The Express.
London, England, 1853-01-11 00:00:00

THE POLICE COURTS.

MANSION HOUSE.
It. F. Pries, of No. 16, Grove-road, Brixton, merchant,
was brought before Sir ltobert W. Carden, in the custody
of Huggett, the detective officer, charged with having
knnwiugly uttered forged bills of lading, by means of
which he obtained 113,0001. The sums obtained by the
prisoner amount, it is believed, altogether to the enormous
sum of 33,0001. Mr. Ballantine instructed in one case by
Messrs. Crowther and Maynard, and in another by Mr.
Vansandsu, attended for the prosecution. Mr. Wontner

for the define*.
Mr. Ballantine said that he should on the present occa-
sion merely call witnesses, whose testimony would be
sufficient to justify a remand, in order that the police
might pursue the investigation with u little delay as pos-
sible in a ease of such serious magnitude. The instance,
in proof of which he sbonld call evidence, referred to the
sum of 3,0001., a part of the money advanced by one of
the houses represented by tim to the prisoner upon
the security of bills of lading and other securities. That
sum became due on Saturday last, and the prisoner then
gave a cheque for the amount, which cheque was presented
on the same day and dishonoured at his bankers. Soon
after the presentation of the cheque, a clerk of the house
which had been thus treated went to the prisoner's house
and saw his wife, who chewed him a letter which she had
received from her husband. That letter contained quite
enough to show that the writer had committed the offences
with which he was charged. It expressed his sorrow for
having deceived his wife, called upon her to look with care
to their children, and intimated that it was 'his intention to
put an end to himself. That letter had, the learned counsel
believed, been soon afterwards burned; but he would be
able to satisfy the lord mayor that such a letter written by
the prisoner to his wife had existed. At present he would
produce evidence that the signatures to one of the securities
upon which the prisoner had obtained the money were
forgeries.
Mr. Ignace Shuloff !aid—l am a partner in the house of
Prosper, Monteaux, and Co., foreign bankers, at No. 17,
Gracechurch-street. I know the prisoner well, and have
had very extensive money transactions with him. He is a
merchant in Crosby Hall-chambers. In consequence of a
transaction which took place, I took steps for his appre-
hension.
Mr. Emile Adolph Herman—l am manager of the house
of James Redford and Co., of No. 1, New Broad-street,
bankers. I know the prisener. I received from him, on
the Ist of January, these corn warrants (producing papers
alleged to be forged securities). We advanced 18,0001.
upon them. I was to be repaid on the 3rd instant. He
put off the time of payment, and gave subsequently a cheque
ter 3,0001. for Saturday upon his bankers; which cheque, as
our reporter understood the witness, was not paid.
Mr. Samuel Barnard, confidential clerk to Messrs.
Brown and Young, lightermen and granary keepers, at
Bermondsey Wharf.—l do not believe that there is any
other firm of our name in the trade. I have looked at the
signatures to the documents exhibited (the corn documents).
They are not in the handwriting of my employers, nor, I
should say, were they written with their authority, for the
evident reason that documents of the kind uniformly pus
through my hands.
Mr. William F. Ingelow, principal clerk to Messrs.
Monteaux, Schuloff, and Co., said, I went to the house of
the prisoner in Grove-road, Brixton. I know his hand-
writing. I saw a lady there, who showed me a letter in
his handwriting. I read that letter so as to recollect the
subject of the contents, and I distinctly recollect one or two
sentences. After he was taken into custody I wont, accom-
panied by an officer, to the prisoner's house again, and
asked to see the letter, but was unable to obtain it.
Mr. Ballantine—Did you see the same lady who showed
you the letter ?
Witness—l did ; and when I went Leto the passage to
communicate with the detective officer, I distinctly smelt
the burning of paper, and called his attention to it. lam
unable to obtain the letter.
Mr. Ballantine—Notice shall be given for the
.production
married;ht letter by the lady to whom the prisoner is no doubt
and if we fina,that the letter has been destroyed,
we must give the best evidence we can as to its contents.
Sir It. W. Carden—Have you any doubt that the letter
you read, and which was handed to you by the lady, was in
the handwriting of the prisoner ?
Witness—l have no doubt of it. The lady said, when I
saw her spin, that the letter was burnt.
Cross-examined by Mr. Wontner.—l cannot recall to my
mind any occasion upon which I saw the prisoner write.
know the letter to be his from my knowledge of his hand-
writing. and partly from what the lady told me. I knew
'his handwriting, and was confirmed in my opinion by what
the lady said.
Joseph Huggett (of the City Detective Police.)-1 took
the prisoner into custody at the station of the North-
Western Railway at nine o'clock on Saturday evening, just
as the train war about to start. He was in one of the car-
riages, and had a first classick ti for Newcastle. lie had
with him a carpet bag and a radway wrapper. In the
carpet bag were clothes all new. I asked him to give up
whatever property he had, and he handed me a canvas bag
containing lull. lls. 9d. I said to him that I was an
officer, and must trouble him to go back to the City
with me.
The prisoner was then remanded. Considerable sensa-
tion was caused on 'Change in the course of the day by the
prevailing report that the prisoner had obtained by means
similar to those described in the evidence double the
amount of the sums mentioned in the course of the exami-
nation.
In thecae. against Was. Lansude, the shopman of Mr.
Benson, of Cornhill,
Mr. ohnson, the witness who at the last examination
spoke as to the assaying of the watch-chain purchased by
Mr. Ward, attended to make what he conscientiously be-
lieved to be a necessary, although perhaps not an essential,
correction ; and also to make an addition to tho testimony
he hod given on the occasion.
Mr. Parry and Mr. Humphreys attended for the prosecu-
tion, and Mr. Hobler for the defence.
Mr. Lamude's own secutity for his appearance at the
Central Criminal Court having at the last examination been
accepted by the Lord Mayor, the accused, of course, did

not appear.
Mr. Robles made no objection to the proposition to hear
Mr. Johnson.
The witness—When I said I assayed the chain produced
in court, I meant that 1. with the assistance of others in
our house, sealed it. I did a part of the process. I hesi-
tated to sign my deposition because it read as if I alone had
assayed. What I wish to add is this—l have, since that
occasion, assayed the chain myself. I received on Satur-
day the same chain from Scott the officer, in the presence
of Mr. Thomas. I took two of the ornamental links and
two of the other links. The variation in the two kinds of
limb is aliaht aa tar as regard' the gold la them, within a