The Sun.
London, England, 1862-01-10 00:00:00

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.—Jan. 9.

- MANSION-HOUSE.---Henry David Lloyd, de-
scribed as a merchant, carrying on business at No.
26, Philpot-lane, was again brought up on remand
before the Lord Mayor, charged with having con-
spired with another, not in custody, to obtain a
quantity of alkali,to the value of £750, with intent
to defraud Mr. Jeffrieson, of the Jarrow-hill Chemi-
cal Works, near Gateshead.
Mr. Mullens again appeared for the prosecution,
and Mr. R. S. Miller for the prisoner.
The prisoner was originally brought up on the
29th of November, and it appeared from the evi-
dence that was adduced on that occasion in refer-
ence to the charge, that in the beginning of October
last a letter was received at Mr. Jeffrieson's office,
dated from 26, Philpot-lane, and signed "H. D.
Lloyd and C 0.," requesting Mr. Jeffrieson to send
them a sample of soda ash, together with a quotation
of their prices. A quotation .of prices was accord-
ingly sent, and on the 16th of October a letter was
sent by Mr. Jeffrieson to Messrs. Lloyd and Co.,
asking for a reference before doing business with
them, in reply to which a letter was received at Mr.
Jeffrieson's office, giving Messrs. Alexander Bell
and Sons, of 38, Threadneedle• street, as a refer-
ence. Mr. Jeffrieson being away from the office
at the time of the receipt of the letter,
his clerk applied to a gentleman named Livingstone,
a friend of Mr. Jeffrieson's, for advice in the matter,
and he, knowing that there was a firm in London,
of the name of Alexander Bell and Sons, of 38,
Threadneedle street, he wrote to them and received
a letter in reply, stating that Messrs. Bell had
known Messrs. Lloyd for a considerable period,
had had several business transactions with them

to a considerable amount, and always believed them
L to be perfectly trustworthy. Thinking that the
Alexander Bell and Sons, of 38, Threadneedle-
street, was the same firm with which he was con-
nected, Mr. Livingstone thought the reference
satisfactory. Accordingly, under Mr. Livingstone's
directions, in the absence of Mr. Jeffrieson, his
clerk entered into a contract with H. D. Lloyd
and Co. to supply them with about 100 tons of soda
ash, which was to be paid for fourteen days prompt
after the receipt of the bills of lading. The goods
were shipped in two shipments, and the bills of
lading forwarded to Messrs. Lloyd in due course.
At the expiration of fourteen days from the de-
livery of the first bill of lading applicotion was
made to Messrs. Lloyd for the money, and a letter
was sent, signed per procuration, for H. 1). Lloyd
and Co, stating that Mr. Lloyd was out of town,
and the subject of the letter from Mr. Jeffrieson
should be attended to upon his return which would
be in the course of a week. A few days after that
Messrs. Lloyd sent another letter to Mr. Jeffrieson.
complaining that he had violated the contract in not
sending a certificate of the test. Enquiries were
afterwards made, and it was discovered that the
firm Alexander Bell and Sons, of 38, Threadneedle-
street, was not the real firm, their name being
Alexander Bell and Son, and their place of busi.
ness at the corner of Finch-lane, in Threadneedle-
street, and so Mr. Jeffrieson was defrauded of his
goods.
The prisoner has since been remanded from time
to time in order to enable Mr. Mullens to obtain
evidence of the conspiracy, and for that purpose
he has called several witnesses, whose evidence has
proved that the prisoner was assisted in this trans-
action by a person of the name of Solomons, to whom
the bills of lading were handed as soon as received
from Mr. Jeffrieson, and he forwarded them to
Hamburg, with instructions to parties there to
dispose of them on his account. Letters were put
in containing instructions to that effect, which Were
proved to be in Solomon's handwriting. It was also
proved that Solomon took an active part in the
engagement of the offices at 26, Philpot-lane, and
was continually at those offices. Evidence was also
adduced to show that the prisoner and Solomon
were carrying on business at several other places
in the City under different names; for instance,
they had an office in Aldermanbury, and carried
on business in the name of Leander and Co., the
prisoner calling himself Mr. Leander ; and 'a

Broad-street, in the name of Wilson, Graham, and
Co., next door to an old standing firm of nearly the
same name, viz., Wilson, Graham, and Rose, and
at 38, Threadneedle-street, in the name of Alex-
ander Bell and Sons—all during the time they
occupied the offices at 26, Philpot-lane ; and that
about the same period, or a little before the trans-
action with Mr. Jeffrieson, Solomon was carrying
on business at Liverpool, under the name of Wilson,
Graham, and Co., in one place, and Jonas Simons
in another place. The same witness who proved
this latter fact, proved also that he was a witness
agains,`, Solomon at Liverpool, where he was tried
for forgery, but he was acquitted on account of the
bills, which were taleged to have been forged,being
uttered abroad.
Mr. Mullens now said ho was sorry to say he
should be obliged to ask for another remand, as,
from some inexplicable catese, Mr. Jeffrieson and
his clerk had not arrived from Clateshead,
Mr. Miller thought it was very unfair towards
his client, and said he could not see that there was
the slightest evidence of conspiracy against the pri-
soner. He thought he had good grounds for com-
plaint, as Mr. Mullens had stated on tht first
examination that there were lots of witnesses to bC
brought from Hamburg, but not one had been
called.
Mr. Mullens said he had produced the correspon-
dence of Solomon from Hamburg, which was proved
to be in his handwriting; and he thought that was
the best witness he could procure.
Some little discussion took place as to what course
should be taken, and it was ultimately agreed that
the evidence of all the witnesses, except Mr. Jeffrie-
son and his clerk, should be read over, after which
Mr. Miller should address his lordship, and, if he
made up his mind to commit, the witnesses should
be bound over, to save their attendance at a future
day, and that the prisoner should be formally re-
manded for the attendance of Mr. Jeffrieson and
the other witness.
The evidence having been read over, Mr. Mullens
called Henry Webb, a detective officer, who deposed
that ho held a warrant for the apprehension of
John Solomon, for conspiring with the pris )ner to
defraud Mr. Jeffrieson ; but although he had used
every possible exertion to arrest him on that war-
rant, he had not been able to obtain any certain
information of his whereabouts.
On being cross-examined by Mr. Miller, he said
he was not aware that the prosecutor had taken
legal proceedings to stop the goods at Hamburg,
nor was he aware that Solomon had gone there for
the purpose of defending those proceedings.
Mr. Mullens said that was his case, and as his
lordship was not present at all the examinatioti.s., he
briefly reviewed the whole of the facts for hit;

lordship's guidance, and said no complaint was made
by Messrs. Lloyd about violation of the contract, or
not sending the certificate of the test, until after
payment had been demanded. The contract stipu-
lated that it should be subject to Mr. Patterson's
test, but there was nothing said about the certifi-
cate being sent to Lloyd and Co.
Mr. Miller said he felt considerable difficulty in
addressing his lordship on the prisoner's behalf on
account of the manner in which he had been carry-
ing on business, which he would admit was not at
all honest ; but at the same time ho contended that
there was no evidence to show that the prisoner
had conspired with anyone to defraud Mr. Jeffrieson.
Mr. Mullens had said at first he was about to bring a
lot of witnesses from Hamburg to prove the conspi-
racy, but no such witnesses had appeared. To prove a
conspiracy in law it was necessary to prove a connexion
between the parties concerned. There was no evi-
dence to show that the prisoner conspired with
Solomon, but merely that ho and Solomon had been
seen together on several occasions as friends and
nothing more—not in business transactions. Ho
thought at first from the opening of Mr. Mullens
that the prisoner would be charged with conspiring
with Messrs. Bell and Sons. No evidence had been
given to prove that there was not such a firm as
Alexander Bell and Sons, at No. 38, Threadneedle-
street, and as regards the reference from Messrs.
Bell and Son, they were not to know that Mr.
Livingstone, of Newcastle-on-Tyne, and Mr. Jeffrie-
son, of the Jarrow-hill Chemical Works, were the
same, and argued that the whole case of conspiracy
must fall to the ground. As regarded Mr. Solo-
mon, he had gone to Hamburg to stand to his right
and to defend the legal proceedings taken there.
The contract with Mr. Jeffrieson stated that the
goods should be subject to Mr. Patterson's test,
and the correspondence went to show that Messrs.
Lloyd and Co. expected a certificate of that test.
The prisoner had sold the goods under the same
contract, and had been unable to fulfil it.

The Lord Mayor said the contract certainly sti-
pulated that the goods should be subject to a test,
but it was not incumbent on Mr. Jeffrieson to send
a certificate of the quality. He did not undertake
to send the certificate.

Mr. Miller said that it was the full intention of
his client that he should do so, and the payment had
been delayed on account of that certificate nut hay-
ing been received.
The Lord Mayor said be thought it was for
Messrs. Lloyd to obtain the certificate according to
the terms of the contract.

Mr Millar said that if his lordship had made up
his mind to commit the prisoner it was no use his
going on.

The Lord Mayor said that it was his intention,
unless Mr. Miller could show him why he should
not do so.

Mr. Miller said, merely on account of the test not
having been supplied. It was evident the contract
had not been completed.
The Lord Mayor said he thought that must be
for a jury to decide.
Mr. Mullens then produced a letter in which Mr.
Solomon stated that the alkali was of a very good
colour, and was of a much better quality than that
usually shipped from Liverpool.
Mr. Miller said it was hardly fair for Mr. Mul-
lens to prejudice the prisoner, as that was from a
man who wanted to sell his goods.
The prisoner was then formally remanded for the
attendance of Mr. Jeffrieson and his clerk.

ROBBERY OF TWO HUNDRED
WATCHES.

During an entire week the town of Dover and its
vicinity has been agitated in consequence of no less
than three arrests, and the discovery of some por-
tion of the proceeds of a robbery committed in the
adjoining county. For some time past the vigilance
of the Sussex county constabulary has been excited
to a somewhat increased extent by the escape of a
man, Henry Goble, who was well known to have
been implicated in a singular robbery at Warble-
ton, in that county, upwards of 200 watches having
been carried away on December 6, during the tem-
porary absence of the shopkeeper, in early evening.
At the Lewis assizes an accomplice named Alfred
Fuller was convicted and sentenced to 12 calendar
months' hard labour; and from that time until the
present a warrant has been held for the apprehen-
sion of Goble, who had adroitly baffled all the
efforts of the police. Bills were circulated, and by
some means information was obtained that Goble
had been seen in the neighbourhood of Dover,
and that a labourer named Harmer, employed
at the Heights, might possibly afford some in-
formation. Harmer was therefore visited by one
of the Sussex constabulary, when he denied
having seen Goble; but on another occasion,
on Ilarmer's house being searched, some things be-
longing to Goble were found, and on Saturday Har-
mer was brought before the magistrates at the Dover
Petty Sessions ou a charge of " aiding, abetting,
harbouring, and concealing," by which ho had ren-
dered himself liable to a charge of felony as an ac-
cessory after the fact. Evidence having been given
he was remanded.

The affair, however, did not end here, for on Tues-
day Mr. Thos. Robins, well known at Dover as a
watchmaker for more than 40 years, was charged
before the Mayor and W. P. Elstcd, Esq., with hav-
ing in his possession one gold and four silver watches,
knowing them to have been stolen, the property of
Henry Grant, of Warbloton, in Sussex. Prisoner
is 76 years of age.
Mr. Fox, for the prosecution, proposed to pro-
duce such evidence as would justify the magistrates
in making a remand until Friday.
George Jeffries, superintendent of the Sussex con-
stabulary at Guestling, stated that on Friday last,
in consequence of information received, he went to
the house of a man named Hammond, at Shooter's-
hill, Buekland. He wont upstairs, and having been
shown five watches banging over a mantle-piece,
took possession of them and now produced them.
He afterwards went to the shop of Mr. Robins,
where he found Hammond (who had previously
shown him the watches). The watches were shown
to Robins, and he was asked how he became pos-
sessed of them. He said he bought them of a Jew, and
witness then asked where the man lived. Robins re-
plied he did not know, but he had dealt with him
before. He was then told that they werepart of the
proceeds of a robbery, and must be taken charge of.
Ott Monday he called upon Robins again, and told
him the watches had been identified. He again
questioned prisoner as to the manner in which they
came into his possession, and received the same re-
plies, that he had bought them of a Jew about three
weeks ago. Considering the answers unsatisfac-
tory, he took Robins into custody.
kagistrate—Has he been out on bail ?
Witness—No.
Magistrate—Where has he been all night ?
Superintendent Coram—At the station-house.
Mr. Henry Grant, of Rushlake-green, Warbleton,
identified the watches produced, which, with a num-
ber or others, were stolen from his shop on the
evening of Friday, Dec. 6, 4 little after 6 o'clock._

The five watches before him he ',valued at from £1
to £lB.
Thos. Hammond, living at the .Prince of Wales,
Shooter's-hill, Buckland, said—On Friday last, the
3d of January, I met prisoner and his son, just op-
posite Bridge-street, Charlton, and' prisoner asked
me if I had any money I could lend. 'him for a few
days. I told him I had some, and asked him how
much he wanted ? He told me " £,5, and would
give me security for the money." I have lent him
money before, and the security has always been
watches. We all three went to my house, and pri-
soner pulled out two watches from his pocket, and.
placed them on the table. I hung upon the loan,
not thinking the two watches quite worth the money.
Prisoner then said I could have another one or two
if I liked, as he had plenty of his own watches at
home, His son then went and fetched the other
three, and on the five watches produced I advanced
him £5. This transaction took pint: about four
o'clock in tho afternoon.

The accused was then remanded, at, 'd bail re-
fused.

On Wednesday Thomas Robins, jun., cart-viug on,
business as a watchmaker at the village of Btahatn,
near Canterbury, was brought up as a receiver of
the stolen watches, having been apprehended in the
tow:'' of Dover on a warrant the previous aftemoon.
Mr. Fc,„K app eared for the prosecution, and Mr.
Minter fox' dehince of the prisoner.

Gee. superintendentJeffrthe of the Si sex
and county const,Abulary, recapitulated his fnmer
that he had sufficient infbrma-
evidence, and addc.l,
an a-Iplicatiou for a remand, that
rroduce further evidence.
tior. to justify
he might be enabled to
d the watches produced„
Henry Grant identities
and Mr. Fox applied for remand, to which Mr..
Minter objected ; but the court having been cleared,
the magistrate (W. P. Elsted, .Esq.) decided upon
granting the application, giving Mr. Minter per-
mission to see his clients, subject to the usual gaol
regulations.

COUNIRI MARELYS.

MANCHESTER-JAN. 9.

At our market to-day there was a fair attendance, but.
business in either home or foreign wheat was limited--
English declining is per qr, and foreign 3d ta 4d per 1( 011 at.,
Flour also 6d to is per sack lower. Oats offered at fully Id'.
per 451 b less money, and oatmeal 6d to is per load. Beams.
and Indian corn each in favour of purchasers.