The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1886-09-18 00:00:00

CIVIL SERVICE ESTIMATES.

The House was in Committee all the evening on the
Civil Service Estimates. On the vote for the Chief
Secretary's Office,
Mr. Tuite raised a long discussion on the BarbaviLla
murder, of which he contended that the convicted per-
sons now under sentence were entirely innocent, and in
enforcing this in an elaborate review of the case he
advanced the usual charges, of conspiracy, perjury,
subornation of perjury, jury packing, intimidation,
bribery, &c., against the executive, judges, jurors,
police, witnesses and all other persons concerned in
bringing about ;he conviction. Mr. D. Sullivan also
went at length into the same subject, and Mr. Sexton
diverged into some general reflections on the office and
functions of the Chief Secretary, and Mr. T. Russell
vindicated the impartiality of the Dublin special
jurors.
The Attorney-General for Ireland, while pointing
out to the committee that the present Government
had no knowlegde of the case and no responsibility
for it, showed that all the facts mentioned had been
before the Court and jury at the trials, and that the
only method of re-opening the case was by memorial
to the Government in the usual way.

Mr. Deasy travelled in minute detail and with much
iteration through the circumstances of the case, mid,
on the Chancellor of the Exchequer appealing to the
Chair whether any real progress cculd ever be made it
the time of the committee oas taken up with cases of
which this Government had no knowledge and for
which they were not responsible, Mr. Courtney held
that where there were prisoners under sentence for a
crime it was competent for members on the vote to
state reasons why the prerogative of mercy should be
exercised.

Mr. Harris endeavoured to speak to the question,
but, being called to order three times, at down. Sub-
sequently the Crossmaglen case was introduced into
the discussion, and Mr. Dillon, Mr. P. M•Donald, Mr.
Cox' Mr. Hayden, Mr Sexton, Mr. W. Redmond, and
Mr. Blane in turn went at length throtu h the facts of
both cases. Mr. W. A. Macdonald also spoke, and by
this time the impatience of the Committee was 80

loudly manifested that Mr. Biggar moved to report pro-
gress in order to secure attention and adequate dis-
cussion. On this motion there was a discussion of some
20 minutes, and in the cou”se of it Mr. T. Harrington
was reproved by the Chair for threatening the Com-
mittee. Ultimately Mr. W. A. Macdonald was allowed
to conclude his speech, and Mr. Nolan and Mr. Crilly
having spoken on the same side, Sir J. Ellis, who was
several times called to order for wandering from the
subject, appealed to the Irish members, amid much
laughter, to speak to - the vote under discussion.
Mr. Sheehy and Mr. J. O'Connor (Tipperary) continued
the debate until twenty minutes to twelve o'clock,
when a division was taken and the reduction which
had been moved in the vote was negatived by 178
to 75. _

Sir M. Hicks-Beach, replying to a series of (locations
put to him in an earlier part of the debate by Mr
Sexton, maintained that the Arms Act was impar-
tially administered in the North as well as in the
South of Ireland, and denied that the Inspector-
General of Constabulary had been actuated by a party
feeling in the disposition of the police during the Belf act
riots.
Mr. J; Morley also bore testimony to the impartial
administration of the Arms Act and to the efficiency
and integrity of the Inspector-General of Con-
stabulary.
Several other Irish members also spoke upon the
vote, which was ultimately agreed to.
The Belfast Inquiry Bill passed through Committee,
and the House adjourned at half-past two o'clock.

EXTENSIVE ROBBERIES OF BANK
NOTES AND POSTAL ORDERS.

TAMPERING WITH LETTER BOXES.

At the Central Criminal Court on Tuesday morn-
ing, before the Recorder (Sir T. Chambers), Henry
Bond, 25, described as an agent, was indicted on the
charge of stealing three post letters, the goods of her
Majesty's Postmaster-General; he was also charged
with forging and uttering the endorsements to three
banker's cheques for payment of £25 16s. 6d., £142
us., and £lOO, in each case with intent to defraud.
Mr. C. Matthews, in opening the case to the jury,
said that this case would be found to be one of Et
somewhat extraordinary nature, and one also of con-
siderable importance. For a very long time past
there had been numerous complaints made about the
missing of letters in the Oxford-street district and
neighbourhood, which letters contained post-office
orders, postal orders, cheques, and other valuable
securities, to the extent of several hundred pounds.
Indeed, the complaints had been going on since the
year 1884, and had increased as time went on. All
elorts to trace the culprit had been fruitless until
recently, and they would now be able, be thought, to
bring home several cases of theft and forgery to the
prisoner. On the 90th of July last a test letter was
made up in the usual manner by Mr. Stevens, of the
Confidential Inquiry Department of the General Post
Office, containing a cheque for £25 16s. 6d., and
posted to a Mr. Nelson, of Hanover-street, and pay-
able at the Union Bank, Chancery-lane. That letter
never came into the hands of Mr. Nelson, and it
would be shown that after the letter was delivered in
the ordinary course his letter-box must have been
tampered with, and the letter abstracted. .Mr.
Stevens went with a polin-constable on the morning
it would be delivered, and it was not long before the
prisoner came in and presented the cheque for pay-
ment. He was, of course, questioned on the subject,
the cashier having previously had his instructions,
when he said that a man in the street had asked him
to get the cheque cashed; but, on going into the
street, of course there was no man whom the
prisoner could point out as the one who had given ,
the cheque to him. The endorsement on the back
seemed to Mr. Stevens, who in the course of his
duties has had an extensive experience in hand-
writing, to bear a remarkable resemblance to other
endorsements on stolen cheques, postal orders, &c.
He was asked to write his name, and wrote the name
" Hent y Bond," which was very similar to the writing
on the cheque he had just presented; and, in fact,
the prisoner himself admitted that there was a
similarity not only in that case; but also in numerous
others which were brought to his notice,
.and in which
cases it was alleged by the Post-office authorities
that he bad purloined the letters after delivery from
the letter-boxes in the doors, and forged the endorse-
ment on the cheques, &c., by whatever name the letter
indicted for whom it was intended. He was, of
course, taken into custody, and they Would be
able, from inquiries made, and witnesses to be pro-
duced, to see that the prisoner had for some years
been engaged in a most extensive system of robbing
street letter-boxes, and not stopping at forgery to
realise the proceeds of the valuable securities the
letters might contain.
During the course of the learned gentleman's
statement, one of the jurymen stood up and said the
name of a Mr. Feller had been mentioned as having
had a letter-box tampered with, and a letter contain-
s cheque stolen. He thought it better to say that he
was Mr. Feller's brother, and that when the cheque
was stolen they were in partnership together.
The Recorder said it was quite right that such a
thing should be mentioned, and the juryman had
better leave the box.
The Clerk: But don't leave the court, for you may
be wanted in other cases. (Laughter.)
Another juryman was then sworn, and the crve was
proceeded with, it not being thought necessary that
the case should be gone over again from the beginning
as the juryman had been in court the whole time.
Various witnesses was then called in support of the
3 indictment.
t Mr. Warburton, for the defence, called no witnesses,
I but said that his client was the dupe of some other
person, who was the real culprit.
The Jury found the prisoner guilty, and he was
sentenced to five years' penal servitude.