The Sun.
London, England, 1862-12-20 00:00:00

one charge, and that is enough at a time,"
When I arrived at the station the police-ser-
geant asked what the charge was. Morgan. one of
the police, said, " Stealing a book in the Middle
Temple." The sergeant then said, "Go in there,"
pointing to the felons' dock, I declined to do so.
Mr. Rodwell and Mr. Bagshawe then entered the
station, and the superintendent said, " What is the
charge, gentlemen ?" Mr. Bagshawe replied,
" Stealing." The superintendent then said, " Then,
sir, go into that dock, or I shall compel you." The
charge was then made, Mr. Bagshawe charging me
lwith " stealing a book from the Benchers' Chamber
in the Middle Temple. I was then in the felons'
dock. I asked Mr. Bagshawe if he really meant
that, and he said, "I do." The superintendent then
said, " Let us take the charge altogether ; and then,
if you object to its sufficiency, will be your time to
speak." Mr. Bagshawe then used the word " Tak-
ing." When the charge had been completely taken
down I said, " I object to a charge being taken in
that way, and I require to be liberated. I must
either be charged with stealing, or with felonious
intention, or liberated." The superintendent, Mr.
Bagshawe, and Mr. Todwell then conferred to-
gether aside, and on my objecting to the word
" taking" for " stealing, Mr. Bagshawe said,
" They are synonimous." I said, "No, Mr. Bag-
shawe, I'll show you they are not—if a man taks
a wife, for instance, he does not steal her."
(Laughter.)
The Lord Chief Justice—Unless he runs away
with her. (Laughter.)
Witness—The superintendent then said, " Can't
I throw oil upon the waters ?" (Laughter.) He
asked me to give him the book, observing he would
keep it until the proper ownership was established.
I refused, and said, "It has not been got from me
by violence, and it shall not be by Ihe chicanery of.
those parties. The superintendent then said, " I
discharge you." I then said, " Now I have a charge
to make against the constable for not having taken
the porter in charge, who assaulted me." I, however,
did not press the charge, and I withdrew from the
station.
Cross-examined by Mr. Sergeant Shee—l left
the office of Messrs. Mapleson on the 24th of Octo-
ber, not caring to follow the profession of the
law. (Laughter.) I managed not only the com-
mon law department there but also et inllcal
matters and business of the Great Western Railway
Company. It was during that time I became
acquainted with Mr. Digby Seymour ; I had not
known him previously to my going into the office of
the Messrs. Maplesons. I promoted the Waller Gold
Mining Company, and Mr. Digby Seymour became
in a very early stage of the formation of the com-
pany connected with it, but he had not much to do
with the formation of the company. I had become
acquainted with Captain Smith, upon whose infor-
mation as to gold being in the Waller mine soil, I
then became the promoter of the company. A sum
of £3,000 had been paid by the shareholders, but I
cannot say by whom. Captain Smith was to have
29,000 shares, at £1 per shale, of 70,000, the whole
number to be issued. I was to receive 8,000 shares,
and I received them ; and I received 5,000 more.
That was before I became a director. Mr. Seymour
was to receive 5,000 shares. The arrangement was
that evsry director was to receive 500, but they
were not paid-up shares, although nominally they
were. Every director was to have one hundred
shares, on which they paid up £1 per share, and
they were to have as many more as they might
choose to take by paying up for them ; but, for
reasons, I did not let them have additional shares.
I cannot tell you how many shares Mr. Digby Sey-
mour had in 1853. I cannot swear that he had 3,000.
I went at the time to Brighton and Paris, and I was
at that time, consequently, not present at all the
meetings of the directors. My belief is that Mr.
Digby Seymour had not had 3,000, nor 5,000, nor
10,000. My fixed belief is he had not more than
2,000. Previously to the 14th of February, 1853, I
was not aware that the directors were " rigging"
the market; but I am aware that at that time some
arrangement was going on for " operating" upon
the market. It was within my knowledge that
some of the directors were operating upon the mar-
ket ; but neither I nor Mr. Digby Seymour took any
part in the proceeding at the time. I believe I knew
that an arrangement was going on by which a per-
son of the name of Lakerman said he should hold the
shares, and seal them up, and then that certain direc-
tors were to employ brokers, who were to con-
tract with other brokers to buy and pay for shares
on the account, and then, if the price rose, the
sellers were to pay the difference. That might, as
far as I am aware, be what you call " rigging the
market ;" but I regard it as a mode of enhancing
the shares. (Laughter.) I communicated with,
and expressed my opinion upon it to the directors.
I knew it sufficiently to warn them that Lakeman
was a man not to be trusted, and that he would un-
doubtedly deceive them. I knew between the ac-
count day of the 14th of February and the account
day of the 28th of February, " the settling day,"
that the same thing had been done. Six or seven
thousand shares of Lakeman's and of several other
parties had been sealed up, and not then issued.
Lakeman was not a director, but was a speculator
on the Stock Exchange who had taken shares, but
who had otherwise nothing to do with the corn-
, pony. All the shares, except four or five thousand
to Lakeman, had not been issued. I knew there
were a number of persons interested in trying to
depreciate the shares of the company, and to put it
down. I became acquainted with what was going
on while I was in Paris, by a paragraph which I
had there read, in the newspapers, and I at once
threw myself into a train, and hastened to London,
where I communicated with the directors that
" Lakeman was a low and vulgar thief, whom they
should not trust ; and that if they would go to the
chairman of the Stock Exchange they would find
he was a man who would deceive them." They
replied he had behaved well to them, and that they
would continue to put trust in him, and let him
have shares ; and that was the quarrel between the
directors and myself. I think the price which those
parties bought the shares at was from £2 10s. to
£3 ss. But I cannot say that I knew all those
things before Lakeman sold the company. The ar-
rangement, as I understood it, between Lakeman
and those parties, was that they should open a
" Bear" account on the Stock Exchange, and carry
out their transactions in a manner which, undoubt-
edly must be called " rigging the market ;" but
I had nothing to do with it. [ fhe witness
here described. the manner in which the
operation was carried on, the locking up of the
shares on the inducement of Lakeman, who in-
duced them to allow him to deposit at Messrs.
Coutts's, the bankers—but while they weakly
failed to take any step to stop him from withdraw-
ing his own shares, they allowed him to stop
them from dealing with, or withdrawing theirs,
and he then went in to the market and sold his
own.) The number of shares which I was to have
was not then named as 7,000, and was not known
to the directors ; but undoubtedly I was to receive
some shares. It was arranged that scientific re-
porters were to be sent out to America, who were
to report favourably of the mine. Professor An-
sted was consulted, and the bargain with Captain
Smith was to be dependent on the purchase of the
mine, provided that the professor's report of the
mine turned out corroboratory of that of Mr.
M‘Daniel, who was the first that reported on its
worth. Should it turn out corroborative, then the
bargain with Smith wt. s to go off.
A juror here asked the Lord Chief Justice if it
was nor in Mr. celgeaut, 011ec t., r.---. . ..,,,,o
examination of the witness upon matters respect-
ing which he could only answer from " what he
thought." He (the juror) thought the learned ser-
geant was only confusing the witness and the jury
by doing so.
The Lord Chief Justice said that they could not
know but it was intended to bring out something
in the cross-examination that was intended to con-
tradict something else that had been said. The best
way was to allow the examination to proceed.
Cross-examination resumed—l certainly wished
at the time, and I said so, that such a proceeding
as that carried on with Lakeman should be put an
end to. When I became a director I think the
shares were at the nominal price of £2 per share.
I am aware that from what occurred on the 21st
of February, that they became depressed in the
market, I went after I had become a director to
Virginia, in America, to see and judge for myself
of the value of the mine. In 1854 Mr. Charles
Heneage, Colonel Kent, and some few other di-
rectors were frequently at the board ; but Mr.
Digby Seymour wes not then frequently pre-
sent. I was myself more frequently present at
the board than any other director, for I had an
overwhelming interest in the mine.
(Laughter.) I
think there were perhaps 30,000 shares on which
money had been advanced, and in
which Mr. Sey-
mour and I had an interest. I can swear most dis-
tinctly that I had not borrowed to the amount of
£12,000 upon my shares. There had at that. time
goio, anout as thick as
been gold brought from the m„ine,; and I myself
brought over four ingots nt
displayed for some time at
my hand, which were
inspection of persons desirous the office, for the ipso • to
received from the mine altogether.
About a thousand pounds value
purchase shares.
was that came to England in 1854;
in gold had beenndo not know what the amount in
„Jaunt would not come ; that was paid i
I cannot say-1
oh.e Itlieshamy otnhdatßtahnekre, Vir-
ginia ; but it might be. XeOt
declare a dividend of £3,000
no resolution of the directors at the board that we
buti
in the
e talkedm a r,
intent of raising the value of cently about it,
onfotsa it was with the
should
the shares
y '
jot, but it would have had the effect of giving satis-
faction to the shareh Id o ers. I undertake to say
that there were then 26 0 , 00 shares out, Ut which