The Sun.
London, England, 1864-11-14 00:00:00

MIT —Viceroy beat AUFdyomene.
BATTLESFIELD HANDICAP.

Catalogue .. 1
Concordia. ...
Forester ..

Nne ran.
QUEEN'S PLATE.

Dr Syntax
Oldminster
Grosvenor

Eight ran.
SHOBDON COURT STAKES,

Birdfinder ......
Attraction
Persuasion
Sawn ran.
ABBEY HANDICAP.

Warrior
Antidote
Hawkshaw

Six ran,
NURSERY HANDICAP.

Sidewind
Leoville

Eleven ran.

A Town Councillor Charged with Perjury.

At the Salford Town-hall, yesterday, IV. A. Jenner, iron
merchant, Chapel-street, Salford, was charged with having
committed wilful and corrupt perjury. The prosecutor was
Samuel Platt, boiler maker, Adelphi, Salford. The defen-
dant holds two public offices, one as a representative in the
Salford Council of Trinity Ward, and the other as guardian

of the Salford Union,—Mr Ernest Jones, who appeared

For the prosecutor, said that the alleged offence was emu-

mitted in the Salford Court of Record on March 1, 1861, in
an action in which Mr Jenner was the pl aintiff and Mr
Platt the defendant. Mr S. Platt, the prosecutor, said that
in May, 1859, he sent one of his men, named Lyons, to the
defendant's works to obtain a foot of inch and a half square
cast steel. Lyons brought a piece of double sheer steel,
about seven or eight feet long, Complainant cut off a foot
and sent the bar beck. The following day he returned
the foot also, after finding that it did not suit his purpose,
but the defendant refused to receive it. Witness had
a dispute about some circular plates he bought from
the defendant, and the matter was referred to Mr Mather,
of the firm of Messrs Mather and Platt, who decided that
the price should be reduced. With respect to this decision,
defendant said to witness, "You have done me this time;
and it will be my turn next;" and, about the 30th of Juno,
1859, ho sent an invoice containing item of credit for the bar
of steel, as returned, but the invoice contained an error, and
it was sent back to the defendant. 'Witness also received a
second invoice, in which was shown a balance of £1 17s 43,
the item of credit being omitted, and he offered Si 17s 4d to
discharge the claim. Defendant refused to accept this as
payment in full, said that the bar had not been received by
him, and obtai9ed a writ in the Salford Court of Record.
Before the trial, witness paid £3 3s 81 into Court. At the
trial, the defendant swore that neither he nor any of his
servants had received the steel. The Judge, in summing
up, said that there had been perjury on one side or the
other ; and he went so far as to order the witness Lyons
not to leave the Court. A verdict was found for Mr
Jenner, and witness had to pay the amount of the claim.
After the trial, witness said, " You know you have got
that steel,' to the defendant, who then produced a bit of
paper, and said, This is for the double shear, and as you
have seen it tear it up." Witness did so, end did not see
defendant afterwards. In 1862, Mr Astley,t elerk,!who was

in defendant's service at the t,me the alleged perjury was
committed, gave witness two invoices. Mr Mather had pro-
mised to stand ty him with £5OO, in order to sea publics
justice done to him, and had enabled him to carry out these
proceedings.—Thomas Lyons said that ho was in the pro-
secutor's service in 18.59, and that he took the long bar,
after a foot had been cut off, to the defendant's works. A
man named Miller weighed it, and witness left it there,
Witness was present at the trial in the Court of Record,
and was requested by the judge not to leave the court,—W,
T. M. Astley said he was an auctioneer at the King's
Head, and that up to February, 1862, he was in defendant's
employ. In the second invoice, dated the 30th September,
IS6O, produced, the item of credit for the bar of steel was
omitted. Witness prepared the invoice, and copied the
items from the defendant's j.urnal, The item of credit

was omitted because it was entered amongst other
similar items at the end of the book. On the day before the
action in the Court of Record was brought, the defendant
asked if the bar had been returned. 'Witness examined
the country ledger, produced, and found the item of credit
for the bar of steel returned. Mr Benner asked, "How
can it be done," and upon witness saying that he did not
know, the defendant took a penknife and cut the leaf con..
taining the item of credit out of the book. The defendant
afterwards sent the book to a binder, had a facsimile leaf
inserted, and directed witness and another clerk, named

Heywood, to copy all the entries except the item of credit
for the steel. This was done. The book thus tampered
with was produced at the trial, the following day, when the
item of credit did not appear in it, and the defendant there
swore that the bar had not been returned. In cross exami,
nation by Mr Leresche, witness said that if he stated in the
Court of Record "had the steel been returned, I should

have known it, or that the steel had not been returned," he
was " subordinated.' to say it by the defendant, whom he
was compelled to obey. Witness knew what he swore
on that occasion was not true. The presiding magistrate
(Mr Trafford) : Did everyone in Mr Jenner's commit
perjury? Witness—Yes, all of us, because we were
bound. Mr John Beardsall said he was in the employ
of Mr J. Clarke, bookbinder, Kennedy-street, when
some cue from the defendant's service brought a bock
in which a new leaf was placed. The day-book iroduceu
had been altered since it was first bcund. He had exa-
mined it. In the first instance, he observed that a section
projected beyond the others. He opened the book and
found that section had been removed, and replaced.
There was a trifling difference in the colour of the new
paper that had been introduced, and the name of the
maker in the water mark was also different from the rest
of the book. Witness also examined the journal produced,
and found that several pages had been removed from the
end of the book.—William Rogerson, salesman, said ho
was formerly in the defendant's employ. On the morn-
ing before the trial, the defendant instructed witness
to transfer the plaintiff's account from the town to
the country ledger. Witness saw the witness Astley
with sonnthing in his hand on the morning after the
trial, which he said were the old leaves which had been
cut out of a book, add;ng that Mr Jenner would look a
bonny when the prison van came for him. Astley
also said that he could transport the detendent if he did
not suit him. While, the Judge was considering the ver-
dict, Astley said to witness in the Court of Record, " What
a shame it is; we have actually taken the leaves out of the
day-book to make it appear as if the steel had never been
returned." Witness asked him to tell him all about it ; and
Astley continued. " Yesterday, we went upstairs to get up
the evidence: We examined the beaks and found is the
day-book the entry relating to the steel, with a mark against
it, end I pointed it out. Mr Jenner then said, we may as
well give the case up; I said, we can alter it,' took hold
of the leaf, and before Mr Jenner could hinder me, I tore
it out. J enner then s lid, Oh I Astley, you have ruined
me ; it is a very serious case, and you do not know what
may be the consequences.' I said that I would get it
put right, and I went to Clarke's with it."—John Hay-
ward, a nephew of the defendant, said that Mr Astley took
the day-book to Clarke's. Witness assisted in copy-
ing Mr Platt's account from the old pages. Every
item was copied, and what was omitted was only the mark
that was made against the item of credit.—Mr Leresche
was proceeding to speak for the defence, when the presid-
ing Magistrate, Mr Trafford, said that he should be guilty
of a great dereliction of duty if he did not send the case to
a jury, and the defendant was, therefore, cemmited for trial
at the assizes. He would be admitted to bail.