The Sun.
London, England, 1865-02-13 00:00:00

ISLE OF WIGHT.

The half-yearly meeting of this company was held on
Friday, at 29, Great George-street, Westminster—Mr. J.
Simpson in the chair.

Mr. H. Hicks, the secretary, read the report, which stated
that the first portion of the line, from Hyde to Shanklin, a
distance of eight miles, was opened for passengers on the
23d August last, and although the summer was nearly over
the returns had fully equalled the anticipations of the direc-
tors. During the short period to the 31st December 91,624
passengers had passed over the railway, and the receipts
amounted to £3,577. The expenses included every item of
cost to the end of the year, and amounted, with the Go-
vernment duty and local taxes, to £1,828, leaving a balance
of £1,749. The:directors had decided on charging the inte-
rest of two-thirds 4 the entire bond debt against the re-
venue from the date of opening, eight miles out of 12 miles
having been opened. It amounted to £464, leaving £1,285
to the credit of the current half-year. Tho facilities afforded
by the natural harbour of Brading, to which the short
branch was open, for the rapid and economical discharge of
heavy materials and coals, were such as to warrant the
directors in anticipating a considerable trade there; so soon
as the company's jetty and tipping stages at Brading were
completed, a further diminution in the cost of coals would
be effected. The directors hoped that by increased energy
the contractors would enable them to open the whole line
in time for the summer traffic. They had lodged a bill to
provide and work steamers of a superior class, and these
coupled with an improved service of trains between Lon-
don and Portsmouth, promised by the South-Western Com-
pany, could not fail very largely to increase the resort of
families to the island. The directors had also prepared a
bill for a short extension from the present very incon-
venient and contracted station ground at Ventnor to a
point singularly eligible both for Ventnor and Bonchurch.
The capital account showed that £162,129 had been ex-
pended. Mr. J. Fowler, the engineer, reported that from
Shanklin to Wroxall the works of construction were nearly
completed. The excavations of the Ventnor tunnel was
ready for the necessary brickwork. There would be no dif-
ficulty in completing the works from Shanklin to Ventnor
for public traffic during the ensuing summer season.
The CHAIRMAN having moved the adoption of the report,
a long discussion ensued respecting the proposed extension
of the line into Ventnor. A memorial, signed by a num-
ber of landowners, was presented by Mr. Moore against it,
while three other memorials were presented to the direc-
tors, signed by a large number of the inhabitants of
Ventnor, in favour of the proposed extension.
Captain Hunni explained that the proposed extension
would not destroy more than two cottages, and would
greatly increage the value of the property in the district,
giving very great facilities to residents. The great difficulty
was to get enterprising builders to erect suitable houses in
Ventnor and the neighbourhood to make it a second
Brighton.

Mr. MAXWELL said he believed it would be a great bless-
ing for thousands of invalids if suitable houses and other
accommodation were provided at Ventnor.
The report was adopted.
Mr. J. Simpson and Mr. P. H. Atherley, the retiring di-
rectors, were re-elected, and also Mr. Phillips, the retiring
auditor. The proceedings concluded with a vote of thanks
to the chairman.

WEST NORFOLK JUNCTION.
The half-yearly meeting of this company was held at
Lynn on Saturday—Mr. L. Simpson in the chair.
The report of the directors stated that the works were
being prosecuted with energy by the contractors, and that
the line would be opened as far as Burnham in the autumn.
The principal landowners had met the company in a liberal
spirit. The receipts on capital account to the close of 1864
had been £26,063, and the expenditure £24,642, leaving a
balance of £1,421.
The CHAIRMAN., in moving the adoption of the report,
said he believed, the line would be as remunerative as the
Lynn and Piunstanton, to which it would be a valuable
adjunct.

The report was adopted, and the proceedings closed with
a Y°4% 'of thanks to the chairman and directors.

BISHOPS'-CASTLE.
The half-yoarly meeting was held on Friday at the
Westminster Palace Hotel ; Mr. Whalley, M.P., in the
chair.

The report stated that the works on that portion of the
line
between its junction with the Shrewsbury and Here-
ford Railway and the town of Bishops'-Castle were in so
forwtu'd a state as to insure its opening for traffic in June
next.

The CHAIRMAN, in moving the adoption of the report,
thclught it must bo satisfactory to the glaaroltoltlorg•

There was every reason to expect that the three bills now
before Parliament would receive its sanction, as they had
already passed the standing orders without opposition.
The report was agreed to.
The retiring directors were then re-elected, and a vote of
thanks to the chArman for his great attention to the inte-
rests of the comiaany concluded the proceedings.

The Great Fires at Dockhead.

-- --s-- -
ALLEGED EXTENSIVE FRAUDS UPON THE IN-

SURANCE OFFICES

On Saturday the three men, named James Arnett, Wil-
liam Sedgewick, and Charles Thorne, who were until they
were apprehended employed at Messrs. Barry's wharf, were
again brought up at the Mansion-house, in the custody of
Detective-sergeants Brett and Hayden, before Mr. Alder-
man Stone, the Lord Mayor being too indisposed to pre-
side, to undergo a further examination upon the charge of
having conspired together to obtain and obtaining by frau-
dulent pretences several large sums of money from the
Royal Exchange and other insurance offices, with intent to
defraud.

Mr. Giffard, barrister, instructed by Mr. Humphrey, of
the firm of Humphrey and Morgan, Giltspur-chambers,
Newgate-street, appeared to conduct the prosecution; Mr.
Sergeant Atkinson, instructed by Mr. Moss, appeared for
Thorne; and Mr. Lewis, jun., appeared for the prisoners
Arnett and Sedgewick.

Mr. Branford, superintendent of the M. division of police,
was present to watch the proceedings on the part of the
metropolitan police.
Josiah Fage, the witness who was examined upon the last
occasion, was again placed in the witness-box, and in ad-
dition to the testimony already given by him, he said he
remembered seeing Arnett and Sedgewick together a few
days after the November fire. He noticed them more par-
ticularly in No. 1 warehouse. Sedgewick was calling .out
the goods to Arnett, who had some papers in his hand, and
was checking them. He afterwards saw Sedgewick by him-
self with the papers in his hand. He saw him go along the
wharf into No. 1. A few days afterwards he again saw
Arnett and Sedgewick together, and afterwards on the
same day he saw Arnett and Thorne together on the third
floor. Thorne had the papers in his hand at that time,
and Arnett was calling the goods. He heard Thorne say
to Arnett "Is it all here ?" and Arnett replied, " Yes,
Panama's wheat, and rapeseed by the Burton Bell." They
afterwards went into No. 4. He afterwards saw them in
No. 12, and a day or two subsequent to that he saw them
in the yard together. Thorne was holding the papers.
He thought the papers Thorne had were the same he had
a day or before.
Cross-examined by Sergeant Atkinson—He did not state
what he now stated before because he was not asked.
Thorne kept the books, and was generally in the office,
and was very seldom seen about the wharf except about
dinner time. If he were told by Mr. Barry to assist in
stock taking it would of course be his duty to obey his
orders. The goods were ufostly lying on the floor.
Cross-examined by Mr. Lewis—He had said several

times with regard to Sedgewick and Arnett, that he thought
they ought not to be where they were, and that he thought
the proper persons were those who would obtain the bene-
fit with regard to the "overs." Arnett and Sedgewick
could remove them if they thought fit to do so. Sedge-
wick could not. He could not say whether any of the overs
had been removed. There were none missed. There were
thousands " over." He fancied some of the bales of jute had
been removed off one of the stacks, and he said so ; but
after some inquiries were made it was concluded that none
had been removed. There was a watchman kept, and the
goods which left the wharf would have to pass him ; but
there was no pass given to him. There was a pass given
to the foreman. Goods were delivered without a pass.
He himself had delivered some goods without a piss. He
asked the foreman what ship's name he was to put them
down to, and the foreman said sundry ships, which was the
same as delivering them without a pass.
-. Re-examined—When he gave the information to the in-
surance offices he expressed his opinion that neither of the
prisoners would get the money, but the Barry Brothers
would, and that was why he expressed his opinion that
neither of the prisoners ought to be where they were,
although they knew well enough who was to get the money.
Edward Badman was then called, and said he was ma-
naging clerk to Messrs. Brown and Roberts, the auc-
tioneers and surveyors. He went, on Jan. 11 last, to
Messrs. Barry's wharf, and there saw Mr. Alfred Barry.
Arnett, Mr. Whiting, the witness Fage, and some others
were present. He heard the witness Fage say that the tal-
lies had been taken off the goods by thepnwards, and other
tallies substituted. Fage also said there were about 100
bags of rice in No. 45 warehouse, of which no account had
been rendered to the office. Mr. Barnett turned to Arnett
and said, "Now, Mr. Arnett, is this true ?" and Arnett re-
plied, "It is true." He also heard Fage say there were some
bales of jute by the William Cole and other ships put into
a barge called the Cat. After the first fire, and after knock-
ing about the docks for two or three months, they were re-
landed, and were burnt in the November fire. Arnett said
it was false, but afterwards said it was quite true. Fage
further said if his statements were denied, he would chal-
lenge them to produce the prisoner's books. Mr. Whiting
told him (witness) to go with him and take stock of the
goods then on the premises. Witness, with Mr. Field, a
clerk in the employ of Messrs. Barry, Gatehouse, the fire-
man, and the witness Fage, then proceeded to examine the
stock on the premises. Witness put the quantities down.
About a month back he had received a list of the goods
that were saved. He received it from one of Messrs. Barry's
clerks. He had that list in his hand at the time he was
examining the stock.
Mr. Giffard proposed to put the list in and make it evi-
dence.

Sergeant Atkinson and Mr, Lewis, however, objected.
Mr. Alderman Stone was of opinion that unless it could
be shown that the prisoners knew the contents of it it could
not be put in evidence.
Witness continued—He found„ then, that there were 378
bales by the Onwards. Nothing passed between him and
Arnett with regard to the saved list. Witness in some in-
stances referred to the saved list, and pointed out the dis-
crepancies between it and the goods he found.. Arnett was
present during part of the time he was making the exami-
ation. He believed Arnett knew to what list he was refer-
ring. The list produced was the list of the goods saved that
he had made out. It was all in his handwriting except one
page, and that was in Mr. Field's. The average value of
a bale of jute was about 50s. Witness did not know how
much had been paid by the insurance offices.
Cross-examined by Sergeant Atkinson—Mr.Roberts was
connected with several insurance offices. Witness had only
been to one company's office in the matter of the present
prosecution. There were secretaries of other companies
there at the time. Mr. Humphreys was present at the
time.
By Mr. Lewis—He was present at the whole of the con-
versation between Fage and Arnett at the wharf. He heard
Fage say once that Arnett was not to blame, but he did not
hear him say so more than once. Fage gave the names of
the ships from which the goods came that were put into the
cart. He did not hear Arnett say it was false that Page
knew the name of the ships ; that they were from sundry
ships. He (Arnett) might have said so, but he did not hear
him. He did not recollect hearing Page give the names of
the ships the second time, but he would not say he did not
do so, nor did he hear Arnett say anything about the goods
being from sundry ships. He (witness) went over the stock
and superintended the counting. It took him almost three
days to go over the stock. He, Fage, Field, and Gatehouse
counted the goods. 11e could say the goods were then pro-
perly entered. He occasionally checked them as they were
counted. He heard that Messrs. Humphreys and Harvey
were engaged in making a list of the goods saved, but he
did not know how long they had been doing it. He did
not think that Arnett alone could have gone through the
stock in half a day. If he did, he shouid say it was not
done right. He sent down to the wharf on Jan. 11. He
did not know when the warrants were obtained. The in-
terview at the insurance office was before the warrants were
obtained. Witness did not report at that meeting that
Arnett was not to blame. He did not do so because Mr.
I Whiting was present and heard it, and was also present at
I the meeting. He did not hoar it mentioned, and believed
lit was not.

Mr. George Henry Whiting said he was the manager of
the North British and Mercantile Insurance Company, 67,
Threadneedle-street. On the 11th January he went to
Messrs. Barry's office. Fage was there, and Mr. Alfred
Burry was present. He asked Fage to explain the nature of
the communication he had made to him, and Fage then
accused the firm with having sent in a false statement to
the offices of goods destroyed by the fire, and said he had
been told by Arnett to remove all the marks and tallies from
the bales by a vessel called the Onwards, and to burn them.
Fage stated that some goods were put into a barge called the
Cat, and were knocking about there two or three months,
and were destroyed in the last fire. Fage made some further
statements, and he (witness) addressed himself to Arnett
and asked him if what Fage had been saying was true, and
Arnett said it was. He then addressed Mr. Alfred Barry,
and asked him how he accounted for these discrepancies,
and said it was a very important matter both for him and the
insurance offices. Mr. Barry asked Arnett how he ac-
counted for it, and said there seemed to be no check on the
goods in the warehouse. Arnett made no reply, and some
further comments were made, when Fage said that it was
all very well to blame it all on to Arnett ; but Messrs. Barry
knew all about it. Witness expressed to Mr. Barry a wish
to see the goods in the warehouse alluded to, and Mr. Barry
said he had no objection ; so they all proceeded to the ware-
house, together where Fage pointed out a stack of jute the
front bales of which were marked " City of Dublin," and
said the black bales would be found to have no marks at all
on them. Fage also alluded to some bales which were up
stairs. Witness then gave directions to Mr. Rodwell to
take stock immediately, and in consequence of what he had
seen and heard he took steps to call together the represen-
tatives of the offices interested.
Cross-examined by Sergeant Atkinson. The meeting took
place at witness's office, and thero was a committee formed
upon that occasion, and it was decided to confer with
Mr. Humphreys. Several meetings had been hold since,
at which Mr. Humphreys was present.
By Mr. Lewis—We heard Fage say once that Arnett was
not to blame, and he reported that to the committee. That
was before the warrants for the apprehension of the defen-
daut§ were issued. The defendants worn il3 the employ-

ment of Messrs. Barry, at the time they were apprehended
Mr. Giffard said that was as far as he proposed to carry
the case that day, and asked for a further remand.
Sergeant Atkinson then proceeded to address the alder-
man upon the subject of bail. He said there were but two
points in the whole of the evidence that had been adduced
that at all affected his client. One was, that he was check-
ing the lists, and the other that he transmitted the lists to
the insurance offices, both of which acts he might well ha"
done in the discharge of his duty, if ordered to do so by hr
s
employers, Messrs. Barry, and which he contended was 11°,t
sufficient to justify his being kept in prison until the next'
examination, and he therefore hoped the alderman would
admit him to bail on good and substantial sureties, with
which he was quite prepared.
Mr. Giffard opposed the application, and said if the pro-
secution were well founded, there could be no doubt that
the insurance offices had been defrauded of many thousands
of pounds, and if, as it had been already suggested on the
part of the defence, it should turn out in the course of the,.
proceedings others were behind, there could be no dot
they were persons with ample means who would have dot
he
interest in getting rid of the men who were at pre;
sent under charge ; and until it was fully ascertained Wits
shape the charge would take he thought certainly the de"

fendants ought not to be admitted to bail.
Mr. Lewis, in reference to the same subject, said on behalf
of Arnett and Sedgewick, for whom he appeared, that the
charge upon which the prisoners were being examined vtaa.
one of conspiracy, and was an offence upon which they wer"
entitled to be admitted to bail by the law, even if th,e,YA
were committed for trial and the evidence was concles" -
against them ; and how then ought it to be where they were
merely under charge with such scant evidence as there h a
been brought in the present case ; The evidence which ha
been adduced that day did not amount to more than s""
contained in the information. But his clients had bee„milit
many years in their employment, and had borne exce"`"
characters, which ought surely to go a great way in the to
favour, and Fage himself had said that Arnett was 11°t,:j
blame, and it was said that not a farthing of the mono/
gone into the pockets of the defendants, and that it 'Pi'
impossible that they could gain anything by the transactio -
0.
He considered a great injustice would be done the &fee
dants if they were detained in prison until the next exareio-
nation. Why had Mr. Giffard not the boldness to clislo
those who he insinuated were in the background•
was torturing the defendants because he had net till
courage to charge Messrs. Barry. It was not hOl
5t
they would run away. They were apprehended #OO
their homes, being still in the same employrselat;]-0
days after the conversation with Mr. Whiting, en De
trusted under all the circumstances justice Weill('
done, and the defendants would be admitted to bail.
Mr. Alderman Stone said he was presiding for the Lordf
1
Mayor, and he did not see anything in the evidence to ins
co
him in altering his lordship's decision, and he had decl
not to admit the defendants to bail. It was therefore
ot
duty to refuse to admit either of them to bail in the re°
instance.

The prisoners were then again remanded.