The Sun.
London, England, 1862-09-27 00:00:00

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.—Sept. 26.

LAMBETH.—THE SERIOUS AND FATAL CASE
OF STABBING.—Henry King, a man about 40 years
of age, against whom a coroner's jury has returned
a verdict of " Wilful Murder," was brought up on
remand, and placed at the bar before Mr. Elliott,
for final examination on a charge of stabbing and
causing the death of Sarah Ann Day, by stabbing
her in the abdomen.

It will be recollected, from the evidence given on
a former examination by police-constables Charles
Marks Cooke, 168, and George Pike, 95, of the L
division, that about half-past three o'clock in the
afternoon of Thursday, the 18th inst., the prisoner
called at the residence of the deceased, 75, Tower-
street, Westminster-road, and after some alterca-
tion with her stabbed her in two places, once with
a screw-driver, and a second time with a chisel, in-
flicting deep and dangerous wounds, which pene-
trated her abdomen, and caused her death on the
following day. It further appeared that the pri-
soner and the deceased had been married, but the
former having discovered that the latter had been
been married before, and that her husband, a
soldier, was still living, gave her into custody for
bigamy. He did not, however, appear against her
but the result was a separation for some time. On
the prisoner being now placed at the bar the first
witness called was Cooke the constable, 168 L, who
said he was in the room of and alone with the de-
ceased when the prisoner came to the house, and on
seeing him the deceased said, "Halloo, Harry,
what do you want here ?" but he did not remember
his answer, nor did he pay particular attention to
them while they talked for five or six minutes
together. The first thing he remembered was the
prisoner saying to the deceased, "Do you intend to
come back to me or not ?" and the deceased said " No,
King. You never acted like a man to me ; and not
all your persuasion shall induce me to return to
you." The prisoner made some reply to this, but
in so low a tone that he did not hear it. Prisoner
then suddenly stepped forward, and struck the de-
ceased on the stomach with the chisel and a screw-
driver, and she gave a loud and fearful shriek,
During the conversation between the prisoner and
the deceased he (witness) asked the former if he
had any claim on the latter, and he replied " No."
He then said, " Then why do you come here annoy-
ing her in the way you do ?" 6.nd he made no reply.
In cross-examination by Mr. Beard, who ap-
peared for the prisoner, the witness said the first
time he saw the prisoner was about five weeks be-
fore the occurrence : and at that time he was in the
company of the deceased. He did not then know
that they were married, nor had he seen the deceased
before. On the 18th inst. he was at the house of
the deceased by invitation, and taking tea with her
when the prisoner called. Was not then aware that
she was a married woman ; on the contrary, he had
been given to understand that she was not. Had
known the mother of the deceased, who lived at 75,
Tower-street, and the deceased resided with her,
and not in Stargate .street as he was aware. He
did not know of his own knowledge that the pri-
soner was a carpenter, but believed he was; and
would therefore require such articles as those he
carried with him on the day of the fatal occurrence,
namely, a hammer, a chisel, and screw-driver, in
the course of his trade. Did not hear the prisoner
when he first came to the deer ask the deceased for
a pair of stockings ; but on seeing him witness
knew him to be the person who had been married
to the deceased. Did not hear the deceased say to
the prisoner, in allusion to him, " I told you I had
a young man," or anything to that effect. If she had
said so he thought he must have heard and noticed
it. Did not hear the deceased use any bad lan-
guage to the prisoner for the three or four minutes
he was in the room, and before he struck her. The
deceased had told him that she had been married
to the prisoner about three weeks, or it might be
a month ago. He had been frequently to the house
of the deceased on her invitation, to take tea, and
once dined there, and at the time of the alleged
fatal occurrence he was alone with her at tea, and
the only persons present were the deceased, the
prisoner, and himself.

- Mr. Elliott—When the deceased told you she
had been married to the prisoner, did she say any-
thing about their separation ?
Witness—Yes, sir. She said she was separated
from him by a process of court.
George Pike, 95 L, said he found the chisel he
produced in the bed of the deceased, and on com-
paring it and the screw-driver, also found in the
room, withthe marks on the clothes of the deceased
they fitted exactly.
Mr. Donahoo, a surgeon' in the Westminster-
road, said that on the day in question he was sent
for to attend the; deceased, whom he found bleeding
profusely from two wounds, cne on the left side of
the abdomen, inflicted with some blunt instrument,
and another nearer the hip, by some sharp instru-
ment. She was in a very dangerous state, and he
attended her up to the time of her death, which
took place on the following day. On making a
post-mortem examination he found both wounds
extended to the cavity of the abdomen, and that
internal hemorrhage was the cause of death.
Ann Jones, residing at 74, Tower-street, said that
on the afternoon of the 18th inst. she heard a great
disturbance next door, and saw the policeman Cooke
in the act of scuffling with the prisoner, removing
him from the house. She went down to see what
the matter was, and saw the deceased standing by
the foot of the bed, and heard her exclaim, " Oh,
dear, lam in such pain ! I believe that King has
stabbed me." She (witness) assisted in shifting
her and putting her to bed, and saw that the de-
ceased had two wounds, one on the side of the ab-
domen and the other near the hip. About five
weeks ago the prisoner came to the house of the de-
ceased fora looking-glass which he elairned,and some
person whom she could not see gave him one. The
prisoner by his motion appeared as if he had at-
tempted to strike the person on the head with the
glass, and appeased to be in a great passion. She
heard him then quarrelling with the deceased, and
heard him say, "You --., I'll murder you. If I
can't have you, no one else shall, for I'll do for you
and myself."
Cross•examined—He did not say this in reference
to the looking-glass, that if ho did not have it no-
body else should, She first told this to Cooke, the
policeman, but thought Pike was present at the time.
Sergeant Thompson said he was on duty in Tower-
street when the prisoner was brought there in charge
of Pike and Cooke, and took down the charge against
him. In doing so he asked the prisoner what he
had to say to the charge of stabbing his wife, and
the constable Cooke said she was not his wife. The
prisoner replied that she was his wife, but had left
him to go with others, as she had with him (point-
urder.
leg to Cooke). Witness asked him what he meant
by making such a charge against the constable ; and
that his wors'eiP
he replied, " Oh, she has been carrysug it on with
him for some time, and ho knows it."
Mr. Beard expressed a hope
from the
would not feel called on to commit the prisoner on
Cooke, the
e charge of wilful murder, contending that, after
and
unfortunate Dee
testimony of the woman Jones, and
had been regulaurir
who lied b
to the present
The prisoner,
byup the constable
Ceasene bore noue of the characteristics of
wilful m
it not been for the improper A tof the Constable
occurrence bore ts., a excellent character,
married to the deceased, and had
-mproper conduct

Cooke, who had much to answer for, his worship
would never have been troubled with the case. The
fact was, that the prisoner, who had sii;pt with the
deceased on the night before, had called at
house for a pair of stockings, and finding Cooke there
at tea caused the annoyance which led to the fatal
result. The act, however, had been unpremedi-
tated, and it never would have occurred but for the
presence of the constable, and under all the circum-
stances he hoped his worship would commit for the
manslaughter only.
When asked by the magistrate if he had anything
to say,
Prisoner replied that there was a great deal more
passed than what Cooke, the constable, had men-
tioned ; and if he spoke like a man and stated the
truth, the case would bear a different appearance.
The prisoner was fully committed for the wilful
murder.

711 E EXTRAORDINARY CHARGE OF

FORGERY.

Luther Yeats, a middle-aged man, residing at
No. 1, Langport-place, Camberwell, and lately
carrying on the business of an accountant at No.
14, Tokenhouse-yard, Lothbury, was placed at the
bar of the Mansion-house, yesterday, in the custody
of detective officer Spinal, before the Lord Mayor,
to undergo a further examination upon a charge of
forging and uttering certain deeds purporting to
have been signed by Admiral Sir John West,
G.C.8., with intent to defraud Lieutenant-Colonel
John Temple West, of Ryde, isle of Wight.
Mr. Lewis again attended for the prosecution,
and Mr. F. H. Longley appeared for the prisoner.
From Mr. Lewis's opening statement on the
previous examination it appeared that the prisoner
had at some time or other been in a solicitor's
office, and in addition to his having gained a know-
ledge of the mode of making out deeds of convey-
ance, &c., he appeared by some means or other to
have obtained a knowledge of the existence of some
property known as the St. George's Estate, and
that it belonged to Admiral Sir John West, and
that he availed himself of that knowledge, and
forged at different times within the last few
years a number of deeds of conveyances, purport-
ing to be signed by Admiral Sir John West, con-
veying to him certain houses in West-square,
Lambeth, which comprised the St. George's estate,
upon consideration of certain sums of money,
and that having forged the deeds, he mortgaged
them and obtained advances upon them from
different solicitors. By this means he appears to
have obtained advances to a very large amount, and
was negotiating with a solicitor for an advance apon
another deed, but that gentleman happened to hear
of the death of Admiral Sir John West, and upon
examining the deed, he noticed it was dated subse-
quent to the death of the admiral, and he accord-
ingly instituted an inquiry, and the deed was dis-
covered to be a forgery. It will be remembered
that upon the last examination a deed upon which
the prisoner had obtained money from a gentleman
named Parker, a solicitor, carrying on business at
Bedford-row, was proved to be a forgery.
Although upon the last examination Mr. Lewis
stated that the amount which had then been ascer-
tained to have been obtained by the prisoner was
upwards of £6,000, it has been subsequently ascer-
tained that the amount is much larger.
Yesterday Mr. Lewis called John Morgan Deere,
solicitor, Lincoln's-inn-fields, who said he acted as
solicitor for the prisoner in the year 1860. On the
7th of August in that year he saw the prisoner exe-
cute the mortgage deed then produced by Mr.
Parker, and attested his signature. The deed pur-
porting to be signed by Admiral West purported to
be attested by James Bennet, land agent, Portvale,
Hertford. He handed the mortgage to Mr. Parker.
He did not remember seeing the original lease. He
received a copy of the lease from Mr. Yeats to fur-
nish to Mr. Parker in Bedford-row. _

The Lord Mayor asked Mr. Lewis how many of
the cases he intended to go into.
Mr. Lewis said he proposed to prove eight out of
about eighteen.
His lordship said he should have thought two or
three separate cases already proved would further
the ends of justice, and be as well as going into so
many.
Mr. Lewis said so far as the prosecution went
two or three cases would be sufficient, but the
friends and family of the late Admiral Sir John
West were anxious that it should be understood
that all the deeds of conveyance executed by the
prisoner were forgeries, and it was necessary to
prove as many cases as possible to prevent litigation,
otherwise in the course of 20 years or so the holders
of the mortgages might probably come upon the
family for payment.
His lordship said, under those circumstances, he
had nothing more to say.
Mr. Ebenezer Morley, a solicitor, at King's Bench
Walk, Temple, vas then sworn, and said in the year
1859 ho was acting as solicitor for a Mr. Hopley,
and Messrs. Brandon, of Essex-street, Strand, ap-
plied to him on behalf of the prisoner respecting a
mortgage, and on Oct. 14,1859, a deed of mortgage
was executed in his presence. Tne mortgage wags
four houses, Nos. 45 to 48, West-square, Lambeth,
both inclusive. He produced the deed of mortgage
and the lease, which he received fromN,essrs. Bran-
don in the presence of the prisoner. There was at
that time annexed to the lease the receipt produced
purporting to be a receipt from James Bennet for
the last two quarters' ground rent. The signatures
of the prisoner and Sir John West were attested by
James.Bennet, Hertford. Upon the mortgage of
that lease he advanced to the prisoner the sum of
£7OO on behalf of Mr. Hopley, and the prisoner had
since been punctual in paying the interest due
upon that mortgage. In January, 1861, he was
acting as solicitor to Miss M'Bride, and the pri-
soner applied to him to advance the sum of £l,OOO
upon a mortgage of a lease purporting to have been
executed by Sir John West of four houses, 25 to 28,
West-square, inclusive. The lease was dated 12th
Dec., 1860. He consented to advance him the sum
of £BOO, on behalf of Miss M'Bride, on Jan. 17, and
in 1861 he (prisoner) executed a mortgage, which he
produced, and handed over to the firm the deed of
mortgage, and the lease which he also produced.
The prisoner had paid the interest on the mortgage
from time to time since that period.
Mr. George M. Arnold, solicitor, practising at
Gravesend, said he knew the prisoner. He had three
transactions with the prisoner. He produced an
assignment of a lease of Nos. 18 and 19, West-
square, Lambeth, dated Aug. 29, 1859, granted by
Sir John West, to Luther Yeats, the prisoner. He
made an advance upon the assignment of that lease
of £375 on the part of his client, Mr. Cheeper. He
likewise produced a mortgage dated 20th March,
1860, made between the prisoner and Mr. Alfred
Talhurst, who was a client of his, of a lease which
he produced. It was a mortgage dated Feb. 25,
1860, purporting to be made between Sir J. West
and Luther Yeats, of houses 20 and 23,West-square,
inclusive. The prisoner applied to him for the ad-
vance of £750 upon that property, and on the 25th
March he made him the advance, and then received
the deed of mortgage and lease. He also produced a
deed of mortgage dated Sept. 30, 1861, between
himself and the prisoner. It related to a lease dated
Sept. 30, 1861, of houses 45 to 48, West-square,
and purporting to be executed by Sir John West to
the prisoner.
Mr. Lewis remarked that the prisoner had forged
the leases for those four houses, and had obtained
money upon each of them.
His lordship said, that if he understood the case
rightly, the prisoner had been in the habit of con-
cocting fictitious deeds of conveyance upon the pro-
perty in question over and over again, and then
mortgaging them.
Mr. Lewis said that was just the case.
The witness then continued his evidecce, and
said he advanced the prisoner £750 upon that lease.
He likewise produced a lease or mortgage, dated
Sept. 30, 1861, between himself and the prisoner on
a lease dated Sept. 10, 1861, and purporting to be
signed by Sir John West, in favour of the prisoner,
of houses Nos. 44 to 48, West-square. The prisoner
personally applied to him for an advance of £BOO
upon that lease, and he made him the advance, and
received the deed of mortgage and lease which he
produced from him. In two instances the signature
of Sir John West was alleged to have been attested
by James Bennett, house agent, of Portvale, Hert-
ford ; and in the third instance by James Bennett,
jun., of the same place.
Mr. James Lay, solicitor, of 44, Poultry, was then
called, and said he had known the prisoner about 12
years. He produced a lease dated April 10, 1862,
made in favour of the prisoner, and purporting to
be executed by Sir John West, in respect of four
houses, situate Nos. 25 to 28, West-square, both in-
clusive. He advanced the prisoner £l5O on the 10th
of May, 1862, on behalf of one of his clients,and the
prisoner deposited the deed with him as security.
He believed there were negotiations with another
solicitor for a mortgage upon the same deed for a
much larger amount. He likewise produced a policy
of insurance on the property.
Mr. Lewis said the latter was not necessary.
There was no carelessness attributed to the solici-
tors, who had had transactions with the prisoner.
Mr. Lay said he wished to make a complaint to
his lordship with regard to some observations which
fell from Mr. Lewis upon the last examination, and
which he did not think he was at all justified in
making. It appeared in all the papers that that
gentleman had stated that Mr. Lay was not present,
and that he was afraid he was keeping out of the
way on purpose, and would not produce the deed.
lle wished to state, however, that he was away
on business at the time the subpoena was served
at his office—which was not until about au
hour before the case was called on, and be
being away his ben Was subpoenaed instead, but

he had no knowledge of the whereabouts of
the deed. He did not consider that such observa-
tions ought to have been made, and be had rendered
Mr. Gamlin every assistance in his power.
Mr. Deis said that he was sorry Mr. Lay had
alluded to the maiasit would compel him to say
what otherwise he wonot have said. He con-
sidered he had very just groum:29 for the observa-
tions which he made on the last oectOion, as Mr.
Gamlin had seen Mr. Lay on the previous day, and
Mr. Lay then said he did not think he should at-
tend at the examination of the prisoner at the
Mansion-house, and the lease which had been left
at Mr. Lay's office, instead of being left out to be
produced, had been put away, and, in addition to
that, he had lodged a detainer on the prisoner's Ac-
count at his banker's on the previous day as soon as
he knew the prisoner was in custody; and if his
lordship wished it, he would call Mr. Gamlin.
His lordship, however, said it had better rest as
it was.

Mr. Lay said Mr. Gamlin bad told him that he
intended to go into several other cases, and he
thought his attendance would not be required.
Mr. Francis Hilbury said he was an articled
clerk, and resided at Bexley, in Kent. He produced
a mortgage, dated Sept. 16, 1859, made between the
prisoner and Francis Hilbury, his father, of a lease
dated July 27, 18.59, in respect of houses 18 and 19,
West-square, purporting to have been executed by.
Sir John West to the prisoner. He saw the pri-
soner execute that mortgage, and attested it. He
produced the lease to which the mortgage related.
The sum of £3OO was advanced upon that lease.
Mr. Gamlin was then sworn, and said he had
looked at the leases produced by the several wit-
nesses, and the signatures were not the writing of
Sir John West.
Augnstus Baley Bushnell, cashier of Gosling and
Co. bankers, Fleet-street, said they were the
bankers of Sir John West for many years. He had
the management of Sir John West's account amongst
others. He had looked at the deeds produced, and
was quite sure the signatures were not in the hand-
writing of Sir John West, nor did they bear any re-
semblance to it.

Thos. Knight, superintendent of police, borough
of Hertford, said he knew a place called Portvale.
He believed he knew every one who lived in Port-
vale, and from the year 1859 to 1861 there was no
such person as James Bennet, a house agent, living
there. There was a family named Bennet living
at Porthill, but he was a shoemaker.
A gentleman, whose name did not transpire,
said he wished to say a few words to his lordship if
he could be allowed.

The Lord Mayor asked the gentleman if he would
be kind enough to say who he was.
He replied that he was another victim of the
prisoner, but he did know not whether Mr. Lewis
would like to go into his case.
Mr, Lewis, addressing the speaker, said he was
serry to have to state that this was one of a great
many cases against the prisoner, into the circum-
stances of which he had forborne to enter.

The Lord Mayor said that if Mr. Lewis was
anxious to prevent litigation hereafter, or to restore
the purity of the title, as far as he was concerned
he should have no objection to have all the cases
against the prisoner investigated.
Mr. Lewis conferred with the gentleman, but as
he was not prepared with the evidence necessary
to complete his case it was not gone into, and Mr.
Lewis said that although he bad only gone into
those few cases against the prisoner, it was not be-
cause the other deeds executed by the prisoner
were not forgeries. They were all forgeries—and
although he stated on the last examination that the
prisoner had obtained about £6,000, since that
time several other cases had been discovered, and
he believed the whole amount which the prisoner
had obtained by means of forging deeds such as
had been produced that day was not less than
110,000. The family of Sir J. West were anxious
to make it known that the whole of the deeds fabri-
cated by the prisoner were forgeries, although they
deeply regretted the losses sustained by those with
whom the prisoner had mortgaged them.
His lordship suggested that Mr. Lewis should
consider with his client whether it would be pru-
dent to go into the other cases.
Mr. Lewis thanked his lordship, and said he
should ask his lordship to commit the prisoner for
trial upon the cases which he had already proved.
The prisoner was committed for trial accordingly.
Mr. Longley, who had refrained from asking the
witnesses any questions, asked his lordship if a gold
watch and chain which was found on the prisoner
at the time of his apprehension, might be given up
to his wife. An execution had been put into the
house, and everything had been swept away, and
his wife and a family of six children were left des-
titute.
His lordship said he could make n 6 order.