The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1877-09-11 00:00:00

CHARGE OF ALLEGED EMBEZZLEMENT

AGAINST A G.W.R. CLERK

On Monday Fre,leriek Ernest Stirkrand, the non of a
hair-dreascr of thin town, wan summoned by the
authorities Id the Great Western Railway Company for
embezzling one shilling, the property of the company.
The Bench consisted of the magistraten sitting
•luring the hearing ~f a former case, and considerable
interent_neemed to he felt in it.

Mr. Nantes for the prosecution; Mr. Howard for
the defendant. Mr. Nantes was unable to arrive at
the opening of the court, but the Bench decide-I to
take the evidence.
William Charles Forrester, an inspector of police on
the Great Western Railway, was at Dorchester station
on Monday, the 13th of August, and assisted in
cillecting the tickets from the train arriving at 1.43.
He collected two second-class tickets (single) from
Dorchester to Weymouth of two lady passengers,
numbered 8,022 and 8,023. He handed them to a
porter named Abel Stone. He took a record of them.
They were dated for that day. He 8140 collected 'Abel
tickets, but they had all been issued from stations up
the line. He then went on to Weymouth, and, in con-
sequence of instructions, he went from Weymouth by
the 4.50 up-train that 'afternoon to Upwey to await the
arrival of the 5.0 short train from Dorchester. He did
not assist in the collecting of the tickets there himself.
Collector Dyke took them and brought him the ticket
"5,022' after he had d ,ne so. That ticket was the
same as he collected at Dorchester the same day. He
knew it by the number and (late, and that wan all.
When the above evidence had been taken, Mr.
Nantes arrived and opened the case, the facts of
which will be found in the evidence. He nail the
defendant had made false entries to start with, for he
had issued the two tickets in question, and had made
no entry of doing no. If that were all, there might
be some excuse on the ground of negligence, but when
they found those tickets were re-issued, it showed
there had been a serious embezzlement, and a systematic
piece of fraud. He should be only paying his friend
Mr. Howard his due compliment, if he anticipated
what might be in the evidence a difficulty, and the
only one which was apparent—that the person who
took the ticket the second time, could net swear to
the booking-clerk from whom she took it. But he
would tell them that they would be able to tir ,ve by
the officials, that defendant was the man who issued it.
Moreover evidence with regard to the entries in the
book, would be proved to have been made in his hand.
writing. It was true the company was prosecuting
in the case of a suit& sum, but he need not tell them
that it involved matters of great importance to them,
as well as to the public.
Forrester cross-examined by Mr. Howard Sail he
might have taken 20 tickets that day, but he only
took the numbers of the two in question. Stones
duty on receiving them, was to hand them over to the
policeman at the station, who ought to have cancelled
them by cutting out a three-cornered piece, and then
to have put them into a drawer of which he would
keep the key. And the next morning he would have
to take them out, put them into a despatch case, and
send them to the clearing house by the guard of the
train. The defendant was a booking-clerk, and his
duty was to give out tickets, and receive the money
for them. He would have nothing to do with
'the circumbsiition " he had described, but would
have only to make the usual entries, and account for
the money. If every other person did their duty, it
would be almost impossible for defendant under these
circumstances, to have got either of the tickets back
again. On a reference to the book, he found by the
train leaving Dorchester 1.33, there was one single
second class ticket issued for Weymouth. By the
5.56, there were 36, and in that entry there was the
ticket 8,023. That made 46 by the two trains. He
had not got those tickets, nor did he know where they
were.

Suppfwmg a clerk made a mistake in his entries for
one tram, and charged it to himself on the next train,
the company would not be a loser by it ?—No, they
would not

..„--
From your experience don't you know that some-
times clerks do not make entries immediately a train
goes?—! have known that to be the case.
Now, I will follow it up with this. And if R., and
they wish to check themselves, they do so by examin-
ing the tickets left in the tube, and so put himself
straight ?—Yes.
By the Clerk: So that if he found he had issued
tickets from No. 72 to 30, he would, at the cud of the
day, have to account for 7.—Yes.
By Mr. Howard: So that if he accounted for three
with one train, and four with another, 4.r four one, and
three another, the company would not be the loner?
—No.
Mr. Nantes: I quite admit that. Now, the entries,
with regard to those trains, were actually made up?
- I found them so about six that evening.
Supposing a clerk made errors and rectified them in
the way suggested, have you ever known it done,
or could it be done by re-issuing them ?—No.
Stoneham was not the policeman who had to
forward them to London. When witness gave him the
tickets he hat collected, he saw he had a lot of others
in his hands, and he also took some tickets fron:
Hiscox instead f handing over his to Hiscox.
Then Stoneham was guilty of a breach of duty?—
Yes.

- ;he Clerk: Hisc.ox we in fault ; he had the tickets,
and ought to have kept them.
Mr. Howard: It is a case of model machinery which
does not exist.

--- ---
Richard Dyke, ticket collector at Upwey, collected the
tickets there on the 13th of August at the five train. He
collected the second class single ticket 8023 from a Miss
Kerslake and handed it to Inspector Fortester.
Miss Louisa Tett took a ticket at the Dorchester station
by the tzain in question for her friend, Miss Kerslake, to
Weymouth. It was second-class, and she obtained it at
the usual place, the booking office, but she could not say
who from. She gave it to her friend.
Miss Rosa Kerslake proved receiving the ticket from
Miss Tett and to giving it up at Upwey to the collector,
where the Weymouth tickets were taken.
Mr. Henry Yoe, station-master at the Dorchester
station of the Great Western Railway explained the duties
of defendant.
.

He produced the train.Mek for the Tirti of Auguat last,
inferhich the entries of the leans of tickets were made. On
that day they were all made in defendaneichandwriting to
the hest of his knowledge. The entry relative to the IA
train, MAD in defendant's handwriting, one ticket tieing
issued —a single second to Weymouth. For the 5.56 the
entry was aho for one aecond.
. . _ _

By the Clerk: If the a. Oh train was a quarter-of-an-hour
late, and the book was closed at 6 and roeh made up, as is
the rule, the tickets issued afterwards would be accounted
for on the following day.
Mr. Howard and that will explain the whole of this
storm in a tea cup.
There were two other booking clerks beside the defen-
dant. If one gave out the tickets it would be very seldom
another clerk would make the entry.
lilt possible for two tickets to be stamped with the
same number I—The tickets are stamped in London and I
have known cases where duplicate tickets have been
issued.

Before they are put into the tube are they examined t
--We examine them as carefully aa time will allow, but, of
course, we cannot count up all the bundlea

Cross-examined: He ennbl not swear either one way or
the other whether or not the defendant's tea hour on the
oragaldrm In question was at five. The 5.56 train was on
that omission about quarter of an hour late. The flimsier
of the second-clam tieket issued by that train was tint,
this was shown by anoth.'r entry for • second-duos to
Upwey.
The Clerk : The es-octal point is was the 8023 ticket
accounted for at the 1.40.
Mr. Nantes said it was not, and it ought to have been.
This was the case for the rrrosecution.
The Mayor asked Mr. Nantes if there were any other
evidence he might wish to call if they adjourned the case.
Mr. Nantes I have no better evidente to give.
Mr. Howard The ca.se is rinsed. Will the Bench ask
the defendant if he wishes the case disposed of here.
The Clerk Do tic consent to that crierse 1
Mr. Howard: Most decidedly, without a moment's
hesitation. He then addressed the Court for the detenee.
They were dealing with a case in which the defendant
consented they should stand both in the position of judge
and jury and say whether he was guilty or not. He
did not wish to take up their time, hut be felt
the responsibility which had been placed upon him,
for he was defending a young man who had throughout
borne a good character, who had his future before him,
and who was the son of respectable parent., and, there-
fore, he would wish to 'ewe the court with the reflection
that nothing had been wanting on his part to show he was
entirely innocent. lie would rather they should think
him wearisome than that he had omitted any fact he
ought to lay before them. Ile did not hesitste to say that,
in • charge of that sort, it was the duty of the prosecution
to prove everything they alleged to the full satisfaction of
the magistrates, and to leave not a doult nr uncertainty.
A company like the Great Western Railway, with its
zealous officials, who did their duty to the utmost of their
rower, were bound to enquire into certain matters and
br:ng cases before them in instep to the shareholders
but, although they were right in doing so, it was not,
therefore, to be assumed that every person they charged
wax guilty, and, as he affirmed in this rase, without a
tittle of evidence. When he spoke of what it was the
duty of the prosecution t I prove, he wished it to he under-
stood that not for one moment did he wish to east the
slightest stigma upon any person. Their first duty was to
prove conclusively by whom this fraud had or had not
been done. Why was the policeman or Stoneham not
c died? The prosecution knew the policeman would have
proved that every ticket was cancelled. Were they going
to send that young man to prison and blast his future upon
sorb evidence. He put it to them as magistrates and as
fathers. Hal those witnesses been rolled he would have
shown by them, and they were both respeetable men, every
ticket given up to them, bad found its way to the audit-
office. What evidence, on earth, was there to show
he got possession of the ticket, or how he did so. In Mr.
Ye*, they all knew there was not to he found a more
energetic station-master on the line, and he had admitted
in his evidence, there were two or three bresking.clerks at
that station, and without wishing to east one slightest
reflection upon them, he would argue there WM not the
slightest tittle of evidence to show who, if either, gave
out the ticket. Why shotiA Stickland have been selected?
A more fiinisey charge he had never heard, anrl he would not
insult them by taking up their time. He felt certain that
upon such evidence they would not convict the young
man, taint his future and blast his prospects. Why even
their Clerk, with his vast experience. Raked with surprise
if the rase had been closed, for he must have known well
there WTo no case before them to-day.
Mr. Giles Symonds: You must not jump at conclusions,
you know.
Mr. Howard felt himself jusitifled in doing so, for
did not the presiding magistrate look up with astonish-
ment and ask Mr. Nantes "Do you want an adjournment
for the production of further evidence ?" (Suppressed
applause in Court.)
The Bench retired for about five minutes, and the
Mayor then said : Sitting here as we do in the position of
judge and jury, we have arrived at the conclusion there is
not sufficient evidence to make out the charge. but we
therefore find you not guilty, and at the same time we are
quite satisfied there have been very grave Irregularities
existing at the Great Western Statiola (Applause, which
the authorities at once stooped.)

PORTLAND.
DEATH ON BOARD THE MINOTAUR.

An inquest was held at the Breakwater Hotel, on
Friday afternoon, by Mr. R. N. Howard, coroner, on
the body of Andrew Archer, a hands:nen, who was
found lead on board H.M.S. Minotaur. By the
kindness of the commander of the ship, a steam launch
was placed at the disposal of the coroner, and in this
the jury proceeded from the Gastletown pier to the
" camber, ' in order to view the lily, Mr. Henry
Russell WM foreman of the jury, who numbered
fourteen. The following evidence w:ts taken. Richard
Samuel Purnell Griffiths. surgeon of H.M.S.
Minotaur :—The deceased was a bandsman. At a
quarter-past six this morning I was called by a ship's
corporal, Thomas Loaring, to go and we the deceased
I went, and found him lying on the mess-table.
and after examination I found deccu4ed
.to be dead.
. .

It appeared to me that he had jest died, for the
body was warm; there were no external marks
of violence, or any feature to indicate a violent death.
There were no symptoms of poisoning apparent, and I
should consider his death occurred from natural
causes, though the exact cause I cannot aay without a
post mortem examination. Ile had complained on the
previous; day to the medical officer of being unwell, the
symptoms were simply those of indigestion, and he was
excused from duty n that day. He was 30 years of
age, and had been invalided from the army, according
to his own account. His address was limehouse. He
was not on chore yesterday. He hail been examined
fully three months ago, and was told to appear at five
o'clock if he was worse.—Thomas Isoaring,
corporal on board the Minotaur. I saw deceased last
alive about six or eight o'clock last evening, he was
then bitting outside .4 him meets on the cable, by him.
self. This morning about six o'clock I was clearing
the hammocks if the lowered deck, and went inside
the bandsmen'.. mess G. turn the bandsmen out, and
went from there G. the main hatchway, to muster
the steerage hammoek men, when lumen Meulden
reported to me the death of Archer. I returned
to the mess immediately, and saw the deceased on
a stool sitting_ with hie 'nick resting across the crawf..rd
of the table. I gent for the sick bay steward, and went
myself for Dr. Grffiths. I have no reason to supp ale
that he came to his death 3tlier than by fair means
He was rather of a melancholy disposition. As a rule.
he wan very good friendn with his inesamates ; he was
very quiet, and very much to himself, I believe he
went to his hamenock.—James MePherw.n, handn.
man: I have known deceased ever since he has been
on board. I saw hi in ghost half past 7 ..'clock, when
the band went to play; but deceased was excused on
account of being unwell. Thin morning I got up at
six o'clock, went to shake deceased, who was sitting at
the end of a form, partly dressed, and I thought he
was asleep. I found the man was deal, and
immediately reported to the sergeant of the guard.
He slept in Ida drawers, and had on his shoes and
coat. It appeared that he had been tithe head, had
come back, sat down, an] died. His face was net
distorted in the least. and I thought he wa
asleep, I have no reason to suppose he died
from anything but natural causes ; but he had
I remarked, a swelling in his bowels. He bad
no enemy amongst us.—James Heard, bandninan : I
have known deceased slum July, 1859, when he was at
Aldershot in the 2nd battalion 11th regiment, as a
handboy, and I was a rrivate, lie was invalided
with me from Hong K ng, in January, 1866. We
had been there about seven months. We went to
Netley Hospital; he returned to the deplt, and I got
my discharge. I did not see hint him from then till
about seven months ago, when he wax in Portsmouth,
and joined the Minotaur. I was with him all day
yestenlay, and he complained of his bowels, and we
were both under the sioctor's hands I did not think
there was anything about him to lead me to suppoee
he was near death. He was much as usual, and ate a
hearty breakfast yesterday morning. The instrument
he played was the tenor slide trombone. I don't know
anything that would lead me to suppose he died from
anything unnatural. When he was invalided splenitis
WAS on his paper. lie never complained of heart
disease.—The jury returne 1 a verdict of "Death from
Natural Causes."