, and a cheque-book, by means of a forged order,
and when arrested he had in his possession two other
requests for cheque-books, addressed to different banks,
and purporting to he signed by customers of those
banks He was examined before the Lord Mayor, and
then committed for trial at the Central Criminal
Court, where, at the last session, he was convicted of
uttering the cheque, knowing it to be forged, and sen-
tenced to seven years' penal servitude. After his con-
viction he gave information which led to the appre-
hension of the prisoner.
Walker, whose real name waaThomas HohdaY, was brought
up from Newgate, and examined at considerable low h for the
prosecution. Ile said: I know the prisoner sydney Thomas
Webb, DWI have known him three or four years I WAS for-
merly with a Mr. Herring, a grocer at Birmirgham, and the
Prisoner was at that time a clerk in the Birmingham Town
anti District Bank. We lodged together with a Mr. Davies.
In July, 1567, 1 was convicted of forgery at the Warwick
Assizes, and sentenced to twelve months' imprisonment.
Webb knew all about that. After I came out in July, 1801,
we ass, ciate.l together again, and the prisoner fimmently
visde limit at no In !Rings. In Ammo, Mad, I obtained a
Nituation at Liveipad with Mr. Deer, a grocer. In be tial
of Ilecetn`ier I left that situation, and shortly afterwards
came to London. When I arrived I knew the prisoner wm
living in Harrow road, and I called upon him there. I went to
reside at a coffeehouse in the Strand. where the praoner came
to see me. A Inuit two month. afterwards I removed to another
coffenhouse In Westminster-tiridge.road. The prisoner also
came to see me there. We went to music-halls, and places of
that k About the time I was staying at Tilley's I made the
acquaintance of a 3 ming woman named SlWilliams, and we
west to live As man anti wife at the houseof a Mrs. Dawson,
in Waterloo road. We went oy the name of Mr. and Mrs
Thompson. The prisoner visited me there rep. atedly. and re-
niained all night on two ocesaions—sieeping on the sofa.
The second occasion was on Thursday, 18th March Ile left
me on the morning of the 19th about eight o'clock. I have
never seen him to speak to since that morning.
Mr. Mullens :solicitor to the Bankers' Protecti Associa-
tion' What was the object of your coining to London?
Witness: The prisoner wrote me some letters, which I de-
stroyed, and said he wanted me to present cheques at the
London banks. I had presented forged cheques at a hank in
Birmingham. As soon as I came to London we talkeu about
presenting the cheques. He was going to snake use of crossed
cheques which passed through the batik at which he was
engaged. I recollect Wednesday, March 17. At seven
o'clock on that evening I met the prisoner in Trafalgar.
square. I 11,t1 been accustomed to meet him there often.
We went to Gatti's Music. hill, Villiers-street, Strand The
prisoner there showed tue half a sheet of blue paper with
the sigoature Neumann. Sons, and Co. at the bottom, on the
right hand. At the same time he produced a cheque for £lO,
and told me that the signature on the blue paper was a
tracing from that on the cheque. We then went to Waterloo-
road, and at my lodgings the prisoner handed toe a piece of
paper on which was written, .• Please give the bearsr a
cheque-6,0k, and if our pass-book, is made up, let him
have that also " I copied this form on the piece of
paper containing Messrs. Neumann's sigi•ature The
prisoner produced another piece of paper with the
address of Neumann, hosts, an i co. upon it. I was to present
the order next day at Messrs Barnett and lloare's batik. I
did so, and received the pass-the-A produced, and a cheque-
book containing 240 cheque, Mintier to the one prmluced. I
took them home and put them into my portmanteau, which
was kept in my bedroom. On that dav (Thursday I met the
prisoner at seven o'clock, and he came with me to my lodg-
ings. We cait up the pass-nook, and there was a balance of
£B5B. The prig nor prisinced three cheques ; one of them
was for £5OO, signed by Lindo and Davis, and another for a
small amount, signed by Harris, Blackman, and ions. Them
two cheques were drawn respectively on the Imperal Bank
and Roberts, Lubbock, and CO., and had been paid into the
Provincial Banking Cerporation that afternoon. The prisoner
also produced two had sheets of white note paper, one c-m-
-taining the signature of Undo and Davis, mid the other
the signature of Harris. Blackman, and Smis. I filled them
tip in the name way that I had tilled upthe paper with Messrs.
Neumann's signature, requesting a eheque-book and the
pass-took, if made up. the gave me the addresses of the
firms. For that purpose he had obtained the loan of a Direc-
tory, leaving two sovereigns as security for its return. We
then went to tour) lane Theatre, and came hack ebout twelve
o'clock, and the prisoner stayed all night with me, as I have
already mentioned. We got up at six next morning, and
Plied up a cheque for £7B. The signature of Messrs.
Neumann appended to it was a tracing from the £lO cheque.
I tilled up the cheque. Another cheque for £397 105. was
then made out, and was copied from one of twelve cheques
which were in the pasa-book. The prisoner said he had taken
the three cheques from the case of • fellow-clerk named
Itinbles, and that he must be off and replace them before
Itibbles arrived at the batik. I made an appointment to
meet him that night at Wellington-street, Strand. I left
fourteen sovereigns in a purse in my portmanteau. I pre
-
milted the cheque for £397 t 0.., and was taken Into custody.
When I was examined at the Mansion-house I was defended
by an attorney, who had called on me in the prison. 1 had
hail no previous comniunication with him.
Emit), WWilliams said site was a single woman, anti made
the acquaintance of the hut witness, whom she only knew as
Thompson, about the beginning of March Mat She after-
wards went to live with him at lodgings in the Waterloo-
road. She knew the prisoner as Mr. Sidney, and he was in
the habit of calling there almost every evening, and ocM- !
sionally sleeping there. On Sunday, the lath of March,
Inc wm there all tiny, writing with Thompson, in a room by
themselves. They were again together writing on Wednesday, I
March 17, Ind she saw the banker's pass-hook now produced.
On the following night the prisoner slept there, anti left about
half-pot seven in the moiling. She was told he .115 ins
bank ear to Padding ttttt Station, that he had come from
Worcester, and that he had been in a bank as liirgninghato
Between ten and eleven o'clock on the morning of Friday,
the 19th March, Th•mpson sent out, and she had never seen
him muds until now. On that Friday evening Sidney called
at the lodgittirs and tool her she would not see Mr. Thompson
again. Ile did not Resign any reason, hut said she ght see
him in the con se of years. Ile asked her for Thompson's
portmanteau. She refused at first, but consented afterwards,
behaving said there were papers and books in it which he
wanted. Ile would not tell her what they ware, Ind, said they
would not de Thompson any good, and might do her a good
deal of harm. He also said he would very likely have to give
up his aituatien at the hank. lie tried to .pen the port-
manteau with a knife, but could not, and broke it open with
a poker. Ile timk a think cheque-book out of it and other
papers, which he tied up in it parcel and took away, saying
he vimuld throw thmii into the Thames Ile went ax ay about
eleven o'clock that night, and railed twice afterwards,
saying, on one occasion, lie had heard of Mn. Thompson, but
had not men him, and that he , the prisoner had had to pay
for the information he had obtained about him. She did
not see him again. After he left she found the banker's
pass-book, and gave it to Mr. Scott, the detective officer.
At this stage, on the request of Mr. Mullens, the
rutlicitor for the prosecution, the Lord Mayor adjourned
the examination, and ordered the witness, Emily
M`Williams to be bound over, in her own recognisances
to the amount of £2O, for her appearance.

The c;reirmstanoes of the attempt on the life of the
Vicer.v of Egypt, reportel some few weeks since, how° been
investigated by a c.mmission of foreign consuls, who have
Come to the conclusion that a very foul con,pirary had been
formed for the assassination, not only of the Viceroy, lint of
his whole Court, on their visit to the theatre. The same
commission his also investigated the attennt made to
explooe detonating halls wider the viceregal train on the
r sq.

THE BISHOP OF CORK AND MR.
GLADSTONE'S CHURCH BILL.
The following letter was published in The Times, last
Saturday :
In a re;.ent issue of your journal you published a letter
signed " Robert 0 Gregg," del.ying that the Bishop of
Cork had ever uttered a certain expression with refer-
ence to Mr. Gladstone and his Irish Church Bill.
We, who were the reporters present on the occasion
when the expression was made use of, beg to state
that the sentence, 'We hem ta'k of hills anti hills, hut
Bill Gladstone may go to the with his hill "was spoken
hy the Bishop. ilia lordship did not say where or to whom
Sir. Gladstone might go, and we in our reports till not at-
tempt to supply the omission. We also wish to be allowed
to say that the two contradictions of our reports of the
speech, which appeared in the Cork mess were anonymous,
and therefore unworthy of notice—We are, to.,
P. 0. SULLIVAN, Cork Con.titution.
ARCHIBALD M'DgitsPiTT, Cork Conititution.
TI1011•9 CARRY, Cork Reporter.
M. N. D'AtrON, Cork Herald.
Cork, April 1.5.

Noticing the above letter, the Rev. E. S. Gregg,
chaplain of Cork writes to The Times
. . .• • . . .

_ .
A 'few days ago you published a letter of mine. In which I
stated that the Bishop of Cork never made use of an offensive
expression attributed to hint with reference to Mr Gladstone
and the proposed Irish Church Bill, I though: that con-
troversy on this Babied was it an end, especially as the
Bishop hirwelf took an opportunity at the meeting .1
the Irish Sdeiety in Dublin to dory the charge, and to ex-
press his arhorrence of the sentiment imputed to hit,.,
md you were good mom lh to publish his Warlir in your Irish
intelligence but in The Times of ,aturilay I see a letter,
signed by four local rep wters, in whieh tile charge is re-
newed. Now, Sir, as a general rule, the gentlemen of the
Press discharge their important and difficult duties with
fairness mid impartiality. sod I think I may say I never
knew such au attempt as has been made in this case to
faster. an odious chime upon a public mart The reporters
write, "Allow us, who were the reporters pr, sent on Vie
oecadon wlnn the words were used, to state that the
seetence, • We hear talk of Bills and Bills, but Bill Glad-
stone may go to the with his Bill,' was uttered by the
Bishop. His Loubhip lilt not state where or to whom, and
in our reports we 114 not attempt to supply the omissiolt."
The italics are min%
Flow could the Bishop utter a "--P We all know
what this mode of writing expresses it has one meaning,
and but ono meaning. It is as notch as to say that the
Bishop used an, expression too bad for the ',spell to
publish. The Bishop used the word "wall," and if that
word be substituted for the " —," it would change the
whole character of the sentence. The report then, would not
be incomistent with my recollection of what the bishop
did say. What is the explanation t The reporters them-
selves supply it. They did not hear what the Bishop 411.1
say, and yet they supply the omission by a mode of writing
suggesting the most offensive thing that the Bishop
possibly could say. I ant not altogether surprised
that the reporters did not hear what the Bishop said. Its
was suffering from a cold, and did runt raise his voice, Ile
spoke front a platform considerably elevated. Tire reporters
sat at a table on the floor of the room and at the side. They
might have had the eourtesy to ark me what the B shop did
my, as by the desire of the Bishop, in the discharge of my
official duties, I am always ready to supply al the papers
with all needful information ; but they had not. I think, the
ugh to supply the omission by a mode of writing sugg, at ye
of what is most offensive, and they are not jostified in assert-
ing, as they do in their letter, that the Bishop did not use
the word which I assert he did, and which changes the
whole sentence from one most offensive into a play upon
words. .

The Bishop, as his friends well know, often uses allitera-
tions in public speaking, hut no loan living has ever heard
the Bishop, either in public or private, utter such an expres-
sion as that imputed to him.
. . .

A persistenir,..-atiempt has been made to hurt the cause
which the Bishop loves by injuring his chAraeter, but his
character is too eel! known to be thus injured, and no cause
can be served in the minds of • truth-loving people by such
means. . .

I therefore beg to repeat my original assertion, that the
Bishop of Cork never made use of the offensive expression
attributed to him.