The Express.
London, England, 1866-10-26 00:00:00

..c4firTß44

(Before Mr. Bairn Pigott.).
THE Lupe wrimco comp/int wit.
In this case, after our report, left yesterday,
Mr. Sediment BeHardin* addrmeed an able and energetic
speech to the jury on behalf of the ddendant, osseending
thet all the difficulties by which he was now surrounded
were attributable to the loose manner in which the di-
rectors bed conducted their businusp, by which the whole
has been cast upon the thdeedent, who had
=palled to take for gran all that the clerks had
chosen to communicate to brim He reminded the jury
that this prosecution had not been institsted by the go-
vernment, shut any person legally entitled to represent
the crown, was at the instance of a body Gelling them-
*elves the Leeds Chamber of Commerce. which be should
have supposed to be a myth, but that it was represented
by the active young gentlemen who so sealocudy instructed
his learned friend (Mr. Keane) on the other aide. Hs
could not but stigmatise the prosecution as being based
upon private malignity towards a man who bad gone
through life with the affectionate esteem and re-
mad of those amidst whom be had lived, and who
knew him best. By the act imputed to him, he could
gain no object or advantage, and it bad not indicted
the slightest injury upon any human being. Thathed been
done by others who might be in that court, but not by
the defendant in the dock. The learned counsel concluded
an eloquent appeal by calling on the jury to return a ver-
dict of acquittal.
Mr. Baron Pigott summed up the evidence with extreme
care and succinctness.
The Jury retired at twenty minutes peat six o'clock, and
after a written ocenuminication from them to the learned
judge, were brought into court.
Mr. Baron Pigott said he had sent for them in eons.-
queues of a written paper they bad sent him requesting to
know whether there was any distinction between the
words " wilful" and " corrupt" perjury. The question
was whether the defendant had sworn the affidavit, well
knowing that the matters it contained were false. In that
case she act was wilful. As to the word corrupt, it fol-
lowed in the same sense as wilful, the object being to de-
ceive the Inland Revenue and to enable his employers
to issue a larger amount of notes than by law they were
entitled to do.
The jury conferred in their box for a sheet
lime,time and at
last returned a verdict of Guilty, with ?them-
mendation to mercy on the ground of his advanced years,
and that the whole management of the affairs of the bank
had been oast upon him by the neglect of the directors.
Mr. Baron Pigott directed the defendant to enter into his
own recovnizances in 1,000/., with two sureties in 500/.
each, to eppear next sessions to receive the judgment of
the court in this indictment if called upon.
The bail was at once entered into, and the defendant
discharged from the dock, leaving the court with a large
body of his friends.
(Before the Recorder.)
TEN CHARGE OP PERITEY AGAINST THE POLICE.

Matthew Hayes and William Barry, two police-constables
of the S division, surrendered to take their trial upon a
charge of having committed wilful and corrupt perjury at
the Marylebone police-court and also at the Middleeex
sessions.
Charles Pearce was examined. He said that he lived
at No. 15. Johnson-street, Somers-town, with his parents,
and was in the service of Mr. John Ivory, a piano-
forte msnufaethrer. On the night of the 30th of August
he was with 11..ney Dye in the Slips, Regent's-park, about
8 o'clock, and they were in company until they were
both taken into custody. He said he would swear posi-
tively that neither he nor Dye were in Gloucester-
crescent on this night, or in the garden of the house
of Mr. Dolman, and they were never nearer to it than the
York and Albany public-house, which was about one
hundred yards off. He was taken into custody by the de-
fendant Barry in Eversholt-street about half-pastl o'clock.
Dye was taken by Hayes. There wag no truth in the state-
ment that he had got overthewall of Mr. Dolman's garden,
and he heard Barry say to Hayes, " Coller him, we may as
well have a couple," and he then took Dye into custody.
The witness detailed the route by which he was taken to
the police-station in Albany-street, and be said he did not
observe that he was followed by any one except one girl,
Phoebe Gine. When he was at the station he asked Hayes
what he was charged with, and he told him to hold his noise,
and he did not know until he was removed from the
cell to be taken to the police court what offence he was
charged with committing. At the police-station ho heard
Dye claim a knife as his property, and witness said that he
had sharpened it for him on the previous day.
In cross-examination this witness said that be had been
in the habit of meeting the girl Glue at the Slips. Glue
was Dye's girl. He was in the habit of seeing other girls
at the place he mentioned, but be did not know that it
was a regular place of assignation for girls and men. The
girl Glue accompanied them the whole of the way to the
police-station. He would swear that the police-sergeant
did not distinctly tell them that they were charged with
being on enclosed ground in Gloucester-crescent, and that
he replied they were never in Gloucester-ereseent, hut
were taken in Everabolt-street. He had been at the
Stationers'Armspublic-borne on this night with some other
young men, and Plicebe Glue was also there with them.
The witness afterwards said that ho did not mean to
state that he was at the Stationers' Arms, but that be
meant the Camden Stores. He said he was also at the
Regalia public-house in the same neighbourhood on this
night, and Dye and three other young men were with him.
After they left the Regalia, they went to the York and
Albany, and then to the Camden Stores.
Henry Dye, the other young man, gave similar evidence
to that of the last witness. He said be lived at Bale-place,
Camden-town, with his relations, and had been for two
years in the employment of Mr. Burton, a plumber. He
went on to say that ho was with Pearce from half-past
7 on the evening in question until they were both
taken into custody, and he denied in the most
positive manner that there was any foundation for the
charge that was noule against them. He said that Phohe
Glue was a respectable girl living with her mother. and he
had known her for eight months. She (
rejoined thm about
8 o'clock to go and see her brother, and she them
about 12 o'clock. The witness admitted that they had
been to several public-houses, and that about 12 o'clock
there was a " bit of a row," and some men wanted him
and Pearce to fight, and it MILS about this time that they
first saw the two policemen, Hayes and Barr 7, and they
ordered them to move on, using a slang expression. When
this occurred, he and one of his companions ran away, and
rejoined Pearce and two othets, and the girl Glue, at the
corner of High-street, and as they were wishing each
other good night they saw the two constables get into a
Hansom cab and drive off. He was then about to go home,
and when he got into Eversholt-street, Hayes knocked
him down, and he heard him say to Barry, " Collar him,
we may as well have a couple," and he laid hold of Pearce
immediately. This witness also confirmed the statement
that had been made by Pearce that, when they inquired
at the polioe-station what they were charged with, they
were told to hold their tongues, and that they would know
in the morning.
Cross-examined—He did not hear any one say at the
police-station that they were charged with being on
enclosed ground in Gloucester-crescent for the purpose
of committing a robbery, and if anything of the sort had
been said, he thought he must have heard it. He went to
the Slips on this night to meet the girl Glue, and he had
been in the habit of doing so. He was not aware that
Pearce met any girl on this evening. He said be forgot
whether Pearce said at the police-station that they had not
been at Gloueester-crescent,but they had been in Evenholt-
street.
William Gregory was then called to prove that be was in
company with Dye and Pearce and a young man named
Blackburn, and another named Potts, and the girl Ph.ebe
Glue. He met them in the Slips, and was with Dye and
Pearce until they were taken into custody, and he swore
positively that they were at no time nearer to Gloucester-
crescent than the York and Albany, and that he saw them
taken into custody in Everaholt-street.
This witness admitted in cross-examination that be was
in the constant habit of going to the Slips in the Regent's-
park of an evening, and that he and the other young men
went to several public-houses on this night.
Phorbe Glue, a young girl about sixteen years old, and
who stated that she lived with her mother, who was a
laundress, said she was with Dye and Pearce on
this night about eight o'clock, and left them to go and see
her brother-in-law. She joined them again at half-
peat eleven, and was with them until they were taken
into custody, and she said she was sure they were not at
any time near G'oncester-crescent. The witness went on
to say that the reason why she was not examined as a
witness at the Middlesex Sorrions was that she was ill.
Cross-examinee:Witness's own father was dead, and
her mother was married again. She bad quarrelled with
her father-in-law, but she had never been locked out all
night by him. Her father-in-law had been angry with her
for stopping out so late at night. She was generally
at home by 12 o'clock at night. She knew a girl named
Rachel and another named Lotty, and she frequently saw
them at the Slips, and had talked to them. She also knew
a girl named Scotchy, and she believed that she was
Pearce's girl. After some hesitation the witness said
that it sometimes happened that she and the other girls
went away for a idlers time, and then rejoined Pearce and
Dye and the others. She would swear that she had
never been ordered by the park-keepers to leave the park.
She had not been to the Slips since the defendants had
been committed. The witness then contradicted herself,
and said that she bad met Dye and Pearce at the Slips,
once since they were acquitted at the sessions. She did
not know whose young lady Scotchy or Rachel was. (A
laugh.) She had a latch-key to let herself in with at her
own house.
By the Recorder—Her mother allowed her to have the
latch-key in order that she might let herself in when she
went of errands.
George Potts, who, like the other witnesses that had
been examined, appeared to be about eighteen years of age,
was then examined, but Lis evidenee was merely to the
effect that on the night in question Dye and Pearce did not
leave his company, and that they were not at fry time
near Giousester-crescent.
In cross-examination the witness said that he bad not
get a young woman of his own. (A laugh.) He was in the
habit of seeing Dye and Pearce. but be did not remember
hearing them say after their acquittal that they would have
a turn at or " do" the police.
Leonard Blackburn another young led, gave similar tes-
timony to that of the previous witnesses wish ragard to