The Sun.
London, England, 1862-07-31 00:00:00

TM SUN, .LONDOIII Z HURSDAY, EVENING, JULY 31, 1861

tacked by the prosicutor and Mil companions, •and
that they had held his hands while they banged
his head. He was eating a piece of meat at the
time, and used his knife to cut it at the time that
he was attacked.

The prisoner was found guilty;and sentenced to
seven months' hard labour.

EXTRORDINARY CHARGE OF HORSE STEALING.
A very little boy, named John. Alborough, only
nine years old, who was scarcely visible in the
dock, was charged with stealing a gelding, the pro.
perty of Thomas Betts, farmer, at Fritton, on the
Bth July. _ _

The prisoner's father works for the prosecutor,
and on the Bth of July the prisoner took the horse
from Mr. Betts's stable, and rode it to a farmer
named Moore, in a neighbouring parish, to whom
he offered it for £l5. Mr. Moore, considering that
there was something very suspicious in the act, de-
tained the horse, and inquiries having been made,
the prisoner was taken into custody.
Mr. Justice Wightman left it to the jury to say
whether the child was old enough to understand
what he was about, and whether he intended to
appropriate the money to his own use.
The jury thought not, and acquitted the prisoner,
who was handed over to the care of his father.
JULY 30.

CLARK V. RACE--SLANDER.
This was an action to recover damages for slan-
ddeefreonudsawnto.rds alleged to haavembre.eßnusiwpookreanppbeyartehde
Mr. O'Malley, Q.C., and
for
thethefe
pdelaiuntdiaffnt
;and Mr. Keane and Mr. Metcalfe
for
The plaintiff is a notary public and magistrate,
at Great Yarmouth, and the defendant is master of
the Trinity steamboat. It appeared from the evi-
dence, that one day in March last the plaintiff's son
and clerk, together with the defendant and a per-
son named Stagg, were in the Duke's Head Inn at
Yarmouth. The conversation turned upon a case
recently decided in the Admiralty Court, " Barnby
v. Yaxley." Stagg asked Steel how Mr. Clarke
came to lose the case, and Steel replied that when
the Trinity Masters had anything to do with a
case they were " dead nuts" on the salvors. Mr.
Clarke, jun., and Mr. Steel then left, and the de-
fendant ased who they were. Stagg said that
they were Mr. Clarke's son and Mr. Steel, Mr.
Clarke's clerk_ The defendant rejoined, " D--
him, he is mcre like iron than steel, and
if he had stopped I would have given him such
a rap on the knuckles as he never had
before. His master had a case in hand for
me some short time since in which he did me
out of £200." The plaintiff explained, with refer-
ence to the case of the Hopewell, to which the de-
fendant's words were understood to relate, that the
result of the case had been that the salvors were
awarded £534, after having been offered only about
half that sum The £534 was, however, awarded
without costs. The plaintiff gave the defendant a
cheque for £165 as his share of the salvage, and he
professed himself perfectly satisfied. Costs were
not awarded to the crew of the Hopewell in con-
sequence of the delay of the salvors themselves. The
plaintiff's portion of the costs was only £26 lls.
for the whole twelvemonths, over which the case
extended.

It was further shown that the defendant had re-
commended a friend not to have any business trans-
actions with Mr. Clarke.

Mr. Keane, for the defendant, contended that the
words used by the defendant simply meant that
he thought that if he had not followed Mr. Clarke's
advice in the case to which allusion had been made,
it would have been all the better for him. The de-
fendant's expressions were never intended to imply
that Mr. Clarke had been guilty of fraudulent,
improper, or unprofessional conduct, as had been
sought to be shown.
The Jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff—
Damages, one farthing.
The remaining business disposed of was of little
or no public interest.
In reference to the action brought to establish a
claim for compensation against the commissioners
of the Middle Level, by reason of the flood near
Lynn, it should be stated that the land flooded is
not under the jurisdiction of the commissioners,
although the drain the banks of which gave way
run through it. This, of course, is an important
element in the question.

OXFORD CIRCUIT.—STAFFORD, July 30.
CROWN COURT.
(Before Mr. Justice Blackburn.)

CONVICTION OF THE ELDEST SON OF THE REV. H. S.

FLETCHER FOR FORGERY.

Horatio Lester Fletcher, 26, was indicted for
forging a certain acceptance to a bill of exchange
for £7B lls., on the 27th of September, 1861, at
Bilston, with intent to defraud.

Mr. A. S. Hill was for the prosecution, and Mr.
Powell and Mr. Matthews for the defence.

The case for the prosecution was that the pri-
soner, up to the middle of last year, carried on busi-
ness at Willenhall, near Wolverhampton, as an iron
merchant, in partnership with Isaac Pitt, the firm
being known as " Pitt and Fletcher." At the date
mentioned Pitt received acceptances to the amount
of between £7OO and £BOO, the acceptor being the
prisoner's father, the late incumbent of St.
Leonard's, Bilston, to leave the business, which
then passed into the prisoner's hands exclusively ;
but Pitt continued to act as cashier. During this
period the bill in question was drawn professedly
by Pitt and Fletcher upon one of their customers,
a locksmith, named Jacob Groves, of Willenhall,
whose acceptance the prisoner was alleged to have
forged. The bill was presented by the pri-
soner to a bill discounter, of Bilston, named
Marsh (since deceased), by whom it was
cashed. It was a three months' bill, and is soon
as it became due it was disowned by Groves. It
was then presented by Marsh to Pitt, who pro-
nounced it to be a forgery, but on Fletcher's account,
whose handwriting he thought he recognised in the
signature " Jacob Groves," he paid the amount.
Upon the discovery of the frauds by the prisoner's
father, the prisoner became bankrupt, and, because
the dissolution between the prisoner and Pitt had
not been gazetted, Pitt also. The bankruptcy was
forced on by the bank authorities, who had ad-
vanced money to the prisoner and to Pitt on the
security of the prisoner's father. The £7OO or £BOO
were never obtained by Pitt, inasmuch as Fletcher
the elder had " blown up" before they were due.
Between the time of that exposure and that of the
bankruptcy of Pitt and Fletcher, the prisoner, it
was urged by Pitt, went out collecting accounts due
to the firm and applying the money to his own pur-
poses. In consequence Pitt threatened to expose
this bill transaction. He, however, communicated
any information respecting it only to his own attor-
ney and to Fletcher's family, until he was required
to give it up by the assignees of the bankruptcy,
by whose instructions the prisoner was arrested.
Upon receiving the bill from Marsh, Pitt showed it
to the prisoner, who said, " I have used Groves'S
name, but it is not a forgery." This, however, was
not the defence. The defence was that Groves
signed the bill at Fletcher's private house, near Bir-
mingham, at 9 o'clock in the morning, some time in
September. This Groves positively denied. Pitt
deposed that it was not Groves's signature ; and the
bill was certainly not entered on the list of bills
received in the ordinary course of business. The
allegation that Groves signed the bill was supported
only by the statement of Miss Norton, sister to
Captain Norton, of the Warwickshire militia, and
sister-in-law to the prisoner, who also deposed that
the servant girl was not in the house at the time.
Mr. Hill commented upon the improbability of a
bill the body of which, it was agreed on both sides,
was written by Fletcher, should have been brought
to the prisoner by Groves, as Miss Norton had
alleged.
His lordship summed up at great length, and
The jury, after having retired to consider their
verdict, found the prisoner Guilty.
The judge said he concurred in the verdict, and
although he (the judge) believed that when heforged
the acceptance he meant to meet the bill when it
came to maturity, yet such was the serious nature
of the 'offence that the Court could not but award
him the sentence of three years' penal servitude.

The trial of the Italian journals seized for pub-
lishing Garibaldi's speech at Palermo will commence on
the 16th of August. It is stated the defendants have re-
solved to cite Garibaldi as one of the witnesses.

ETON COLLEGE ELECTION, 1862.—The following
is a list of candidates elected for the foundation as given
out by the Examiners on Monday evening :—Chute, Raw-
lins, Winsloe, Macauley, Samer Smith, Prothero, R. C.
Radliffe, Mitchell, Macnauten, Hailstone, Pollock, Freeth,
Lock, Smith, Carter, Coombe, F. R. Radcliffe, Armitetead,
Cather, Yarborough, and A. G. Edward. Examiners, Mr.
Earl, Mr. Whitting. There were 83 candidates.
The Xeres Golden Sherry is worthy of commendation, pos-
`l"ming flavour and the characteristics of a pure and true
Spanish Wine, and at a price which will create a new class
of sherry drinkers.—Morning Advertiser. [This wine can be
auLA.ont:vyxtarniompitelsielsi76pdolrters, the Vintage Wine Company, 14,
dozen.
sry-sotrreaentiea] New Oxford-street, lts. and 20s. per
Aofodnitoi:fa:ENTl—Holloway's Ointment and Pills.—
and'egtiiaony.—For the cure of coughs, colds,
rubbed upoliVient consumption, this excellent ointment
e back and chest, aided by the internal use
entalT
sufferer from nttr:f.Ying pills, rarely fails to rescue the
Benbulben, imminent perils. Mr. J. Leonard, of
I did not use your 014,110) writes :—" Sorry, sorry, I am
wondrous change th:Prett and pills in January last. The
trial astonishes every one'`'t.tecl., on and after me week's
proceed
r e
ol
possessesyf
alightedtillee l eP (i: tkehSinSeey: ohtorhtaheveecoursepowerelnt. i improperly
thoseclt hb74:l' 1 s l encouragesdisease:'
se Thist
e d
~... .
end unfav ura Y much, whit
and

THE HORRIBLE MURDER OF A BOY AT
CHATHAM LI2VES.

Yesterday morning Robert Alex. Burton, 18, was
brought up before a full bench of county magis-
trates, at Rochester, by I‘ll% Superintendent Eve-
rest, of the Kent police, and was placed in the dock
to answer a charge of having wilfully murdered
Frederick Thomas Houghton, a little boy about
nine years of age, by cutting his throat, on Cha-
tham Lines, on Wednesday last.
Albert Tree, a little boy 13 years of age, said that
last Wednesday, about five o'clock, he was at play
with some other boys at Chatham Lines. Witness
lan round a heap of chalk to hide in a game they
were playing. He suddenly came upon the body
of a boy. He was very bloody about the face, and
his eyes seemed to be coming out of his head. Wit-
ness ran to two gentlemen and told them what he
had seen, and then went into Chatham for the police.
The Clerk—Prisoner, do you wish to ask this
witness any questions?
Prisoner—No, sir.

Mr. Thomas Everest said that he was going to-
wards the Lines on Wednesday afternoon last, when
the last witness ran up to him and told him what
he had seen. Witness went to the heap of chalk in
Mr. Gilbert's field, and saw the body. He felt it,
and found it quite cold. He recognised the body
as that of Frederick Houghton. He saw no one
about the place until Albert Tree came up to him.
Prisoner declined to put any question to the wit-
ness.

G. J. Henry Houghton, brother of the murdered
boy, identified the deceased as F. T. Houghton, and
said that he was nearly ten years of age. He kne w
the prisoner for three or four years, and he lived
only 300 yards from their residence.
Sergeant Fisher, of the Kent police, said that he
was informed of the occurrence at six o'clock on
Wednesday evening last, and went directly to Gil-
bert's-field, and behind the chalk that surrounds the
air shaft he found the deceased lying between two
projections of chalk. There were several persons
about, but the body had not been disturbed. It was
lying on the back, with the elbows bent and the
hands raised. There was a cut on the right side of
the throat. There was a quantity of blood on the
face, neck, and shirt. The deceased's trousers were
unfastened and open, but one button of the waist-
coat being fastened. There was blood on the ground
where his head lay, in another place below his feet,
about seven feet from that spot of blood, there
was another about the size of the crown of a
hat. The grass was stained with blood also be-
tween the two tips or horns of the gully in which
the body was placed. The crop close to the spot was
mangold-wurtzel, and witness did not observe that
it was trodden or injured. Upon examining the
body he found that the jacket and waistcoat were
unbuttoned and the braces were unfastened. After
the body was taken to the Napier Arms witness took
possession of the clothes produced.
Mr. G. W. Locke, M.R.C.S., New Brampton, said
that the boy Tree called him at half-past 4 o'clock
on Wednesday, to see deceased at the chalk heap.
He examined the body, and found that death had
taksa place about four hours previously. The collar
of the shirt, vest, and jacket were covered with
blood, and much tumbled. The trousers were open
and the shirt pulled up. The front of the shirt was
bloody, as if something had been wiped on it. The
face was injured by a violent blow on the right side.
On the same side of the throat there was an incision
about two inches in length. It appeared to have been
made by a sort of stab with a somewhat blunt in-
strument. The knife prOduced (a shortened dinner
knife, with a white handle) would have caused such
a wound. Witness made a post mortem examina-
tion the next day, and discovered a second wound in
the neck below the other. The second wound was
only superficial. The principal wound divided the
thyroid artery and penetrated the lungs: It was
quite sufficient to cause death. All the organs were
perfectly healthy. There was a mark below the wound
as if the neck-tie had been violently compressed.
The lips were apart, and blood was oozing from the
mouth and nostrils. The immediate cause of death
was asphyxia from the flow of blood into the lungs
from the wound. Deceased was a fine healthy boy.
Prisoner, in answer to the usual question, said
with the greatest coolness, " I have no question to
ask the doctor, only he is wrong in one thing, I
did not touch the neck-tie; it was my hands did
that."

Stephen Hibbard, police constable 167, said that
on Thursday night last he was in Superintendent
Everest's stable in High-street, Chatham, when
the prisoner at the bar came down the yard, and
when asked if he wanted anything said, " I have
murdered that boy on the Lines."
Prisoner—You are wrong there. I asked you if
you wanted a job to take me to the station.
Witness—He might have said something of the
kind ; and he was taken to the superintendent.
On the way prisoner said, " You are not going to
take me to the boy's mother, are you ?" He said
that he had struck the boy in the neck with the
knife, and that when he was down he trod on his
face and neck, and then knelt down on his stomach,
when he put his hands under deceased's neck, and
the blood gushed from his nose and mouth.
The prisoner here laughed, as at some very good
joke. He declined to question witness.
Superintendent Everest said that when he heard
of the murder he ordered inquiries to be made in
every direction, and one lad was taken to the chalk
heap, but was not eventually detained. On the
Thursday night Constable Hibbard brought Burton
to witness's parlour, and said that he had confessed
the murder to him in the stable, and gave the
details of the whole affair. Witness cautioned the
prisoner that whatever he said would be used
against him. Burton said that he had made up
his mind to tell the truth about the whole business.
He said he went around the field with Houghton,
and that when they came to the chalk heap he killed
him. Hibbard asked on which side of the neck the
wound was inflicted, and witness answered, "The
left." Prisoner said, "No it is not indeed, it is the
right. If you look you will find that it is just under
here " (pointing to the right side of his throat).
He said that he only stabbed him once, and that
the deceased made a desperate resistance, and
caught hold of his arms. He also said, " I will
turn down my sleeves, and you will see blood upon
them." He did so, and there were stains of blood
up nearly to the elbows. The sleeves were damp,
however, from having been recently washed. He
added, " He caught hold of my scarf once, but I
don't know whether there is blood on that too. He
tried to hollow, but I very soon stopped him. If
you take me to the place I will show you where the
knife is. You know I had no particular ill-feeling
against the boy, but I made up my mind to kill
somebody." When witness was taking prisoner to
get the knife he said, "I knew the boy, for I often
saw his mother. They lived not far from my place."
He said that the knife was in a water-closet at the
Dark Sun public-house. A light was brought, but
it was blown out by the wind, when prisoner said,
" You don't want a light. Put your hand up under
the eaves and you will get it." Witness did so and
got it, when Burton remarked that there would be
n o blood or anything else on it, as he had washed
it. He also stated that while he was kneeling on
the boy he saw a man pass by, but he was not seen
himself, as the heap of chalk concealed him. The
prisoner's trousers were marked at the knees and
legs with blood and chalk. He said that a second
man was at work hoeing in a field a great distance
from them. He repeated several times that he had no
ill-will to the boy, but that he did the deed because he
was tired of his life. He said that he did not want to
see the boy's mother, as that was the only thing
ho oared about_ g, Go," said he. " to hie tnnthpr
and ask her if she remembers walking with her
son, that I killed, alongside the baker's barrow
in the morning. That was the first time I
saw her son that day. Ask her, did . she
not say to the baker's boy, whose nose was bleed-
ing, that her child's nose sometimes bled too. That
will bring it to her mina in a moment that I was
standing alongside them at the time. Between one
and two o'clock the boy went up to the Lines, and
I saw him there, and I asked him to go round to-
wards Gilbert's Fields. After I killed him I got
on the top of the chalk heap and look around, but
I saw no one coming. Before I came away I took
out the boy's shirt and wiped my hands in the front
of it. I put my hands into my trouser pockets,
with the kni▪ fe in my
hand, and the blade worked
through, and you can find the hole. I then made
up my mind to wash my hands and arms, for there
was very much dry
blood about them. I went down
to the trough where the soldiers' horses drink at
the Lines. When I got there I saw a number of
people walki▪
ng about, and I was afraid they would
see the blood, so I went down the road to the bath-
ing pond, and had a thorough wash. I came through
the sallyport and went to Mr. Lipscomb'e, who em-
ployed me take
a stove out directly, and I did se.
It was then about 3 o'clock." He said that in the
evening he heard the people narrating how the boy
was found, and saw a good many going to the Lines.
He saw some one that he thought was the boy's
brother, going home in the evening from the docks.
Mr. Clarke, he said, might thank his stars that he
had left Chatham, for he was the first
be had made up his mind to kill, for be was
his greatest enemy. He volunteered to show wit-
ness the place where he killed the boy, and he
Were
was taken there in a cart. There
several persons standing there at the time.
,e
pointed out the spot behind the chalk, and
.oala,
"'That's where I did it. Now look at the top person
other heap, and you will find that a mai! came
xe and
up there twice while I was doing it. Ask hiul, a
he will tell you he was there at 2 o'clock, aa near
as I can guess." He then showed witness wile. re
he washed his hands, near the bathing pond, which
was about a mile from the chalk heap. The chalk
of that

heap covered about two acres of ground, and was
from 15 to 20 feet in height. Witness had known
prisoner for some three or four years. He was
formeily: apprenticed to Mr. Andrews, the builder,
but he got his liiing as a sort of waiter at public-
houses in Chatham, He Was prosecuted in January
last by Mr. Clarke,[about whoni.he spoke as befae
mentioned.

Mrs. Lucy Houghton, the mother of the murdered
boy, was then produced, and seemed overwhelmed
with grief and sobbed audibly. The prisoner
merely smiled. Having been accommodated with
a seat, she said that on Wednesday last she saw the
baker with the barrow. Her son was then with
her. Some person was standing alongside the bar-
row, and she did not know that she had seen him
since. All three—baker's boy, deceased, and the
stranger—went away together towards the Lines.
The prisoner declined to put any questions to the
witness, who did not look towards him, but kept
her head averted.
William Oiff, the baker's boy alluded to, said that
about 1 o'clock on the day in question his nose be-
gan to bleed. Last witness and her little boy were
standing together, and the little boy came over and
asked him what was the matter. Just then the pri-
soner came up and stood close by on the pavement.
He asked for a penny loaf, which he said he paid
for at the shop. lie wheeled the barrow up towards
Nicholson's shop. Little Houghton accompanied
them, but afterwards turned back. Burton went
as far as Nicholson's, when he got a penny loaf and
went back down the street, iu the direction that
little Houghton had gone.
William Freeman said that he had gone up to the
top of the second heap of chalk about 2 o'clock on
the day of the murder, as described by the prisoner
to Superintendent Everest. He did not see the
prisoner.

Matthew Diblen said that he was at w3rk about
500 yards away from the chalk heap on the day in
question as the prisoner described.
G. W. Deacon said that he saw the prisoner be-
tween 4 and 5 o'clock on the Wednesday, and he
was then just washed. He said that he had washed
up street, and with mud, and not with soap. He
said that he had been at the Chatham station, and
upon witness saying that his master's son had seen
him on the Lines, he said that he had been there
also. Witness identified the knife produced as the
one which used to lay on his grandfather's wash-
house shelf. It had not then the sharp point now
ground on it. It was a thin knife, used for paring
potatoes. Witness saw the knife with the prisoner
about three weeks ago in his grandfather's yard,
and told him that he might have it.
The prisoner, having been formally cautioned,
was asked in the usual form whether he had any-
thing to say in answer to the charge.
Prisoner—l have nothing to say.
He was then fully committed to take his trial for
wilful murder at next Maidstone assizes.
A dense crowd congregated outside the court to
hoot and groan the prisoner as he was being con-
veyed to prison.

CHARGE OF FORGERY AGAINST A

STOCKBROKER.

Mr. Jno. Bruce, a member of the Stock Exchange,
carrying on business as a stockbroker, at 4, Bank-
chambers, Lothbury, was yesterday charged with
forgery before Sir R. W. Carden, at Guildhall.
Mr. Mullens, solicitor to the Society for the Pro-
secution of Fraud and Forgery, conducted the pro-
secution, and Mr, Wontner the defence.
Capt. Grant, of the 11th Madras Regiment, said
—I became acquainted with Mr, Brace about the
beginning of the present year, and at his solicita-
tion authorised him to do business for me at the
Stock Exchange. Between the beginning of Jan.
and the sth of March last I received from him
the accounts produced marked A, B, C, and D
respectively, and during that interval I paid
him various sums of money, amounting to £472.
On the 12th of March I was at his office in Loth-
bury, and saw there Mr. Antrobus, Mr. Schorn-
dorff, and Mr. Bruce. The object of that meeting
was to show me my account, which he said was
over due by about £l,OOO. I disputed several of
the items he produced against me referring to Con-
sols and Mexican stock, and we could not come to
any agreement as to the exact sum due. He repre-
sented to me that he had got into great difficulties
on the Stock Exchange, partly because my overdue
account was not paid, and partly on account of a
friend of his in the north, for whom he had been
buying and selling, not paying up. He said settling-
day was at hand, and that if he could not meet his
liabilities at the Stock Exchange he would be pro-
claimed, and beeome a ruined man, but that if I
would assist him to tide over that settling-day he
he would be able to transfer my account and go on
speculating the next month, and probably bring
me in a winner. He said if I would give him a
bill for £l,OOO he would deposit it at his banker's,
the Bank of England, or Bank of London, and they
would advance him funds upon it. I objected to
give any bill with any date of payment to it, as I
never do give bills, and I had not the moneyto meet
it. I said 1 had some property at Rangoon, which I
would direct to be sold, and on receiving the proceeds
he should have the money for any amount that might
be due to him. He urged that such a bill without
a date of payment would be next to useless, and
Mr. Antrobus suggested I should give a bill, the
form of which he drew out, and I approved it, and
promised to sign such a bill when properly drawn.
He pledged his word of honour that no one should
have the bill but his bankers. I then wrote a letter
to my agents at Rangoon to sell my property, and 1
gave it to Mr. Brace open. He read it, and said he
would post it, and I left. He came to me the same
evening at the Junior United Service Club, and gave
me an account showing a balance due of £1,071 16s.
I objected to some of the items, and said I did not owe
him £l,OOO, nor anything like it. He said that
he should be a ruined man unless I gave him
the bill or note for £l,OOO, to help him over his
difficulties, and that if he succeeded in getting over
the next settling-day he would carry over my ac-
count without any further risk or liability to me,
and very probably bring me in a winner, instead of
a loser. He then placed before me the note suggested
by Mr. Antrobus, and after readicg it I struck out
the words " for value received," as I had not re-
ceived value for it. He disputed the point with me,
and I then said I would not sign it, at all. He how-
ever gave in, and said I might as well sign it, and
he would see if it was of any use. I signed the note
and he took it away, and asked me if I would sign
another note if he found that one of no use, and I
promised I would. On the following morning Mr.
Bruce's clerk came to me at the club with a letter
from Mr. Bruce, which stated that he had been un-
able to do anything with the bill and asked me to
sign a fresh one, worded as I wanted it, which he
forwarded; and in reference to the disputed account
he offered to submit the whole of our transactions to
some disinterested party, and abide by the decision
even to the refunding of money, should it be against
him. The clerk brought me this note to sign :
" London, March 12, 1862.
£l,ooo.—Four months after date I promise to
pay to Mr. John Bruce or his order the sum of one
thousand pounds sterling on receipt-of a remittance
from India arising from the sale of two houses be-
' longing to me at Rangoon, for which I have sent
out orders to my agent per last mail to that effect,
provided my liabilities are not liquidated before
that time. (Signed) " C. W. GRANT.
" Captain Christian W. Grant, Junior United
Service Club, London."
At the time I signed that note the words "Four
months after date" were not on it_ I gave the rote
to the clerk, and on the following evening Mr Bruce
called on me at the club with a friend, whom he in-
troduced to me as Mr. Rougier, one of his creditors.
Mr. Bruce said they had come to bring me a more
satisfactory arrangement, either by putting a date
of payment to the note, granting another note, or
making some cash payment on the account rendered.
I declined to do anything of the kind. Mr. Rougier
said he knew that I had money, as they had been
to Mr. Stuart, my solicitor, and ascertained the fact.
I said I had stated that I had no money to make a
cash payment, and that Mr. Rougier's contradiction
was tantamount to calling me a liar, and that I
would not have anything further to say to him. I
left the room to tell one of the club servants to show
them the door. Mr. Bruce followed me out, said no
offence was intended, and that Mr. Rougier would
apologise for the words he had used. I returned to
the room, and Mr. Rougier apologised. They said
it would be very awkward for me if my account
could not be carried over the settling day, and I
replied that I did not care for the consequences, but
I would not put a date of payment to the note. The
worst they could do would be to put me into gaol,
and they were welcome to take me then and there.
The note was not produced at that interview. In
consequence of certain information I went to the
Stock Exchange, on the 9th of April, with Mr.
Ryley, a solicitor, and there saw this note in Mr.
Mortimer's possession. It then contained the words
" Four months after date." I had not authorised
anyone to put those words in the note, and I was
not aware of their being there until I saw them on
that occasion. I was at Mr. Bruce's office on the 17th
of March, and he told me two of his creditors were
in an adjoining room, and that if I would tell them
I would pay the £l,OOO as promised in the note he
would be able to tide over the account. I agreed to
do so, and he then introduced me to Mr. Mortimer
and Mr. Rougier. We discussed the disputed items
of the account, and I expressed a wish to consult a
lawyer; but Mr. Mortimer said no lawyer could
a
help me, as Mr. Bruce's attorney already had my
name and address, and that it' the settling day were
not tided over the creditors would commence pro-
ceedings against me ; and one of those present said

that a further claim had occurred against me for
speculations since the closing of the former account,
and that they also were closed. I objected to
further liability, on the ground that the account
had been closed without my orders, They then
agreed to receive the £l,OOO note as a full settle-
ment of all claims against nle. Mr. Mortimer
ellculated the time that the roalisation of my
at Rangoon would take/
property and asked me
if I could not name three or four months as the
time of payment. I said I could not; and he then
asked me to pledge my word of honour that I would
pay the £l,OOO to him, and I did so, ant: he said
on that promise he would hold the note on behalf
of Mr. Bruce's creditors. Mr. Mortimer then gave
me the following letter :
" Dear Sir,—ln consequence of the conversation
just held with you, and the understanding come to
at cur interview, I will at once order all proceed-
ings on my part to be stopped against you as the
principal of Mr. Bruce.—l am, dear sir, yours truly,
" March 17, 1862." " C. S. MORTIMER.
A letter to the same effect, signed by Mr. Bruce,
was given to me at that interview, and one part of
the arrangement was that he should give me his
acceptance for £l5O. I did not on that occasion see
the note for £l,OOO. The note was presented for
payment and noted on the 16th of July.
Cross examined—He has never rendered me an
account bringing me in a debtor to him for £1,500.
I have seen such an account, but it was sent to my
solicitor by Mr. Mortimer, and not to me. I in-
structed Mr. Bruce to close some accounts for me,
but I do not know if he did so beyond receiving the
contracts from him.
Sir R. W. Carden—The same kind of contracts
that you received in all your other transactions ?
Witness—Yes, sir. The date of the last contract
is the 12th of March; the last entry in the account
is the 14th of March. I was not in a position to
pay £l,OOO at that time. I had sufficient money to
enable me to stay in England until my leave of ab-
sence expired, and no more.
Mr. Wontner—Very well. Now, having no
money to pay on your transactions, look at this
letter, dated the 14th of March, instructing Mr.
Bruce to purchase railway and other shares on your
account, and say if it is in your handwriting.
Witness—lt is, and the meaning of that letter
was that he was to buy and sell in the market for
the chance of a profit, according to the best of his
judgment.
Mr. Wontner—That is, to pledge his credit to the
jobbers on those transactions, for you had nothing
but bare subsistence money, you say.
'Witness—He was to act upon his own responsi-
bility.
Sir R. W. Carden—Do you mean that Mr. Bruce
was to pay all the losses, and that you were to have
all the gains ?
Witness—Yes, sir, upon the condition of my giv-
ing my note for £l,OOO.
Sir R. W. Carden—lf those were the conditions
he made with many of his customers it is no wonder
he is in difficulties. (Laughter.)
Witness—He volunteered to pay my losses. He
was to carry on my speculations at his own risk on
my helping him with the note for £l,OOO.
Sir R. W. Carden—You have referred to his dif-
ficulties several times. Did not those difficulties
arise from your not paying him ?
Witness—Only partly on that account. I knew
that Mr. Antrobus was cueing him for a large sum,
but I did not hear it was for £3,000. I saw
Mr. Antrobus ou Monday last. I heard there was
an action pending against Mr. Bruce. I told him I
was going to give Mr. Bruce into custody. That
was after I heard of the action coming on for trial.
I will not swear I do not owe Mr. Bruce all the
account for £1,574 lls. ld., but I think I do not.
I did not see the promissory note zd the meeting at
Mr. Bruce's office when Mr. Mortimer and Mr.
Rougier were present. If it were produced I must
have seen it. I will swear distinctly that Mr. Mor-
timer did not read the promissory not aloud. I will
swear that it was never said in my presence that
the bill was for four months. The acceptance for
£l5O was for the disputed items, and not for half
the commission on these transactions. I never heard
the word " commission" used at that interview.
claimed Mr. Bruce's note for £3OO on account, and
the disputed items, and Mr. Mortimer suggested
we should split the difference, and we agreed to do
so. I have delayed these proceedings since the 9th
of April, in order to see what course would be
adopted at the end of the four months. If the bill
had not been presented and I had been allowed to
pay it at my leisure, I should not have adopted
these proceedings. My leave of absence expired in
June last, but I got it extended for three months.
I had no knowledge of the anonymous letter found
on Mr. Bruce, urging him to leave his office or he
would be arrested, until it was shown me by the
detective, Sergeant Brett, who apprehended Mr.
Bruce.
Re-examined—l have had no communication
with Mr. Autrobus in reference to these proceed-
ings, and he has not had any influence in inducing
mo to tako this course. He has told me that if it
were his own case he would prosecute.
Sir R. W. Carden—Then it was at his sugges-
tion that you prosecute ?
Witness—Not quite, sir. I would rather have
paid the £l,OOO at my leisure than prosecute. I
have been connected with the Indian police since
1852.

Mr. Wontner—And therefore know something of
criminal law ?
Mr. Chas. Smith Mortimer said—l am a member
of the Stock Exchange. I produce the promissory note
in question for £l,OOO. I received it from Captain
Grant about the 13th of March. I had seen it pre-
viously. Mr. Bruce brought the note to me in the
first instance, and said he could not get his differ-
ences from Captain Grant, and asked me to discount
the bill. It was then in exactly the same state in
which it is now. I declined to do that without
knowing Captain Grant, or what his liabilities
were. I saw Captain Grant on the morning of the
settling day in company with Mr. Rougier, and
produced to him the accounts showing the balance
due from him to Mr. Bruce to the amount of 1:1,500.
I asked Captain Grant if he would, as an honour-
able man, undertake to pay £l,OOO if Mr. Bruce
relinquished the rest, and he said he would. A dis-
cussion then arose about the date of pay ment. Cap-
tain Grant said it would take three or four months
to get the money, and accepted the note produced
as payment on behalf of the creditors. Captain
Grant asked me if we should be harsh with him if
he exceeded that time, and I said certainly not if
the remittance did not come from Rangoon.
Mr. Mullens—This evidence has taken me quite
by surprise. When did you give the letter da►ted
the 17th of March, and when was the interview it
alludes to ?

Witness—The interview was about three days
before; for I got the Committee of the Stock Ex-
change to suspend the matter before them, to give
Captain Grant and Mr. Bruce three days to arrange
matters in. The bill was on the table at that inter.
view, and was the subject of conversation for two
hours, as to how it was to be met, and what the date
of payment should be, because we wanted to reduce
the time, as it would have been a great thing for
the creditors to have the bill fall due in June, before
Captain Grant's leave of absence expired, instead
of in July. Captain Grant gave me the bill. I read
it aloud, so that all might hear it, for we were at a
very small table.
Cross-examined—When everything else was
settled the. acceptance for £l5O was given. Captain
Grant claimed back from Mr. Bruce the half of his
commissions, and Mr. Bruce said he agreed to pay
that on the condition that the account for £1,500
was settled, but that Captain Grant had only paid
£3,000, and left him to pay the balance.
Mr. Mullens said—After this witness's evidence
I cannot proceed with the case. This is the -first
time Mr. Mortimer has mentioned these facts, and
being my own witness I cannot cross-examine him.
Sir R. W. Carden—And if you could you would
get nothing but the truth from him. I have known
him for many years as one of the most respectable
gentlemen on the Stock Exchange. I think, in
justice to Mr. Bruce, that Mr. Rougier should be
called.

Mr. Hy. Rougier was then sworn and said—l
most emphatically confirm all that Mr. Mortimer
has stated. When I saw Captain Grant at the club
I told him Mr. Bruce's existence depended on him,
and asked him if he intended to sacrifice Mr. Bruce.
He got excited, and I told him he could raise money
on his property at Rangoon, and save Mr. Bruce,
but he said he would not do so. I then told him
that his answer amounted to his declining to pay
his debts, but I never made any apology to him.
Mr. Wontner—Now that this case is who'll'
before you, sir, I must invite you to express your
opinion of it publicly.
Sir R. W. Carden—l shall do so without invita-
tion.. This has been a most painful case
atnhrohuags
out. The defendant, though a young
nothingin has,
believe,' held a respectable position;.
for
rother young
transpired to the contrary, and,
men, has, I suppose, been unforliaktee in his specu-
lations. With regard to Captain
I can only say it is extremely discreditable to him,
without the means of
for any man
. who will enter into a speculation, will-
ing to receive the profits, but
that may arise against
meeting any differences
not an honourable- man.
him, that man 's
before me that when the bill
There is no prolof".'
t hands the words, "Four
was in Captain
Grants
not on the face of it, but,
months after dateG"
the
theevidence fact that the bill was lying
Whnesses e
on the table, and was afterwards given by Captain
Grant to Mr. Mortimer, with the words iu question
then
written on the bill. lam quite sure Mr.
lens would never have brought such a case o court
had he been aware of the facts as sworn to, and,