The Sun.
London, England, 1864-06-11 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENI

Manchester would be most grateful to the noble lord for
this propcsal.
Mr BAINES said that all the mercantile interests of the
country would heartily approve of the vote.
Mr CRAWFORD said his constituents in the City of
London unanimously declared for the proposal.
Mr Matins, Mr Marsh, Mr M. Smith, and 31r Cox like-
wise strongly supported the motion.
Sir F. BARING, as the Chancellor of the Exchequer in
the days when Sir Rowland Hill's plans were sanctioned
by Parliament, testified to the great pleasure which he
felt at the announcement of the proposal of Government.
(Hear, hear.)
Mr NEATE, as the private secretary of the right hon.
baronet at the period to which he had just adverted,
reminded the house that they ought not to forget the part
which the right hon. gentleman acted in giving effect to
the suggestions of Sir Rowland Hill. (Hear, hear.)
Mr HENNESSY asked how it happened that Sir Row.
land Hill had never filled other than a subordinate office
in the department with which he had been connected ?
He ventured to suggest that if there was a place in the
Government not directly connected with finance, that ought
to have been given to Sir Rowland Hill, that place was the
office of Postmaster General. In any other country, per-
haps, the services of Sir Rowland Hill would have been
requited in that manner.
Lord PALMERSTON—Sir, there are two very good
reasons why I think it would have been no benefit to Sir
Rowland Hill to have been made Postmaster General. He
would have had no increase of salary while he held the
office, and he would have had to go out with the Govern-
ment. (Laughter.) I just wish to answer one observation
made by the hon. gentleman. He said he did not believe
the Post-office paid its expenses. Now the net revenue of
the Post-office for the year 1863 was £1,793,000, after pay-
ing expenses.
Mr D. GRIFFITH was surprised that the practice had
sprung up of appointing peers to an office that was of a
strictly commercial and mechanical character, and he wished
for information on the subject.
Mr J. WHITE said while the noble lord told the house
that the Post-office paid to the revenue £1,700,000, he had
forgotten that the packet service, which cost £1,000,000, was
a legitimate charge on the Post-office. We therefore derived
only £700,000 from the Post-office. He did not say this in
disparagement of Sir Rowland Hill, but he thought the
mistake ought not to pass uncorrected. He should cordially
support the vote.
The vote was then agreed to without o dicooutiont
On the rota of C 66,513 fur the expenses of the Board of
Trade and subordinate departments,
Mr A. SMITH and Mr WILLIAMS complained of the in-
crease in the estimate.
Mr N. GIBSON said the increase arose from a desire to
make the department more efficient. It was also attributable
to the increase of business received by the Board of Trade
from the Admiralty in connection with harbours, and to the
annual increase of the salaries of the clerks. Several places
which were vacant had not been filled up. The increase
arose from increased business of the department, and the
change of organisation had improved its efficiency. He
expressed his belief that it would be a great pity if Admiral
Fitzroy's department should be given up, until further
experience showed whether it was desirable to continue
permanently the expenditure for meteorological purposes.
Colonel DICKSON had witnessed the accident at Egham,
and had seen two men die from want of some apparatus like
tools and ropes to extricate them from the rains of the
crushed carriages. He suggested that such appliances should
be attached to all trains.
Mr COX moved te report progress.
Mr M. GIBSON ex; lained that the powers of the inspec-
tors were limited ; but no doubt the remark of the hen, and
gallant member would lead to some such precaution being
adopted.
The motion to report progress was negatived, and the
vote agreed to.
The next vote was one of £2,908 to pay the salaries and
expenses of the office of Lord Privy Seal.

Mr COX said after twelve o'clock they ought not to pro-
ceed with supply, and again moved to report progress.
The opmmittee divided—
For the motion....
Against it 59
Majority
The vote was agreed to.
The next vote, of £8,741 for the Civil Service Commis-
sion, was agreed to.

£19,491 was next proposed for the Paymaster-General's
Department.

The vote was agreed to, and the house resumed.
The report on Lady Elgin's Annuity was brought up and
agreed to, and leave given to found a bill thereon.
The report of the Greek Loan of £4,000 was brought up
and agreed to after some discussion, and leave given to bring
in a bill.

WEIGHING OF GRAIN (PORT OF LONDON)
BILL.
Mr CRAWFORD, on resuming the adjourned debate on
the second reading of this bill, proposed that if the house
agreed to the second reading, he would consent to have the
bill referred to a select committee upstairs.
Colonel DICKSON moved the adjournment of the
debate.

Mr AYRTON supported the amendment.
Mr Alderman ItOSE was proceeding to address the house
in support of the bill, and against the adjournment of the
debate,'when

Mr A YRTON rose to order, and directed the attention
of the Speaker to the circumstance that there were not forty
members present.

The right hon. gentleman, having counted the house,
ascertained that there were only thirty members present,
and SO the house stood adjourned at one o'cloek.

CHARGE OF CONSPIRACY,

Yesterday Emile Werner, a Frenchman, aged 27, residing
at Richmond, and who had been arrested on a warrant, was
brought before Alderman Hale at the Justice-room of the
I Mansion-house, charged with conspiring with others to de-
fraud Messrs Legrand, Tanco, and Co., bankers and mer.
chants in Paris, of goods of the value of from £25,000 to
£30,000. Gustave Lheman, one of the persons with whom
the prisoner is accused of conspiring, is now in custody on a
charge of forging bills of exchange to the amount of £4,300
and upwards, under circumstances which were partly stated
in evidence at the Mansion-house police-court on Wednes-
day, and one Arend and others not in custody are the other
parties alleged to be implicated in the charge of conspiracy.
Mr Lewis, jun., conducted the examination, having first
related the circumstances under which the charge of con-
spiracy was preferred, as they were afterwards proved in
evidence. The parties, he said, accused both of the alleged
conspiracy and of the forgeries, were all foreigners, and the
case against the prisoner Werner bad this peculiar aggrava-
tion, that he was a confidential servant of the firm whom he
was accused of conspiring to defraud. He acted as their
agent in London for the sale of merchandise, principally
silks, in which capacity he received a salary of £2OO, with a
commission, which probably increased it to £6OO or £7OO. His
principals were persons of long standing and great respecta-
bility in the city of Paris, and they had given him almost
unlimited power to purchase goods for them in the French
markets, but had charged him, under no circumstances, to
dispose of them in London to any but houses of established
repute, or without consulting certain gentlemen of commer-
cial eminence in the City of London whom they named, and
to whom they themselves had been long known. Mr Lewis
then, in some detail, stated the manner in which the prisoner
was alleged to have lent himself, in spite of those injunctions,
to defraud his employers in a couple of months of that large
amount of property, acting for that purpose with persons
whom he designated as swindlers, and who had afterwards
sold part of it at 50 per cent. less than the invoice price, and
had pledged the rest with money changers. He adverted to
the importance of such a case to a commercial community
like that of the city of London, and he bespoke the earnest
attention of the Bench to the circumstances which would
be given in evidence.

Mr Nicolas Tanco Anger°, whom he called, said—l am
one of the firm of Legrand, Tanco, and Co., of 11, Ruo
Bergere, Paris, bankers and merchants, In May, 1863, the
prisoner Werner was introduced to me in Paris, and very
highly recommended by an old established house, and we
engaged him to act as our agent in London, at a salary of
from 4,000 f, to 5,000 f., besides a commission of 1 per cent.
on the sales he effected, and the payment of all expenses
connected with the trade. We took an office in Cheapside,
and I directed him to proceed to London, to take with him
samples of all our different commodities and goods, princi-
pally silks, and to endeavour to trade with some of the best
houses, a list of which was handed to him. Before trans-
mitting orders, however, to us, he was to consult with a
few respectable firms in the city to whom we introduced
him as to the commercial standing and respectability of the
parties. I presented him myself to some of those houses for
that especial purpose. We told him, moreover, that he was
to send us a monthly report of his sales and accounts, and
to keep his accounts by double entry, and in other respects
according to the usages of commerce. Between May and
December of last year the pi isoner did very little business.
I requested him by letter in December to furnish us with an
account of his operations. He came to Paris in the begin-
ning of January last, and represented to the that business had
begun to be promising, and that he had come with two buyers
connected with respectable houses in London. I asicCd him
to introduce them to me as I wanted to see them, but he de-
clined, on the ground that they were busy, and could not
come to our office. He did noc then tell me who they were.
I had not asked their names. In the beginning of February
last I came to London, and the prisoner then told me they
Were
Lheman and M. Arend. I directed him to inquire
as to their solv,_ney. When he called on mo in Paris in
Luosnidnoenal
business b
le through required
the to have
an
(l a
tlhaartg eh
e stock
must
vhean itd i
be-
fore the spring, as the London "season" would begin then,
In January
I gave him directions to go to Lyons and Switz-
erland to purchase silk goods, He went, and there and in
Paris he bought goods on our account to the amount of
frcm £25,000 to X 30,000. He had unlimited power to buy.
Those goods were all sent to our office in Cheapside, and
before they could have arrived the prisoner, as our agent
there, was disposing of them as fast as possible. They
consisted of silks principally, of the value of about £16,000,
about £2,000 worth of plush, some £2,000 worth of leather,
and cotton goods to the amount of about £6,000. That is a

rough calculation. He appears to have ordered everything
that he was likely to realize in money. The goods were
purchased at the best manufactories, and on very advan-
tageous terms. I have since paid for all of them except a
few trifles. So lately as Saturday last I paid about £3,000
in respect of them. It having come to our knowledge that
a quantity of leather of a peculiar kind had been offered for
sale to Messrs. Bevington, of Cannon-street, at an ex-
tremely low price, our suspicions were excited, and my
partner wrote to the prisoner on the sth February charging
him to observe the greatest caution with regard to the houses
with which he dealt, and to have no transactions with any
one unless he had a satisfactory reference. Believing the
goods offered at such low prices to Messrs. Bevington were
some which the prisoner had disposed of to other parties who
had not paid for them, the prisoner was directed to go imme-
diately to Messrs. Bevington's, and to take a lien on them,
requesting them at the same time not to pay to the sellers
until we ourselves had been paid. Just before that the
prisoner had written to us stating he had sold all his goods.
It was not from him that we had heard the leather had
been offered to Messrs. Bevington at low prices. Up to
sold
January last the prisoner had not furnished us with the
m e
buyers, and we had then not the least
idea
goods to Lheman or Arend. We
expected his customers would] have been large respectable
nas
that of
he h hads
houses. lat once came to London, arriving on Feb. 7. I
saw the prisoner and spoke to him about the goods offered
to Messrs. Bevington. He replied that the buyers with
whom he had dealt always paid him beforehand, and that
there was nothing to fear. He explained that the leather
had been offered to Messrs. Bevington with the view only of
proving that it had not been bought too dearly at Paris. I
believe Messrs. Bevington did not buy any of it. On Feb.
8, I learned the names of his buyers from the prisoner. I
asked him for a list of all his buyers and the amounts they
owed. I put down abotia dozen names, and among them
those of Lheman and Arend. I made inquiries, and with
respect to those two, having been told that they were not
worth £2OO, I told him he was not to trust them for any fur-
ther amount. He said he would not, but at the same time
he was sure they would pay to the last farthing. Hs said he
had known Lheman for many years in Paris, that he was
very honest, and that M. Devaux, a French banker in Lon-
don had recommended him. He told me he had seen Lhe-
man receive £9,000 in exchange for a packet of bills. He
said also that Lhetaan had introduced him to Arend. He
afterwards stated that a man named Leo had introduced him
to Arend. I saw Leo outside the police-station when Lheman
was given into custody. I had looked at the prisoner's books,
and, finding them in a state of the greatest confusion, I
begged him to employ a bookkeeper at once. The prisoner
replied that it was very difficult to find one in London, but
that he had spoken to a Belgian whom he knew, and should
shortly have the advantage of his services. Before returning
to Paris I saw Lheman (who is now in custody on a charge
of forgery), and told him it was necessary we should have
some settlement of the large amount he owed us—£6,ooo
or £7,ooo—and that we must draw on him for part of the
debt. lie said he was a great merchant, that he had sent
consignments to different pa its of the world, especially
the Cape and the Mauritius. He said he had sent many
goods to Australia, and that he had written to all parts ask-
ing for money more than £2o,ooo—but that none had yet
arrived. He at first objected to our drawing bills upon him,
but at last consented that we should do so for £2,000, adding
that he would pay the remainder in May. The prisoner was
then present, and heard all the conversation. After we had
left Lheman's office he sail he regretted very much that I
had made that arrargemeat with Lheman, because he was
sure I would have teen paid the whole debt by the middle
of April. This was on the Bth of February, and I gave
directions to the prisoner that Lheman was to have no fur-
ther credit until he paid what he owed. Lheman was at
that time occupying two small rooms on a first floor at 140,
Fencheurch-street, end I only saw one man there as a clerk,
poorly dressed. When we came out the prisoner, observing
that I was not satiated with his having given such large
credit to a person so circumstanced, said I was not to judge
by appearance, for Lheman was a partner in one of the first
houses in London. The prisoner did not afterwards tell me
that on that vary day, Feb. 8, he had supplied to Lheman
£2,128 worth of goods, and on the 11th £796 worth, or nearly
£3,000 worthein all, contrary to my express instructions,
There is no entry inhis bock of those goods having been
supplied, or any of tlem. Oct the 9th I meet Arend at my
office in Cheapside, tie prisoner observing that he wished
to afford me the pleasure of his acquaintance as one of his
principal customers. On that occasion Arend said he bought
large quantities of gods of other London houses for con-
signment, but that le certainly preferred our houses because
we were Selling him goods on very advantageous terms.
(A. laugh.) He added that he was waiting for some silks
that had been ordend for him by Mr Werner (the pri-
soner) from Lyons. these orders were stopped by us at once,
and the prisoner blaned us very much for having done so.
Arend said he had iitended to ship the goods to different
countries. I told lim, however, that we could not sell
him any more, and hat he must settle his accounts in the
same manner as other customers—by bills that we
should draw upon lim at once. He then owed us £5,000
or £6,000. He pronieed to accept a bill for £2,000. The
day after this intervew, though I had told the prisoner not
to give Arend creditfor a tingle farthing more, he supplied
Arend with goods t 4 the amount of £1,179, On Feb. 14 I
returned from Parte., and between that time and the 20th
prisoner forwarded lo me there acceptances of Arend for
£3,000, of Lheman for £3,000, and of a man named Lindner,
whom Lheman had ncommended to me, for £1,200. Those
bills were payable inApril, but we returned them to him on
Feb. 20, on the ground that we had found it impossible to
negotiate them. In an accompanying letter we charged the
prisoner not to give trecht to Lheman and Co., Arend, or to
Lindner for a.greatr sum than £500; and that to justify
risks of considerablesums they must be incurred only with
respectable houses, yell• established, and whose acceptances
we should find no difficulty in negotiating. On Feb. 23 the
prisoner wrote us a Dtter, in which he said " I an, going to
tell you what I have done. Arend has plenty of money, but
he does not wish t' pay any yet. His reason is that he
wants some more htods, and seeing clearly that we dont
wish to give him more credit he does not see why he should
pay. Lheman says the same. They all reply thus to my
questions, 'Do yot think we have thousands of pounds
sterling to give youevery time you ask ?' For the future
I will conform in at parts to your instructions, and as re-
gards the present 1 close the credit with these men."
That letter was written by the prisoner on Feb. 23, and
betwen Feb. 27 and March 8 he supplied Arend, unknown
to us, with £7,000 north of goods. On the 15th or 16th
of March I returned to London. and had all the prisoner's
books made up byan accountant. I found that Lheman
was indebted to us to the amount of £12,000, though the
prisoner's books on .y showed from £B,OOO to £lO,OOO. As
soon as I arrived I told the prisoner that I wanted to see if
Lheman could ray his bill for £2,000 due on the
2d of April. He said Lheman had positively pro-
mised to pay him from £4,000 to £5,000 in a few days.
The day the prisoner told me that I received a letter from
our house in Paris stating that a gentlemen named Devaux
had called there arid said that Lheman was not able to
he
meet his bill. I afterwards saw Lheman, when he said
of
could not pay, but if I would renew the bill until the 2dJune he would meet it then. I did not accede to that re-
quest, and told:hun he must give us security
forthe
took
sum
he owed us, upon which he opened his iron chest, and
out a lot of bills of exchange for about £3,000,
which he
handed to me, and which I have since found to be worth-
less.and
The bills have now been paid, though overdue,
Lheman still owes me £12,000. Ho is now in
iin custody
on a charge of uttering five of these bills, anions gto
£4,393 odd, knowing them to be forged.
Mr Lewis applied to lava the prisoner remanded, ob-
serving that his client, M. Tanco Amero, in instituting
this prosecution had not the slightest expectation of getting
a single shilling of his money back, and that he was solely
animated by public considerations, having regard to the
protection of commerce.
•Mr Wontner, jun., for the prisoner, said he hoped on a
future occasion to be Was to give an entirely different com-
plexion to this matter.

Mr Alderman Hale, replying that it would be up-hill
work, remanded the prisoner, and peremptorily refused to
entertain an application to admit him to bail inthe interim.

Crystal Palace—Projected Thames Tunne:

Railway,

Mr Bowley,"general
manager From eovfi d
thee n c
Co r
ygivenp9aleasetee
before Lord Stanley's com-
e had been opened (on the
a:hbayt during that period it
persons, exclusive of the cora •
previousmitt e , i t
day)
)eaerxeade
exactly
tte the e
years;paladc
had been visited by 15,266,912
pany's staff, exhibitors, and their assistants, &c., which
would have brought the numbers up to nearly seventeen
millions and a half.
Mr Bowley's evidence also went to show that although
there had been a considerable increase in the population of
the north-east of London, according to the last census, it
had been much larger in the southern districts. He in-
stanced Penge as having, between 1851 and 1861, increased
329 per cent., Sydenham 135 per cent., and Plumstoad and
Charlton 150 per cent,,
Mr Bowley's evidence further went to show that a junc-
tion between the north and south of London, east of Lon-
don-bridge—such as was proposed by the Tunnel line —was
an absolute necessity ; and that it would be a great boon to
the inhabitants of the poorer districts lying to the north and
north-cast of the metropolis. 3 _

It also transpired in evidence, that in addition to the pre-
sent communication with the palace via Kensington, Vic-
toria, and London-bridge stations, that the high level line
now forming in front of the palace would be open for traffic
by the let of May next year, when, by arrangement with the
South-Eastern hallway and other companies, direct access
to the palace would also be had from Blacariars, Cannon-
street, Charing-cross, and whole the system of main lines of
the:South-Eastern and South-Western companies.

' Mr Bowley pointed out to the committee that the promo.
tion of these lines and junctions had very much occupied
his attention during the past six years, and that he regarded
the formation of the present proposed line, crossing the
river by means of the Thames Tunnel,.'as:the completion of
a perfect system of metropolitan and provincial communica-
tion with the Crystal Palace, and that by these means all
the great lines would have direct access to it, and the in-
convenience of the present termini both in London and at
the Crystal Palace might be obviated, and any number of
persons might visit the palace on crowded days in comfort
and safety,