The Sun.
London, England, 1864-09-15 00:00:00

POLICE INTELLIGENCE—Sept. 14,

MANSION HOUSE. CHARGE or PERJURY.—
Gustave Stoven appeared before Mr Alderman Waterlow,
on remand, clamed upon a summons with having com-
mitted wilful and corrupt perjury.
Mr Besley appeared to prosecute, and Mr Wontner was
for the prisoner.

The circumstances under which the charge was brought
against the prisoner were given fully upon the last examina-
tion, and it will be remembered that the charge of perjury
was contained in an affiJa.vit which was made and sworn
to by the defendant, stating that he knew a Mr Franken-
heim, and had had a conversation with him, and he had
expressed his intention of leaving the country for Paris,
and that ho believed Mr Frankenheim was about to leave
England. Upon this affidavit a capias was issued against
Mr Frankenheim, at the suit of Mr Bailey, a stock-
broker. The prisoner, from his own statement, acknow-
edged having signed the document, but said he did not
know its nature. It will be remembered that the names
of Mr Bradlaugh, managing clerk to Mr. Leveson, a
solicitor in Bishopsgato, and Bailey, were mentioned in
connection with the charge,

Yesterday Mr. Besley said ho thought that under the
Vexatious Indictment Act the magistrate was empowered
to bind the defendant over to appear to answer any charge
that might be made against him, and not bind over any one
to prosecute, bat leave the Government to prosecute if it
thought fit.
This, however, was overruled by Mr Oaky.
Mr Bealey said he wished to call the defendant as a
witness in another case, and if there were no case made
out against the prisoner in this case, the charge could not
be supported in the case which was about to come before
the court.

Mr Alderman Waterlow said, taking into consideration
th 9 defence set up by Mr Wontner, he was willing to deal
leniently with the prisoner, and should discharge him.
Charles Edward Bailey, stockbroker, Royal Exchange-
buildings, and C has, Bradlaugh, articled clerk to MrLeveson,
soolicitor, at 66, Bishopsgate, then appeared in answer to a
summons charging them with having unlawfully, wickedly,
and maliciously conspired and combined together to suborns
and induce one Gustave Stoven to swear to a certain false
affidavit, and to deceive one of her Majesty's judges of the
Court of Queen's Bench.

Mr Besley prosecuted ; Mr Lever appeared for Mr Bailey ;
and Mr Bradlaugh defended himself.
The principal evidence that was taken was that of Gus-
tave Stoven, which corresponded precisely with the state-
ment already made by him, and was to the effect that
a man named Duffman told him he could raise £lO, and
on his asking him how, replied, "By making an affidavit."
Duffman took him on the 23th August to Hercules-court,
and pointed out Mr Frankenheim, and told him that he
had become bankrupt, and had sent large sums of money
away, and himself was going to leave the country. Ho
(Stoven) said he could not help his going away, and Duff-
man said he could earn £lO, and then ho could not go.
He saw Duffman and a man named Cruchkey the next
morning, and they told him the money would have to be
divided. He did not understand what he was to do, and
hesitated, and Cruchkey said there was some one else who
would do it. They told him he would only have to sign
his name, and asked him to go with them to Bishops-
gate-street and he should receive £3. He went with
them to Mr Leveson's cffice at about half-past
eleven o'clock. He said Mr Bradlaugh asked him
if he knew Mr Frankenheim, and he told him he saw him
on the previous day, when Mr Duffman pointed him out to
him. Mr Bradlaugh asked him if he knew Frankenheim
was about to leave the country. He hesitated, and Duffman
nudged him and said, " It's all right." He (witness) said,
"No." Mr Bradlaugh told him he need not be frightened
as there was no harm to be done, and it was only a matter
of form. He told him to go again in half-an-hour. He went
again shortly afterwards by himself, but the papers were not
ready for him. lie saw Duffman and Cruchkey at the door,
and afterwards went into the dike with them. They had to
wait a little while. Tw ) papers were afterwards brought to
him to sign, and ho di I so. Mr Hew h, the commissioner,
entered directly he did so, and asked him if that was his
signature, and said some words similar to the oath he had
taken as witness; but he did not ask him if he knew the
contents. Cruchkey then went into Mr Bradlaugh's office,
and came out with some money in his hand. Ile gave
Duffman £2, him (witness) £3, and had .L. 5 for himself. The
witness said the hill lavit was not read over to him, and he
did not know the contents_ When asked by Mr Bradlaugh
if ho knew where Fraukenheirn was going to, Dairinansaia
to Paris, and he (witness) repeated, " To Paris."
Mr Bradlaugh cross-examined this witness at very con-
siderable length, apparently with a view to establish in his
defence that the charge against him was a conspirac3 ; but
nothing material was elicited to favour such a result, and

The, case was adjourned, after having lasted nearly five
hours.

Extraordinary Case at Guildford,

Yesterday, at the Magistrates' Clerk's office, Guildford,
before the Mayor, I'. W. Jacob, Esq., and J, Neale, Esq.,
borough magistrates, Robt, llannam M.D.. Ph.D.,
F.C.S., &c., was charged with threatening to shoot Mr
Marmaduke Wilkie. The defendant is well known in the
scientific world as the successful inventor of a process for
converting the fibre of straw into a pulp capable of being
manufactured hate all kinds of paper, and at the Interna-
tional Exhibition of 1863 received the only prize medal
and special mention for superiority of process in the treat-
ment of raw vegetable substances. The complainant is a
papermaker, residing at Stoke-next-Guildford. The case
excited great interest.
The complainant deposed—l live at Laurel Villa, Stoke-
road. Yesterday I was at Mr Elkins's office, in Great St.

Helen's, London. The defendant came in to see Mr Elkins
on business. I was in an outer office at the time, and pre-
sently was called in to disprove something which the de-
fendant had said. He threatened to print and publish a
libel on my mother. I told him that if he did so I should
consider it my duty to give him a good horsewhipping.
Upon this the defendant jumped up in a violent passion and
called me a great many names. I rushed up to him and we
closed. He put a finger to one of my eyes and tried to gouge
it out. lie also tried to bite my nese. I struck him, and
defended myself as well as I could. We were eventually
separated by a person whom Mr Elkins called in. The de-
fendant then said, " I will go and buy a six-shooter this
afternoon and have your life, and the lives of all the --
Wilkins." This was about half past 12. I left the office
and went out for a walk. I came down to Guildford by the 5
o'clock train from London. The defendant was in the same
train, but not in the same carriage, and when we got out in
the station yard ho called out to me, " I am ready for you
this evening ; I have got it ? I supposed he meant the
revolver. He followed me through the town to the corner
of the Commercial-road, all the way making use of threat-
ening and abusive language and the most dreadful oaths.
He lett me in the Commercial-road, and I went home.
The defendant briefly cross-examined the complainant,
but the facts of the case as deposed to remained unaltered.

The complainant handed in a letter, which he alleged the
defendant had sent to his house, and would explain the
origin of the quarrel ; but the magistrates considered it
foreign to the investigation.

The defendant, in answer to the charge, said ho had no
recollection of making use of the words imputed to him
concerning the pistol, Ile denied that he had any intention
in any way to injure the complainant, to whom, however,
he considered himself quite equal without the aid of a
pistol; but when the complainant spoke of " chastising"
and "horsewhipping" him, as a man of honour he felt
himself bound to resent the affront, and if the magistrates
thought that ho ought quietly to submit to such an indig-
nity, then he was guilty ; but he reiterated that ho had not
the most remote intention of doing the complainant any
bodily injury.
The magistrate decided that the charge was proved, and
ordered the defendant to find one surety of £5O, and to be
bound over himself in the same amount, to keep the peace
towards the complainant for six months.
The defendant entered into the required security, and th 3
parties then left the court.

Foreign Mail Packet List.