The Express.
London, England, 1853-12-05 00:00:00

THE POLICE COURTS.

MANSION-HOUSE.

Char:otle Sasslh was brought before the L,rd klayor
upon suspicion of having robbed Thomas Spence, a I rtolk
man, who Lad come up to town far the purpose of paying for
his passage to Australia, of 60 sovereings and a Norfolk
bank-note for 51.

The complainant said—l brought the bag of sovereigns,
and the U. note, which I had gathered together after pars
of toil as a labourer, to town. I went out on the evening
of the 2S h of November, and met the prisoner, who aimed
me to treat her, and I could not refuse, but visited several
public-houses and other kinds of houses, in which we drank
porter and ale, and gin, together. I was not tipsy, neither
was she; but soon after we parted, upon putting my hand
in my pocket, I missed all my money, and I informed the
police of the disaster, and had her taken into custody.
The Lord Mayor, who had on a previous day remanded
the prisoner, in order that inquiries might be made after
the money, asked the complainant how he had become
possessed of so much money in the humble avocation of a
labourer ?
The complainant said, he bad collected it by living most
economically during the whole time he was employed. He
had been is London before, and now be should be
obliged to go back to work for the rest of life at the old
trade, instead of taking the chance of prosperity, as he in-
tended, in the gold fields of Australia.
The prisoner admitted that she had been drinking in a
variety of public.houses with the prosecutor; but shu de-
clared that he had been very " far gone in lush," and that
he had been practising miztures of ale, rum, gin, beer,
cloves, and brandy, with several other females after she
hail left him.

The policeman said he had learned that the account just
given by the prisoner was correct, and that the unfortunate
prosecutor wes not la attendance.
The prisoner was then discharged.
The Lord Mayor said he bad received a letter, dated
Custom•hounc, Nov. 30, and enclosing one of a number of
circulars that had been addressed to the junior members of
that establishment. The circular, which appeared to be

written by a female, wu as follows
"Beaumont-street, Weymouth street, Portland-place.
" Sir—l beg to inform you I lend various sums of money
to gentlemen holding government appointments. Any time
I sball be happy to oblige you or any of your friends; yen
may rely on secrecy. A letter addressed to me will meet
wits prompt attentiou, or I can be seen personally any
evening after 7 o'clock."
Some of these circulars were accompanied with the inti-
motion that personal acceptances would be taken and'
renewed if required. The Lord Mayor said be was sure of
the truth of the complaint, and was personally acquainted
with the gentleman who hail written it. He was perfectly
aware that a disgraceful system was carried on, by which
great commercial plunder was set going, and he would feel
proud of opportunities to punish the perpetrators.
Mr. C. F. Guttard, who figured in the shop of Mr.
Doniter a few days since, was brought up from Newgate,
and discharged, upon his friends undertaking to place him
under restraint.

BOW-STREET.
THE LEIILK Waal FLED.

Thomas William l'arkes, John Nichelks, Robert
Waters, James Williams, Wawa Richardson, Thomas
Bond Loader, and Archibald Douglas, were summoned as
the alleged trustees and representatives of the Leman
Estate Fuol. to answer the charge of having conspired to
commit the °Renee of maintenance and champerty.
Mr. Bodkio, with Mr. Reynolds, the Treasury Solicitor,
conducted the case on the part of the Crowu ; and Mr.
Parry, the barrister, attended for the first live defendants.
It wu stated that Williams was an inmate of White-
croustreet prison, and therefore could not attend;
and Mr. Ellerby, a solicitor, who appeared for Captaia
Douglas, who had not been in London fur some time past,
and hainever received the summons in consequence. His
was about to stets that Captain Douglas had long ceased to
be connected with the society, but
Mr. Henry advised him to defer his statement for the
present.
Mr. Bodkin then proceeded to address the magistrates in
support of the summonses ; upon which the learned counsel
for the defendants, Mr. Parry, suggested that the consent
of all parties should be given to the removal of the question
which was purely a legal one, ,for discussion in one of the
superior courts.
Mr. Henry thought that this question could not be enter-
tained, as Mr. Parry did not represent all the defendants.
Mr. Bodkin then proceeded to detail the proceedings of
the society, which are already familiar to the public, and
called several witnesses in support of has statements.
George Edward Stanley, law writer, of Percy-street,
stated that he had been employed by the authorities of the
Home-office to make inquiries at the office of the Leman
Estate Fond. Went on the 10th of September to 3, Bridge-
street, Westminster, and saw Mr. Waters, the secretary.
Asked him for a prospectus, which he received, and re-
quested to look at the pedigree and the deed, empowering
the trustees of the society to act as such. Mr. Waters showed
him the deed, which was signed " Edward Leman," but was
not stamped. There were the signatures of two attesting wit-
nesses, Waters being one, and "Thomas Ward" the other,'
both being chscrilsed u of 3, Bridge-street. Witness asked
to examine the deed, but .Waters said he could not part
with it, although he consented to lend an abstract of it,
which witness took away with him. Witness asked what
was the amount of funds in the hands of the Accountant.

General, and he replied "about half a million,"
and he added that the clerks would furnish him with
any number of the shares or certificate~ that he might re-
quire. Witness called at the office again on the 13th, and
returned the abstract to Waters, asking bins on that occa-
sion what the property consisted of. He replied, that some
of the property was situated in Goodman's field., and they
were about to attach that at once, and that their property
at Warboys was being surveyed ; that they were going to
present a petition to the Court of Chancery, so that it might
come on the first thing alter Hilary term. Witness asked
if the half million in the hands of the Accountant• General
had accumulated in the cause of Cassamajor and Strode, and
he replied, " Yes." Witness then purchased a 10s. certi-
ficate, a printed form setting forth the owner's share in the
estates, and bearing the signature of the trustees. On the
',cession of one of hie visits to the office, he saw Mr.
Nicholles, an elderly gentleman in black-silk stockings, and
he stated that he could sell witness as many shares as he
wanted. Witness called again, after seeing an advertise-
ment in the newspapers, about a fortnight ago, and asked
what it meant. as it announced an intended distribution of
the fund, in February next, and purported to negative
some accusations which had been made through the Trade
Protection Society, by some malicious persons. Waters
told him, that a distribution would really take place
at the time announced of the fund raised by the sale
of the property in Goodman's fields. He added, that they
should soon obtain more, and should be in a position, before
then, to establish their c'aim to the entire fund in the hands
of the Accountant-General.

Richard Hudden, accountant, of Kingsland road, said
that he had purchased twelve of the certificate., having
applied for the first of them through the Post-office. Saw
Mr. Waters afterwards at the (Ace in Bridge-street, where
he purchased the remainder. He had a conversation with
Mr. Waters in the boardroom, who told him that there
would be a distribution at Christmas of about .51. a share.
Witness inquired if there were any other claimants to the
property besides the one named in the prospectus (Sir E.
Leman), and he said there were some, but they had been
paid, or promised something, "to keep quiet." Witnees
asked who Sir E. Leman was, and Waters replied, that he
lived at Nottingham, and was a poor man ; and that he was
to retain a portion of the certificates for surrendering his
interest in the property in question. Witness purchased
three of the shares at that time, giving 10s. each for them.
Saw Mr. Parkes there.

Jonathan Wycher, sergeant of the detective police, said
he had been instructed to inquire into the characters of the
persons engaged in the scheme, and went to the house of
Mr. Nicholles, one of the trustees, on the 14th of August
last, without stating who he was. lie pointed out the name
of Mr. Nicholles upon the prospectus, and asked him if
many of the certificates had been sold? Ile replied, " Yes,
to the amount of some thousands of pounds." Witness asked
him the name of the banker where the account was kept,
and he said, " Oh, that is private." On the Itith of Sep-
tember he saw Mr. Loader, at 35, Princes-street, Stamford-
street, having previously applied for him at the • blies.
named in the prospectus, 14, New Church-street, Mait s-
hill, where he could net find him. Witness said he had
called to make inquiries about the Leman Estate Fund. Ile
said, " Before I answer any questions, what is your ino,
tive ?" Witnessinformed him he was a police-officer, and
had been desired to do so, as his (Loader's) name was
own in the prospectus as a trustee. lie said, " Yes."
Witness asked him where the funds were kept, and he
said, " It was originally at the British Bank, but 1 have
quarrelled with the trustees, and don't know now."
Witness called at Williams's, whom he found at N 0.82,
Upper Stamford. street. Williams admitted that he was one of
the trustees. Ile was not present now, being a primmer, for
debt, in Whitecrowstreet prison. On Saturday last, wit-
ness served the summons on Richardson personally, at the
office in Bridge street. Ile admitted that be was one of the
trustees. IVituess had tried previously to find Richardson
at Court-lodge, Wantliaz, Surrey, without success, as ho
was not known there. Witness had seen the tther trustees
and Parkes ping in and out the •fflce in Bridge-street,
and when he served Waters with the summons he said,
" Let me go in and speak to the manager ;" who proved to
be Parkes.

of the Solicitor's•office, Treasury, said
that these proceedings were taken by direction of th..
Home•office, and praluced an office copy of the decree in
the cause of Cassamajor and Strode, dated 17th August,
1810, having procured it from the Report office ut Vac
Court of Chancery.
Mr. John Jackson, solicitor, of 12, Essex-street, strand,
solicitor for defendants in the cause of Cassamajor and
Strode, stated that it referred to funds which conic from
estates originally belonging to the Leman family. The
decree produced was made to carry out the will of William
Strode, dated 1803, which it established as genuine, and it
directed the due performance of the trusts, one of which
was the sole of several estates in Huntingdon, Hertford-
' shire, Middlcses, and other counties, which were devised
by Strode's will to the descendants of John Leman. It in-
eluded property at Wuboys, but he did not recollect any at
Whitechapel and the Docks, nor at Uoodman's•ti,lds. A
subsequent order in the same suit divided the whole of the
property produced by the sale of estates, amounting to
about 400,0001. or 500,0001., into six portions, only three of
which now resins in court, in consequence of their being

trusts (for children) not yet performed. From the time of
that decree all the parties have received the dividend+ due
to them. There is no accumulating or other fund whatever
in the Accountan:-General's bands in connexion with the
estate., end the decree has never been disputed. There has
never been a transfer, or order for a transfer, of any portion
of the funds to the reduction of the national debt, untr has
there been any recovery of any portion of the property re-
ferred to in the suit sines the detree of 1810.

This being the case for the crown,
Mr. Parry reserved the defence of his clients for the
trial. They were in a condition to prove that the claims
which they bad set up were not fabulous ; and, as for the
offence of champerty, it was well known that great estates
had been again and again recovered by the instrumentality
of such agencies as those employed, for example, in the
well•kaowa cause of the Baron de Bode. He would un-
dertake to say that there was scarcely an attorney in Eng.
land that had not committed the offence of champerty atone
time or (Ater in his professional career.
Mr. !Leary directed each of the defendants to find two sure-
ties of eul. each, besides their individual recognizance' in
801., to answer the charge at the Old B►iley Sessions.
A long discussion then ifollowed upon the stability and
reaper ability of the persona who attended as sureties for
the respective parties, but eventually, all the defendants
were liberated on bail, except Waters.
Mr. &Akin withdrew the charge against Douglas, who
had adver,ised his withdrawal from the trusteeship.

WORSHIP-STREET.
11-iMinns Goggan, an athletic man, was charged with a ,
brutal and aggravated assault upon • respectable young
woman, named Fanny Abrahams, residing with her parents
in Spitalfields.
The complainant, who exhibited marks of severe recent
ill-usage, stated that at about 8 o'clock on the previous
evening, while passing through the Broadway, White-
chapel, her attention was attracted to the Prisoner, who
was scandalously misconducting himself towards a decent-
looking young woman, whom he ultimately struck • violent
blow on the lace, in consequence of her indignant refusal to
submit to his overtures. Witness immediately interfered
for the protection of the girl, and on remonstrating with
him upon his unmanly conduct, the prisoner, after assailing
her with the Coarsest vituperation, declared, with an oath,
that he would serve her in a similar manner, and instantly
dealt her a terrible blow in the eye which felled her to the
ground. She was completely stunned from the effects of
the blow, and before she had time to recover her feet, the
prisoner grasped hold of the hair of her head, and tureibly
dragged her along the gutter at the aide of the street fur
a distance of at least a dozen yards. The prisoner then flung
her heavily into the road, and after kicking her in a savage
manner, planted his feet upon her right arm, and trampled
upon her with all his weight. She was at length rescued
from further ill-treatment by several persons who were
attracted by her screams, and alter a strenuous resistance
the prisoner was overpowered and given into custody.
(At the conclusion of her evidence the complainant un-
covered her injured atm, which was shockingly bruised,
and also exhibited the dress she hail on at the time, which
was encrusted all over with mud, and also reduced to com-
plete tenets.)
Mr. John Barnett, a cigar manufacturer in Whiteehapel,
stated that on hearing the cries of "Murder" from the last
witness, he hastened to the spot, where he found the pri.
soner dragginCher along the gutter by the hair of her head,
which was twisted round his fingers. Witness instantly
seized him by the collar, and was endeavouring to extricate
the poor woman from his clutch when the prisoner struck
him a heavy blow on the eye, which compelled him to
relinquish his bold, and sent him staggering back al
paces. On recovering from the effect of the blow, witness
again grappled with him, and managed to fling him on his
Inez, where he was held down by main force until the
arrival of • policeman, when he was given into custot.y.
In his defence the prisoner said that he had been drinking
freely, but distinctly recollected that the complainant
attacked him in the first instance.
Mr. Hammitt sentenced him to aix months' imprison-
ment, with hard labour.