The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1887-03-19 00:00:00

THE GREAT EASTERN.

DIRECTORS SENT TO PRISON.

In the case of The Queen v. Barber, Marsden, and
Brown, which came on on Saturday at the Court of
Queen's Bench before Baron Pollock, the defend-
ants, Mr. William Barber, chairman of the Great
Eastern Steamship Company, Mr. Mark Eagles
Marsden, a director of the Compan, , and Mr.
Thomas Brown, a shipbroker of Milford Haven, were
tried on an indictment charging them with conspiracy
to defraud, which had been removed by certiorari.
The jury found the defendants Guilty, and they now
came before their lordships for judgment. The prosecu-
tion arose out of the chartering of the Great Eastern
steamship by a syndicate, the object being that the
vessel should proceed to New Orleans, at which place
an exhibition was about to be held in the autumn of
1834, and be moored in the river off the exhibiti,,d
grounds as a floating hotel. The main allegation of
the prosecution was that Brown, being a member of the
syndicate, had entered into an arrangement with the
other defendants that the Company should charge
the syndicate £6OOO for a year's hiring of the vessel
and accept the price of £6OOO, and band over the
difference (X 1000 to Brown as commission. In con-
sequence of this it was submitted that the charter
pe...”!7 r_ly.,otiated by Brown contained unusual condi-
tion 3 against the interests of the syndicate. One in-
stalment of £l5OO had been paid with regard to the
£6OOO arranged for under the charter party, but
ultimately the project fell through. after the syndi-
cate had spent considerable sums of money, and the
prosecution alleged that this was due to the conduct
of defendants.

Sir C. Russell, Q.C., Mr. Gully, Q.C., and Mr.
Avory appeared for the prosecution. Sir H. James,
Q.C., and Mr. Bucknell, Q.C., represented Mr.
Barber. Mr. Rockwood, Q.C., and Mr. C. Mathews
for Mr. Marsden, and Mr. Rubie for Mr-. Brown.
Mr. Barber made an address to the offect that he
was in his 80th year, and had been for many years en-
gaged in business in Livetpool and America as a mer-
chant. He had been a director of the Steamship
Company since the date of its formation in 1864 till
its winding-up in 1885, and had also been a director
of the Company which owned the ship before. He
ultimately became chairman of the Company. He
understood that Brown was a shipbroker, who could
find principals for chartering the vessel, and required
£l.OOO if he was successful. There was no secrecy
observed about the transaction, and he had not the
faintest idea when the charter was entered into that
Thos. Brown was himself one of the charterers, and
bad no intimation that he was a member of a
syndicate. He bad not in any way shared with Brown
soy portion of the amount paid to him in respect of
he instalment paid to the Company, and had not
oenefitted pecuniarily by the transaction. He also
stated that, with the sanction of the Court, he should
be prepared to refund the .£250 representing Brown's
commission on the £l5OO, and denied that he had
any intention to defraud.
Mr. Marsden made an affidavit to a similar effect
as regarded his share of the transaction, and stated
that he was 76 years of age, and had just recovered
from an attack of bronchitis.

Affidavits by medical men were read to the effect
that imprisonment would cause Mr. Barber's death,
and that Mr. Marsden's case might be attended with
the gravest results.
Mr. Brown, who is 54 years old, filed an affidavit to
the effect that he was a married man with eight
children, seven of whom were dependent upon him.
He had been in business for 30 years. He demanded
the commission because he had incurred and was
about to incur personal expenses in the matter. He
bad conducted negotiations for two months in refer-
ence to this transaction at great expense and trouble
to himself, and had no intention to defraud anyone.
He became a member of the syndicate a day or two
before it was registered. All the money received by
him was spent on account of the syndicate, except £25,
which was given to the secretary.
Mr. Harvey, the manager of the syndicate, also
made an affidavit, in which he set out details of the
transactions and the amount lost by the syndicate in
consequence of defendants' action. He also imputed
that collusive actions had been brought to defeat the
syndicate.
His Lordship said the verdict conveyed that not only
according to law, but according to known well-estab-
lished rules of commercial trading and morality the
defendants had been guilty of the offence charged
against them. He agreed thoroughly with the verdict,
which was of considerable importance to the public,
especially to that portion of it which was engaged in
the formation of companies and the carrying out of
contracts. With regard to the defendant Brown, this
was a scheme contrived by him, and he had arraoged
to take for his own benefit a considerable sum of money
and be took a portion of it. His sentence as to Brown
therefore, was, that he should be imprisoned for three
months without hard labour. With regard to Barber and
Marsden, he was glad to recognise that they made no
immediate gain in respect of the sum of money re-
ceived, and witnesses spoke as highly as they could of
their conduct during a long life; their age and health,
too, must be taken into consideration, and he would
sentence them to one month's imprisonment without
bard labour.