The Express.
London, England, 1867-05-03 00:00:00

THE POLICE COURTS
--4--
MANSION-HOUSE.

Yesterday Henry Berliner, a man of respectable exterior,
described as being an agent, residing at No. 9, Worship-
street, was charged before Mr. Alderman Allen with ob-
taining from Mr. William Parker, of No. 83, Lower
Thames-street, auctioneer, the sum of 4/. on a false bill of
lading, with intent to cheat and defraud.
Mr. T Beard of Baainghall-street appeared for the
prosecution, and Mr. Vann, of Worship-street, attended
on behalf the prisoner.
From the evidence of the prosecutor it appeared that cal
Friday, the 12th of April, the prisoner, with whom he had
on previous occasions had two business transactions, came
to his office,accompanied by another person, and asked the
prosecutor to oblige him with the advance of 41. on the
security of a bill of lading, which be produerod, and
which represented that e' bundles of straw brand,
value 201., had been shi at Bmershaven,on board the
ship Vulcanus, lying in t e river Weser, bound to the port
of London. The hill of lading was dated the 10th April,
1867, and purported to be signed by Captain F. Mks, the
master of the ship, and the consignees were stated to be
Messrs. Sunless and Company, of 79, London-wall. The
prosecutor, after looking at the document, asked the
I prisoner if it was quite correct, and the latter replied in
the affirmative, and added he was sure the prosecutor
would not think that he would bring him anything that
was wrong ; and the prisoner further stated that his friend
who was with him was the consignee named in the bill of
lading, and that he had been in the habit of receiving
such consignments for three years past. On the faith
of these representations the prosecutor advanced the
sum of 41., with which the prisoner and his friend went
away, after stating that the ship Vulcanus was expected
to arrive on the following nneday. The prolocutor
waited until after that day, and as there was no such
arrival be set about making inquiries at Lloyd's and else-
where, when he learnt that there was not any ship called
the Vulcanus in existence, and that no such a person as
Captain F. Blake was known to the authorities, or on the
Steppinp Register. It was further ascertained, on in-
quiries at the address of the consignees, /Rudest; and Co.,
at 79, London-wall, that they had left the occupation of
their offices six weeks anterior to the date of the bill of
lading, and were not to be found. The prosecutor saw
nothing of the prisoner until he met him on Saturday
last at the St. Katharine Docks, when he told him that
be should give him in custody for passing a bill of lading
which was false and forged. Another man was with the
prisoner at the time, and on that man's promise to call on
the prosecutor on Monday and settle the matter with him
the prisoner was allowed to go at large. The promise to
call on Monday was not kept, and in consequence the
prosecutor went to the prisoner's residence in the evening,
and told the prisoner be must take up the bill of lading by
the repayment of the 4/., or be would give him in custody.
While looking for a oonstable the prisoner made his
escape from a wall at the rear of his house, and was not
seen again until the previous afternoon, when the prose-
cutor gave him in charge.
Mr. T. Beard said that there were numerous similar bills
of lading on which money had been obtained. and hence he
had to ask for a remand.

Mr. Alderman Allen acceded to the application, and re.
manded the prisoner to Wednesday neat, refusing to
admit him to bail.
GUILDHALL

Mr. Albert Henry— illicurtl.y, • solicitor, of 14, South-
ampton-buildings, was summoned before Alderman Finnis,
to mower the charge of committing perjury on the 2((th
day of January last, at the Central Criminal Court, in the
testimony which he gave upon oath as a witness at the
trial of Thomas Cannon for perjury.
Mr. Bosley, instructed by Mr. Board, appeared for the
prosecution, and Mr. Collins for the defendant.
Mr. Begley said that in 1865 Mr. Cannon wanted a loan
of and to obtain it he was introduced by a man
named Jenkyn to the defendant. He offered am security
a power over some money that was in the bands of the
accountant-general in Chancery, and payable to him at
the end of the long vacation. Elworthy required
that he should also give him a lien on two
newspapers of which he was the proprietor, and
that he should make a statutory declamation. A
rough draft of that declaration wee given to Mr.
Cannon to read, and he made several alterations in
it, and amongst them three were important In one
place, where the declaration stated that the papen
were unencumbered, he struck out the word " unencum-
bered ;" in another be struck out " Tool. " and in a
third he struck out the word " registered," where the
declaration described him as the registered proprietor of
the papers. Having made the alterations, Mr. Cannon
was requested to call again by a certain time, and a fair
copy should be made of it. He did call with his wife at
the time appointed, and Elwortby presented him with the
fair copy to sign, telling him that he had copied it him.
self, so that he need not read it. It appeared, however,
that he had reinserted those words that had been struck
out, and Mr. Cannon sod his wife declared to it, believing
it to be a fair copy of the corrected declaration. Sub-
sequently Mr. Cannon was prosecuted for perjury, and
at the police court at Bow-street the defendant swore that
there was a rough draft, but that be had not
got it with him. He, however, undertook to Mr. Flowers
that if he would commit Mr. Cannon he (Elwortby) would
neaten it at the trial. Upon that undertaking, Mr.
Rowers committed him, observing that if the rough draft
contained the alterations Mr. Cannon said it did there
would be an end of the rase. At the trial, however,
Elworthy did not produce the draft, but swore there never
had been a draft, and that he hail never sworn at Bow.
street that there had been a draft. Now, it was clear from
those two oaths that the defendant had committed per-
jury, but he would show that what he swore at Bow-street
was true, and that what be swore at the Central Criminal
Court was false. He (Mr. Beaky) would prove that there
was a draft, that the alterations were made in it, that the
parts struck out were reinserted in the fair copy, that
what the defendant swore at Bow-street was true, and
that at the Old Bailey he committed wilful and corrupt
A great deal of evidence was gone into to support the
charge, and the proceedings were then adjourned.