The Express.
London, England, 1867-08-22 00:00:00

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.

(Before Berm BramwelL)
TIM TAILORS' STRUM.

After the close of the case for the prosecution yesterday,
which consisted chiefly of the evidence of master tailors
and others as regards picketing,
Mr. Coleridge, Berjeant Parry, and Ribton took
some brief technical objections to the indictment, con-
tending that the defendants bad not gone beyond the
line drawn by the act of parliament in the course they had
taken.

The learned Judge, however, at once over-ruled the
objections, and said that the came must go to the jury.
Serjeant Ballantine then summed up the came for the
prosecution, and he submitted to the jury that the evi-
dence had established against the defendants a system of
terror and intimidation which it was absolutely necessary
to repress by the strong arm of the law. The prosecutors,
be said, had no vindictive feeling in the matter, and all
that they desired was to be allowed to enjoy the same
liberty of action claimed by those they employed.
Mr. Coleridge than prooeeded to address the jury on be-
half of his clients. He said that although he was ad-
dressing a jury probably composed of masters, he had no
doubt that the working men or whom he appeared, and
who were now upon their trial, would receive full justice
at their hands. The question, be said, was a very serious
one. He did not deny that the system of picketing had
be inaugurated at the meeting at the Alhambra, and the
only point that was now to be decided was whether the
proceedings that afterwards took place amounted to an
infraction of the law. He then proceeded to refer to the
proceedings that took place at the meeting in question,
and argued that everything that took place upon this
occasion showed that they were actuated by the strongest
desire to act legally and to obey the law in every respect,
and he submitted, that with reference to a good deal of
what was represented to have taken place there was not
• tittle of evidence that the defendants had in any manner
sanctioned such proceedings. He then proceeded to eon-
tend that the picketing system wee not illegal in itself,
and that it was on the contrary the only means by which
the persons engaged in the strike could find out the per-
sons who were employed by the masters, and have an op-
portunity of arguing with them, and dissuading them from
assisting the masters, and ends' to show them that
if they did so, it would only tend to their own injury in
the end.

Serjeant Parry next proceeded to address the jury on
behalf of the defendant Adamson. He went over a good
many of the same arguments that had been adduced by
Mr. Coleridge, and particularly impressed upon the jury
that they had nothing to do with the question of the
strike, and that the strike was perfectly legal, and that
the only question they had to decide was whether the de-
fendants were proved to have committed a crime. In the
urine of his speech he said that the system of picketing
had been adopted by all the trades unions in the country
for many years, and had always been regarded as perfectly
legal under the act of parliament of 1859, and the present
was the first occasion when an attempt had been made to
establish that it was illegal.
Mr. Giffard next addressed the jury on behalf of the
remaining defendants, and he said it appeared to him that
the present proceeding was nothing more than a final
attempt on the part of the masters to compel the men to
accede to the terms they offered them.
Baron Bramwell than proceeded to sum up the cum to
the jury. He commenced b 7 observing that • good many
topics had been introduced into the ease which they had
nothing whatever to do with. In the first place, he thought
it right to tell them that the defendants ought not to be
punished for the strike, for this was perfectly legal, ani
they had a right to strike if they chose, for the purpose of
endeavouring to obtain higher wages or any other advan-
bigm they might consider themselves entitled to. On the
other hand, the lock-out by the masters, respecting which
ea many observations had been made by the counsel for
the defendants, had nothing to do with the inquiry.
The masters had as much right to combine for their
own protection as the men: and it was obvious from the ex-
' planation that bad been given respecting the matter, that
if the other masters had not come forward to support the
three establishments from which the men had struck,
those establishments would have been compelled to accede
to the demands of their men, and all the others would have
been compelled to do the same, one after the other. The
real question before the jury, however, was, whether it
was proved to their satisfaction that the defendants, or
any of them, had been guilty of an illegal act. The
learned judge went on to say that there was no right so
sacred in this country as personal liberty and personal free-
dom, and the law protected equally freedom of mind and
action, and no one could interfere with either of those
privilege. without rendering himself amenable to •
criminal charge. The talent and the industry of a
man were, in feat, as sacred in the eye of the
law as the liberty of the body, and he had no hesitation in
layingit down distinctly as acknowledged law, that if any
man or any body of men combined together for the pnr-
pose of restricting and interfering with the right to which
he had referred, such persona were guilty of a criminal
offence. The question now, therefore, for consideration
was whether the defendants had so acted, and whether
they had brought themselves within the scope of the law.
His lordship then referred to the statute of George IV.,
and to that passed in the year 1859 bearing upon the sub-
ject, and he explained to the jury that by the last men-
tioned statute an express right was given to workmen to
combine together for the purpose of protecting
their interests, and they were also permitted to en-
deavour to induce others to join in their views, but it was
at the same time enjoined upon them that this must be
done peaceably and without any threats or molestation,
and if any such acts as theme were resorted to, the parties
were liable to punishment. If, therefore, they should be
of opinion that the object of the defendants in this system
of picketing was merely to ascertain who the pollee were
that were working for the masters in order that they
might have an opportunity of quietly and peaceably
arguing with them and endeavouring to induce them not
to do so, it appeared to him they ought to acquit the de-
fendant'. If,on the otherhand, they should think that their
object was to intimidate and molest the persons who conti-
nued to work, and prevent them by violence from following
out their own inclinations, in that case they ought to find
them guilty, or at all events such of them as were proved
to have taken part in the proceeding.
The jury retired to deliberate at half-put six o'clock,
and shortly after seven they returned into court and gave
a verdict of Guilty against Druett, Lawrence, and Adam-
son, and Acquitted all the others.
The three defendants who bad been convicted were
allowed to go out upon bail, to come up this (Thursday)
morning to receive sentence.
In the course of the day air F. Pollock came into court
and sat upon the bench. The venerable judge looked
remarkably well, and the whole of the bar rose to greet
him on his entrance,

(Before Mr. Justice Shoe.)
THI CHARGE OF STEALING 13,000/.

Mr. Sleigh, who was instructed to defend William Joky;
Hurst, upon the charge of robbing his employers who are
stock broken in the City, of •• very large sum of money,
applied to the court to postpone the trial to the October
sessions. The grounds for the application were that since
the committal of the prisoner • fresh indictment had been
preferred against him, of the particulars of which he was
entirely ignorant, and he was quite unprepared to defend
the prisoner at the present nedon. Ha also asked that the
prisoner might be admitted to bail.
Mr. Bealey, who appeared for the prosecution, said he
did not feel justified in opposing the application either
for a toetponement, or for the admiasion of the prisoner
to bat
The learned judge upon this directed that the case should
be postponed to the October sessions, and he fixed the
amount of bail at two sureties in 5001 each, and the pri.
sonar's own recognisance in 1,0001.
Frederick Ndley,TG, described as • servant, but who at
the time the offence was committed was a constable be-
longing to the metropolitan police, was indicted for a
burglary in the dwelling-house of George Greenwood, and
sting • watch and chain, his property.
Mr. Healey conducted the prosecution.
The facts of this case will be fresh in the recollection of
the public, as the prisoner was only committed within the
Let few days. The prisoner was • police-constable sta-
tioned at Walthamstow, and the evidence left no doubt
that he had taken advantage of this position to get into
premises that were upon his beat, and steal various articles
which were aftenrards found in his possession.
The jury found the prisoner Guilty ; and then was a
second charge of the same character against him, upon which
he was also convicted.

Mr. Justice Eibee, in passing sentence, remarked upon
the aggravated character of the offence on the part of •
man whose duty it was to protect the public instead of
plundering them. He then sentenced the prisoner to be
kept in penal servitude for seven years.
(Before Mr. Commissioner Kerr.)
Pairkk Bare, 21, was charged with having, in company
with others, committed • robbery, accompanied with vio-
lence, upon James Madden.
Mr. Poland conducted the prosecution, and the prisoner
was defended by Mr. Montagu Williams.
The prosecutor was walking along Gracechureh-street
about eleven o'clock at night, when he was attacked by
the prisoner and two or three other men, who knocked
him down, kicked him, and treated him in a very brutal
manner. His watch and chain were then snatched from
him, and the men ran away, bat the prisoner was pursued
and taken into custody.
The prisoner was found Guilty, and the Commissioner
sentenced him to two yews' hard labour, and to receive 39
stripes with the cat-o'-nine-tails.