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

__________
SPORTING INTELLIGENCE— This Day,

SHREWSBURY RACES-THIS DAY.
BY ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH,
RACING PLATE.

......
...... 2
. 3
. . ......
IFP
I reuoi rgcrena:hl ar
...............
Four. ran.

Mk.T,n—Viceroy beat Anadyoniene.
BATTLESFIELD HANDICAP.

Catalogue
............ 1
Concordia. ......................................... 2
Nine ran.

A Town Councilor Charged with Perjury,

- - -6^ -

At the Selford Town-hall, yesterday, W. A. Jenner, iron
merchant, C'eapel-street, S ilford, was charg d with having
committed wiliul and con upt perjury. The prosecutor was
n-
ive
fmosdSofe:rir
tni nt:htoelulrdeheedolispnlcPdar
Council
fh:aot.ote,
iNretvdes,uoi
upoi
ford
berilldor:
nrca
omia
fAEty atoirhi itrndeee,e,
ccp7roasnl irstlaide,a ThejgtoSrjheneendelpe:'oroso:traashdrw2e2innrhhteaao:lt
pt
ida:
retie
aaf e.rthe
wasid that
lS 6Cl7in
on action in which Mr Jenner was the pl aintiff end Mr
Platt the defendant. Mr S. Platt, the prosecutor, s'id that
in May, 1869, he sent one of his men, named Lyons, to the
defendant's works to obtain a foot of inch end 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 back. The follow;ng day he returned
the foot also, atter finding that it did not suit his harp )se,
but the defendant refused to receive it. Witness had
a dispute abut same circular plates he bought from
the defendant, and the matter was referred to Mr Mather,
of the fiim of Messrs Mather and Platt, who decided that
the price should be reduced. With respect t 3 this decision,
defendant said to witness, " You have done me this time;
and it will be any turn next;" and, about the 30th of June,
1359, he sent an invoice containing item of credit for the bar
of steel, as retuiaed, but the invoice contained en error, end
it was sent back to the defendant. Witness also received a
second invoice, in which was shown a balance of £1 17s 41,
the item of credit being omitted, and he offered £1 17s 4d to
discharge the claim. Defendant refused to accept this es
payment in said that the bar had not been received by
him, and obtained a wait in the Salford Court of Record.
Before the trial, witness paid £3 3s SO into Court. At the
trial, the defendant swore that neither he nor any of his
servants had received the steel. The Judge, in k.ulnroing
up, said that there had been perjury on ono bide or the
other ; and he went so far PS to order the witness Lyons
not to leave the Court. A verdict was found for Mr
Jeurer, and witless had to pay the amount of the claim.
After the hie', witness said, " You know you have got
that steel,' to the defendant, who then produced a bit of
paper, end 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 1562, Mr Astley, a clerk.;who was
in defendant's service at the time the alleged perjury was
committed, gave witness two invoices, Mr Mather had pro-
mis d to stand Ly him with £5OO, in order to sea public
justice done to him, and had enabled him to carry out these
proceedings.—Thomas Lyons said that he was in the pro-
secutor's service in 18e9, end that he took the long bar,
after a feot 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 reqaested by the judge not to leave the court.—W,
T. M. Astley said he was an auctioneer at the King's
Head, [rid that up to Febtua- y, 1862, he was in defendant's
employ. In the second invoice, dated the 30th September,
1860, produced, the item of credit for the bar of steel was
omitted. Witness prepared the invoice, and copied the
items from the defendant's journal, 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 retu' ned. Mr Jenner asked, "How
can it be done," and upon witness saying that he did not
know, the defendant took a penknife and cut the leaf cone
laining the item of credit out of the book. The defendant
afterwards sent the book to a binder, had a fac-simile 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 defendo'it there
swore that the bar had not been returned. In cross examie
nation by Mr Leresehe, witness said that if he stated in the
Court of Record "had the steel been returned, I should
have known it, or that the steal 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 tine. The presiding magistrate
(Mr Trafford) : Did everyone in Mr Jenner's commit
perjury? Wi;ness—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 EelViCo brought a book
in which a new leaf was placed. The day-book produced
had been altered since it was first bound. 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,
end found that several pages had been removed from the
end of the book.—William Itozersop.,ph'cßernelifsin-
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 som dhing in his hand on the morning after the
trial, which he said were the old leaves which had been
cut out of a book, adding that Mr Jenner would look a
bonny when the prison van came for him. Astley
also said that he could transport the defendent 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 metre it appear as if the steel had never been
returnr.d." Witness asked him to tell him all about it ; and
Astley continued, Yesterday, we went upstairs to get up
the evidence: Wo examined the beaks and found in the
daybook the entry relating to the steel, with a mark against
it, end I pointed it out. ICIr 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. Jenner then s id, 'On 1 Astley, you have ruined
me ; it is a very serious case, and you do nut know what
may be the consequences.' I said that I would got it
put right, and I went to Clarke's with —John Hay-
k
whaer dd,aay
-nbeopohke wt of o
c iathedefendant,Clarke's.
s!
tsnaersds t
aa ts
52;
tre Ad s
ney
etoolo,
toegm Mrw.- sPc
loaptile dB, aecncdouChtat fromw es o tmhiet t aoold ne the s. Everymark
i
that was made against the item of credit.—Mr Leresehe
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, unlimited for trial
at the assizes. He would bo admi,ted to bail.