The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1886-10-23 00:00:00

COMMITTAL OF DR. VIVIAN.

At tbe Shropshire Quarter Sessions on Tuesday, Dr.
Vivian, with several aliases, was indicted for stealing
a purse containing £6 and 'a number of old Roman
coins, the property of a commercial traveller named
Charles Henry Prowse, while staying at the Victoria
Hotel, Whitchurch, in May last. It will be remem-
bered that shortly before his apprehension the pri-
soner, representing himself to be an American doctor,
married a young lady at Birmingham, and large sums
were spent upon the wedding.
Mr. Spearman, counsel for the accused, applied that
a portion of the money—about £27—found on Vivian
should be handed over for the purpose of his defence;
but notice not having been served on the police she
application was refused.
Mr. Plowden, in opening the prosecution, explained
that, although the case was one of extreme simplicity,
the circumstances attending the previous life of the
prisoner had made it one of considerable notoriety.
He must ask the jury, however, to shut their eyes to
all they bad hitherto seen and heard, and give their
verdict upon the evidence. There could be no doubt
that their decision would show that the police had
either committed a stupendous mistake, or had suc-
ceeded in capturing a very clever and impudent
thief.

The testimony of the prosecutor was that on the
evening in question he was staying at the hotel, and
going into the bar saw the prisoner there. Prosecutor
produced some old Roman coins, which he showed to
the gentlemen present. The accused examined them
critically, and said they were worth some hundreds of
pounds and a friend of his, Mr. Thorneycroft, of
Wolverhampton, would no doubt give any amount for
them. Some of the coins were very small, as small
as a pea, and when about to pack theta up Mr.
Prowse missed two which prisoner had seemed most
to admire. Being asked for them, Vivian picked
them up off the seat near him. In the presence of
the accused the prosecutor tried to put the coins into
his bag with his gold, but could not, and he accord-
ingly put them into his left trousers pocket. Going
to his room, he hung the trousers at the bedside, and
noticed nothing unusual till noon next day, when on
proceeding to pay his hotel bill he discovered that his
bag of gold and the old coins were gone. He had
not seen any of them since.
John Roberts, labourer, stated that on the day re-
ferred to he was standing near the Victoria, when the
pri oner made inquiries about different hotels in the
town. He afterwards got witness to purchase a sheet
of brown paper, which was now produced.
Mrs. Wright, wife of the proprietor of the Victoria
Hotel, deposed that she saw the accused in the house
Looking at coins, which he said were worth some
hundreds of pounds. His bedroom was above her
own, and during the night she heard footsteps over-
head, as if someone were walking around the passages.
She called up her husband, who went all over the
house twice, but saw nothing unusual. The next
morning she found that he prisoner had absconded
without paying his bill, and she did not see him again
until he was in custody.
The son of the last witness stated: He rose at six
o'clock on the following morning, and saw the accused
peeping around a corner on the landing. He after-
wards observed him in a passage leading both into the
yard and the street.
Evidence of identity was produced, as was also a
sheet of brown paper found in the bedroom which the
prisoner had occupied after he left.
Mary Jane Upton, Aston, Birmingham, said she
knew the prisoner as Dr. Vivian. He came to her
house to lodge on June 19, and stayed till July 8. He
showed her a number of old coins, which he said were
Roman, and one was the size of a pea. When asked
to show them again, he stated that he had been tricked
out of them, and should probably never see them
more. Hc added that the small coin was worth £lOO,
that he had been engineering in Australia, and the
coins were dug up, and that accounted for their rough-
ness.

Detective Whitcroft, Birmingham, deposed that on
July 22 he was in a street when he saw the prisoner
and called out, "Mr. Barnett. The accused turned
round at once, and being told that inquiries were being
made about his committing a robbery at Wbitchurch,
he said, "You are mistaken." He subsequently said
he had never been to Whitchurch in his life; the
nearest he had been to it was Crewe.

Sergeant Griffiths stated that after the examination
before the magistrates Vivian admitted to him that
he had been in Whitchurch, but said he knew nothing
about the robbery. He added that Mrs. Wright was
no lady, although she might have knocked about on
the Continent. _ _

The defence was that it was a case of mistaken
identity.
The jury,liowever, returned a verdict of guilty.
The prisoner pleaded guilty to a conviction at
Liverpool in 1876, when he received ten years' penal
servitude, and there were other convictions.

The chairman passed a sentence of ten years' penal
servitude.