The Sun.
London, England, 1853-12-30 00:00:00

THE PRESTON STRIKE.

A CO UNTER-COMBINATION.

The Manchester Examiner has the following :—° Yes-
terday a step was taken in Manchester which will tend
ty bring this controversy to a settlement sooner than it
was ever likely to be while the Preston masters and
-operatives kept towards each other an attitude of un-
reasoning defiance, and resisted all terms of accommoda-
tion. The general body of manufacturers have been
looking on at the struggle in Preston for some time
with mingled hope and fear—hope that, after a time,
the operatives would return to their work, and make
terms with their respective employers—fear that, from
the language of their leaders, there was a formed deter-
mination to make Preston the battle-ground of a great
truggle, the success of which would extend the circle
f controversy and antagonism until the whole manu-
acturing district was in anarchy and its trade in
jeopardy. Regarding the dispute, as explained by
its leaders, as intended to achieve the supremacy of
labour over capital, the manufacturers of Lancashire
yesterday resolved, after mature and anxious delibera-
tion, to support the Preston masters in the present
struggle.' The resolution was adopted with entire
unanimity ; and the strength of this resolve may be
appreciated, when we state that the meeting repre-
sented manufacturing capitalists from Manchester and
Salford, Stockport, Bury, Ashton, Stalybridge, Glossop,
Hyde, Preston, Darwen, Bacup, Burnley, Colne,
Accrington, and other places. The question at issue at
Preston, whioh has produced this strong resolution, was
not viewed as one of mere wages, but as one of mastery
—the question, in fact, whether the masters should
conduct their own businesses, or give them up to their
workpeople. Such is the result of the combination of
the Preston factory operatives, aided by those of other
manufacturing towns, as well as by men belonging to
other trades. One combination, appalling in its mag-
nitude, and, consequently, terrible in its power, has
itself
more another, destined, we believe, to prove
more powerful. It is with no little pain we view
these counter-combinations ; whither they will lead
we cannot exactly see, but it is evident that
now the Preston manufacturers, who were in danger
of falling before a powerful labour league, are
to receive such an amount of pecuniary assist-
ance as must take from the leaders of the movement
one of their strongest hopes of success, for the bank:
ruptcy and ruin of some of the Preston employers they
have spoken of as something certain, were the lock-out
contfnued for even a few weeks longer. Harsh as this
Manchester combination may seem, then, it may be the
means of more speedily inculcating upon the minds of
the factory operatives a true knowledge of the relations
which ought to exist between capital and labour. Ex-
traneous aid has been thrown into Preston on behalf of
the operatives, and now extraneous aid is to given to
the masters. The contest is, therefore, for the first
time, equal ; the many operatives have not to wrestle
with the many manufacturing capitalists. One great
feature of the Lancashire cotton trade hitherto has been
the power of individual energy, and the English public
may well believe that it is no slight matter indeed
which, for the first time in the history of that trade, in-
duces its great capitalists to lend their united aid to a
few manufacturers in one town. Such a state of things
is abnormal indeed, and therefore we must presume
that the instinct of self-preservation alone has brought
it about."

MEETING OF PRESTON MANUFACTURERS.
PRESTON, THURSDAY.
The adjourned meeting of the associated employers of
Preston and the neighbourhood was held at the full
Hotel in this town at 11 o'clock this morning. Alter
about an hour's deliberation, the result was made known
by placard, of which the following is a copy :
"At a meeting of the associated masters, held at the
Bull Hotel, Preston, on Thursday, the 29th of Decem-
ber, 1853, Mr. Thomas Miller in the chair, it was unani-
mously resolved, that inasmuch as no disposition has
been as yet shown by the operatives generally to resume
work, this meeting do adjourn to Thursday, the 26th of
January, 1854. Should it, however, in the meantime
be ascertained that many of the operatives are desirous
of returning to their work, immediate steps will be taken
by the associated masters to open their mills.
" By order of the Masters' Association,
"JOHN HUMBER, Secretary (pro tern)."
The main street, in which the Bull Hotel is situated,
was thronged with operatives during the time occupied
by the meeting, considerable interest being evinced as
to the result.

REPLI TO THE MASTERS FROM THE WEAVERS'
ASSOCIATION.
The committee of the Powerloom Weavers' Associa-
tion have this morning published the annexed reply to
the address of the Masters' Association, issued yester-
day :

In consequence of the various misrepresentations
which have been so unblushingly put forth by the Mas-
ters' Association, we, the Weavers' Association, feel it
to be a duty to ourselves and the public to publish
the following answers :
" 1. In the document issued yesterday bythe Masters'
Committee, they say, that the differences which in the
first instance existed would have been arranged, and
would not have resulted in a general stoppage of the
mills, had it not been for the improper interference
of strangers between the masters and their hands.'
We beg to say distinctly that no strangers had, either
properly or improperly, interfered in the disputes be-
tween the masters and their hands previous to a notice
being given for a general stoppage.
"2. We repeat that we have been locked out, in
order to starve us into submission,' not because we ob-
jected to the advances made upon the price paid in 1852,-
for the great body of us were perfectly satisfied with the
advances given, but because we thought fit to give our own
money to support some four mills' hands who had disputes
with their employers, the primary cause of our sympathy
being that these workpeople had been denied the opportu-
nity of explaining, or coming to an arrangement with
their employers. It is false and without any founda-
tion to say, 'that these firms were to be made the vic-
tims of an organised combination, whose avowed object
was to take the masters in succession, and compel them
to accept the terms of the unionists.' We deny this
statement, and challenge them to substantiate it. We,
as a body, have never done or said anything to justify
such a conclusion.
"3. They say,—' We at once admit that, owing to
the depressed state of trade in 1847, a general reduction
of wages took place but with respect to the promise of
restoring it when trade revived, they say,—' We deny,
however, that any such promise was made by
the mas-
ters generally, although this might have been done by
some individual firms.' We are prepared to admit that
every employer in the town did not make that promise
there were several firms where, had the hands, or any
portion of them, raised the shadow of an objection to
the reduction, or solicited a promise of any description,
they would have received summary ejectment ; and such
a process, in the state of the labour market at the time
would have been next to starvation and death ; but the
promise given at the firms where the masters allowed
them some little 'freedom' was justly considered appli-
cable to all, and, consequently, to those firms where the
hands dare not ask at that time to be other than de-
graded slaves.'
" 4. They say, anxious to ascertain the diffe-
rence (if any) between the earnings of the various classes
of operatives in 1847, before the above-mentioned reduc•
tion took place, and those in the summer of 1853, before
the 10 per cent. was demanded, we find, from the returns
furnished us from the wages book of several large and
influential firms, that instead of any decrease there has
been an actual increase, varying from 5 to 30 pc: cent.,
after making due allowance fur the difference in the
hours of labour from 69 to 60 hours per week.' Gentle-
men, if your object bad been to furnish statistical data
of the benefits and blessings which have resulted from
the passing of the Ten Hours' Bill (that bill which you
so long and so zealously opposed, and which you so often
prophecied would be followed by ruinous and disastrous
results ; by the by, We are told at the present time, that
if you cannot succeed in reducing our wages 10 per cent,
it will be followed by diastroes ruin), we could have
understood your motive ; but, because by our un-
tiring exertions we have succeeded in doing as much
work in 60 hours as we formerly did in 69 hours,
• you are so ungenerous as to make this a justification for
Preventing us participating in the general prosperity
which has followed ; hut you say that in a well regu-
lated spinning and weaving establishment the average
earnings of all classes of bands is about 103. each.' You
toh'..igse to tell us whose well regulated establishment
; but, if all establishments where the average
earnings are less than 10s. per week are badly regu-
lated establishments we are prepared to prove from your own books, if
you will furnish us with the facility,
that the reatlated.'
body of establishments are anything but
' well
te 5. e
ha repeat tilat the wages paid in Preston are
less than wt are paid in other districts, and this is
the secret
to improve cause of hdition.
e determinatio
n of the work-people
6.
We
refer the public to the letters we have sent
to the Preston papers, in answer to those which
ap-
appeared in the Chronicle of Saturday
7. We beg to say, that in this struggle the masters
wdeirtshtatnhde
are the aggressors ; we are on the defensive ; we were
(with the few exceptions referred to).avitisefieudn
wages given us before the 'lock-out ,
that we must not resume work unless we will submit to
a reduction of 10 per cent. ; we have offered to have the
question settled upon reasonable terms, but no conces-
sion' is the terms of our employers; they have forced us
to rely for an existence upon aid from other towns, and
now tell us that we can only resume work upon condi-
tion that we will degrade ourselves in the eyes of the
world by accepting a reduction, which must naturally be
followed by a reduction in the wages of those 'who have
so generously saved our children from starvation, Are
these the only terms of honourable men ? Will it he the
interest of the employers of Preston to see their work-
people both degraded and dishonest ? We think not ;
but, if it be, we tell them that we will suffer much be-
fore we will submit to such depravity.
"In conclusion, we again reiterate, that we are pre-
pared at any time to bring this dispute to an honourable
and reasonable arrangement.
"By order of the Powerloona Weavers' Committee,
" • "JAMES WHALLEY, Sec.
Committee-rooms, Preston, 'Dec. 28."

THE GREAT BILL FORGERIES.

Yesterday having been fixed for the further examina-
tion of IVilliaan Anderson, who stands charged with
having committed forgeries of a most extensive nature,
long before the hour of commencing business at the
Mansion-house the justice room was densely crowded by
influential merchants and others, many of them suffer-
ers from the misconduct of the prisoner.
The Lord Mayor presided. Sir R. W. Carden and
Alderman Humphery were also upon the bench. Shortly
after 12 o'clock the prisoner was placed at the bar in
custody of John Forrester.
Mr. Nobler, who appeared for the prisoner upon the
former examination, was again in attendance.
The depositions of the witnesses in connexion with the
charge against the accused of having feloniously uttered
a forged acceptance for 2,2501. with intent to defraud
Messrs. Womersley and Burt, well knowing the same
to be forged, were read over and signed.
After the usual caution, upon being asked what he
had to say in answer to the charge, the prisoner,
through his solicitor, said he should reserve his defence.
He was then committed, and the witnesses were bound
over to prosecute.
The prisoner was next charged with having feloniously
uttered a forged acceptance for the sum of 2,4801., with
a view to defraud Mr. Philip Conrad Freese, well know-
ing the same to be forged.
Mr. Philip Conrad Freese—l am an exchange, dis-
count, and insurance broker of No. 16, George-street,
Mansion-house. On the 20th inst. I received the bill of
exchange, the subject of this inquiry. I believe it
was brought to my counting-house by a Mr. Ryder's
clerk, but I was absent at the time. I received it loose
from my clerk. It was for 2,480/. I had previously,
spoken to Mr. Ryder upon the subject of the bill, hav-
ing been made acquainted with the fact that it was
about to be sent to me for the purpose of being dis-
counted. I believe I received directions about getting
it discounted from Mr. Ryder. The prisoner gave my
clerk directions as to what was to be done with the pro-
ceeds of the bill ; the directions were not given person-
ally to me. I took the bill to Messrs. Overrend, Gurney,
and Co., who discounted it for me. I received from
them an open check for 2,0001. By "open" I mean an
uncrossed cheque. I gave this cheque to Emanuel
Green, my clerk, who cashed it at Messrs. Barclay and
Co.'s, and brought the money back to the counting-
house ; but I did not see it in his possession. I had
given him directions what to do with the money, but
what he did with it was not done in my presence. I
afterwards saw the prisoner on the same day upon the
subject. He then wanted me to buy a bill upon Havre
for 6001. This sum he was to pay on the delivery of the
bill. I understood that part of the proceeds of the
2,0001. that I had obtained was to be applied to the
purchase of the 6001. bill. It was not to be paid through
me. I was to pay the balance of the 2,4801., after de-
ducting the 1,6001., to Mr. Ryder. I gave my clerk di-
'rections to pay this balance to Mr. Ryder. No portion
of the balance that was to be paid over to Mr. Ryder
was to be applied towards the purchase of the 6001.
bill. The bill produced by Daniel Forrester is the bill
in question, to the best of my belief. I did not indorse
it. I merely acted as agent between the parties. The
bill is as follows :
" B. 2180, due 7th April, 1854.
"No. 630--Exchange for 2,4Bol.—Calcutta, 4th Oc-
tober, 1853."
"At six months after date pay this first of exchange
(second and third unpaid) to the order of J. M. Dupont,
the sum of two thousand four hundred and eighty
" Value in account, L and S—which place to account
as advised. "J. LE BRUN.
" 685, J. Le Brun.
"To Messrs. P. and C. Van Notten and Co.,
London."
" Accepted for two thousand four hundred and eighty
pounds payable when due at Messrs. Martin and Co's.
" P. and C. Van Notten and Co."
" Endorsed Payez iL l'ordre de Monsieur W. B. An-
derson valeur en co compte. Paris, Decembre 13, 1853.
"NV. E. Anderson." "JAN. DUPONT.
The bill upon Havre has nothing to do with the pre-
sent transaction, it never having gone. The interview
between me and the prisoner took place at my counting-
house. I saw him again the same day, when he was in
custody, at Messrs. Womersly and Co's.. I went there
about half-past three o'clock, when I demanded of the
prisoner the return of the bank notes, amounting to the
sum of 1,0001., which he had received from my clerk.
He replied that if I went with him to Mr. Ryder's
counting-house in Broad-street, he expected I should
find them there. I went there with Forrester, another
person, and the prisoner, but did not find the notes. I
saw Mr. Ryder's clerk. When the money was not
found to be there, the prisoner said it would be in Bil-
liter-street. We then all went to Billiter-street together,
when the prisoner went into a counting-house, Forrester
and I after him, slipped down an inner staircase, and
attempted to escape. He was, however, secured by
Forrester. I then came with Forrester and the person
who had accompanied us, a Mr. Clark, to the Mansion
House, where the prisoner was searched. 6001. and a
warrant were found upon his person. The 6001. he
received from my clerk, although the produce of the
cheque for 2,0001. never passed through my hands.
Mr. Hobler—Nor the 6001.
Witness—Nor the 6601.
Mr. David Barclay Chapman—l am a partner in the
firm of Overend, Gurney, and Co. of Lombard-street,
money dealers. I produce a bill of exchange for 2,480/.
purporting to be drawn by Mr. J. Le Brun upon Messrs.
P. and C. Van Notten and Co. It was brought to me
by Mr. Freese for discount, and in part discount of it I
gave a cheque for 2,000/. on account, upon Messrs.
Barclay and Co., of Lombard-street.
Mr. Emanuel Green—l am clerk to Mr. Freese. On
the 20th of December the bill of exchange produced was
brought to the counting-house by Mr. Austin, Mr
Ryder's clerk. He left it with me for discount, and I
gave it to Mr. Freese the same day at half-past eleven
o'clock. At a quarter to two o'clock the same day I
received from Mr. Freese an open cheque for 2,0001.,
which I cashed at Messrs. Barclay and Co.'s, getting
for it five notes, namely, one for 1,0001., one for 5001.,
two for 2001., and one for 1001. I had received direc-
tions from Mr. Freese to give 1,6001. to the prisoner,
whom I found at the office when I returned from Messrs.
Barclay and Co.'s. I accordingly handed him the notes
for 1,0001., 5001., and 1001. I neither wrote upon these
notes, nor made any memorandum of their numbers.
On the same day, about twenty minutes to 12 o'clock, I
had some conversation with the prisoner after the bill
was left with me, in the course of which he said he
wished to have notes, and also a bill on Havre, instead
of a crossed cheque, for the bill that he had brought. To
the best of my recollection he mentioned notes to the
amount of 1,6001., and a bill on Havre for 6001. I did
not see him indorse the bill. I should not know his
handwriting. I did not see him again after I gave him
the money till he was in custody. When I gave him
the 1,6001. he said nothing to me about the balance. I
understood it was to be sent to Mr. Ryder by previous
arrangement between him and the prisoner. No
arrangement of this nature was made with me. I took
no receipt for the 1,6001.
Mr. J. Mitchell—l am cashier at Messrs. Barclay and
Co.'s, bankers, Lombard-street. I cashed the cheque
for 2,0001. produced on the 20th inst. Ido not know
who brought it. I gave in exchange for it one note of
1,0001., numbered 93,425, dated the Ist April, 1853 ;
one for 5001., numbered 90,972, dated the 2nd March,
1853 ; one for 2001., numbered 59,733, dated the 4th
January, 1853 ; another for 2001., numbered 59,347, of
the same date, and one for 1001., numbered 34,924,
dated the sth August, 1853. The two halves of the
notes produced by Forrester are parts of those which I
paid on the occasion in question—one being half of the
500/, the other of the 1001. note.
Mr. Charles John Austin-1 am clerk to Mr. Ryder,
of 76, Old Broad-street, East India and Jamaica mer-
chant. The bill of exchange produced was given to me
by the prisoner, on the 20th of December, at Mr.
Ryder's counting-house. He asked me if I would take
and get it discounted, and let him have
twelve o'clock. Mr. Ryder being
tithe to
money .Alr. Freese reebseefere
out, I took the bill to Mr. Freese. I saw the prisoner
endorse the bill at our office. I did not receive any
portion of the money afterwards from Mr. Freese's
clerk. I believe tile prisoner received the money. Mr.
Ryder has not yet received any portion of the proceeds
of the bill.
The
T billsord to 1% aeyuotr
brbrio
Witness—He had done so once before,
Tirdsiscounteit usual for the prisoner tod
only once.
The Lord Mayor—Had you authority from your em-
ployer to take them for discount without his seing them ?
Witness—Yes, in his absence.
The Lord Mayor—When last before the occasion in
question had he brought a bill to you ?
Witness—About a month before.
The Lord Mayor—And you then got that, discounted,
did you ?
Witness—Mr. Ryder took that on himself.
The Lord Mayor—Do you remember the amount of
that bill ?
Witness—l do not.
The Lord Mayor—Had Mr. Ryder given
• you direc-
thins to take a bill of this kind to be discounted when
presented by Anderson ?
Witness— He had that particular bill.
A Clerk from the office of Mr. Murray, a solicitor,
here stepped forward and said Mr. Ryder was quite
willing to state all that he knew in connection with the
transaction.

The Lord Mayor—l can see no objection to that. I
think the object should be to elicit as much as we pos-
siblycan.

kr. Thomas Ryder was then called. He said—l am
a merchant carrying on business at 76, Old Broad-street.
I know the prisoner, and have had mercantile transac-
tions with him. I have discounted one bill for him, the
amount of which was 830/. I discounted that bill my-
self. The prisoner had spoken to me of a bill for
2,0001. coming, but not of one for 2,4801. That was on
Saturday the 17th or Monday the 19th instant. I did
not see that bill, but he told me that it was drawn on
Messrs. Van Notten. The bill that is now the subject
of inquiry had not been mentioned to me by the prisoner.
I had had some conversation with Mr. Freese, with re-
ference to the 2,0001. bill. I had asked him if he could
get a bill for 2,000/. done. I had asked him at what
rate he would do one. I afterwards told the prisoner
that a bill could be done on Van Notten, by Mr. Freese.
I was not in when the bill for 2,4801. was brought
tc my counting-house, but about one o'clock on the
20th instant the prisoner called on me, and said he
had made au appointment to be at Mr. Freese's office
at half-past one, as he wanted to buy a bill on
}lavre or France. I forget whether he said Havre.
At this time my clerk had told me that he had
received a bill for 2,4801,, and left it. The pri-
soner said to me that he wanted 1,6001. in cash to buy
*auk post-bill, and that the balance Mr. Freese could

deduct for the French Bill. He then asked me to walk
on with him to Mr. Freese. We went together and met
Mr. Freese by his office. The. prisoner then told Mr.
Freese that he wanted a French bill bought. Just as
Mr. Freese left the prisoner said to me, "But I want
1,600/. in cash." This I mentioned to Mr. Freese, who
said he would come back in a quarter of an hour. I was
not present when the money was paid over. I did not
see the prisoner again till he came to my office in com-
pany of Forrester. Mr. Freese then said, "I want
1,0001." I said I had no 1,0001. The prisoner then
stepped forward and said that he had instructed 'l,OOOl.
to be sent to me, and that I was to detain it when it
came for Mr. Freese. He then said, " Let us go to my
office, perhaps the money will be there," or " We may
find the money there." They then left. I did not go
to the prisoner's office. Mr. Freese came back about an
hour afterwards, and when I asked him what was the
matter, he said it was a forgery.
Mr. Goodman (chief clerk)—At the time the prisoner
spoke to you and said that he had made an appointment
at the office of Mr. Freese, to be there at half-past one,
and also that he wanted to buy a bill on France, you
knew that he referred to the bill for 2,4801. ?
Witness—Exactly so.
The Lord Mayor—Did I correctly understand you
that your business is that of a merchant?
Witness—Yes.
• The Lord Mayor—ls it any part of your business to
negotiate bills of exchange ?
Witness—Yes, as agent. I never put any name on
them.
The Lord Mayor—Have you known the prisoner for
any length of time ?
Witness—Since about the beginning of April of this
year.

The Lord Mayor—Did you introduce the prisoner to
Mr. Freese ?
Witness—Yes.
The Lord Mayor—ln what character ?
Witness—As a merchant, and a party with whom I
was acquainted.
The Lord Mayor—As a man whom you believed to be
a person of respectability ?
Witness—Oh, certainly.
The Lord Mayor—Were you to have had any com-
mission for the discounting of this bill ?
Witness—Yes.
The Lord Mayor—You would have considered your-
self entitled to a commission for the discounting of this
identical bill ?
Witness—Yes.
The Lord Mayor—Have you any objection to men-
tion at what rate the commission would have been paid ?
Witness--I should have charged an eighth.
The Lord Mayor—And that is a legitimate portion of
your business ?
Witness—Yes. •
The Lord Mayor—What might have induced you to
form the opinion of the prisoner being a man of respect-
ability ?
Witness—Because he was introduced to me by very
respectable parties, with whom I had been acquainted
for some time.
The Lord Mayor—Was the bill for 8301. that you bad
previously discounted negotiated in a similar manner,
your name not being upon it ?
Witness—No.
The Lord Mayor—And you have no means of know-
ing whether that was a genuine bill ?
Witness—Yes, it was a genuine bill.
The Lord Mayor—Wbat amount of commission did
you obtain on that bill ?
Witnessed—l obtained none in that case.
The Lord Mayor—Then had you no profit in that
transaction ?
Witness—lndirectly I had. It was to be paid against
particular transactions.
The Lord Mayor—The 8301. was to be paid against
particular transactions ?
Witness—Yes. A certain amount was owing me.
The Lord Mayor—By the prisoner ?
Witness—Yes; and, therefore, I was very glad to
discount the bill for nothing.
The Lord Mayor—Your transactions with the pri-
soner have not been confined simply to these two nego-
tiations—you have been connected with him ever since
April ?

Witness—Yes ; I have had transactions with him
since April.
Mr. Lambert Van Notten Pole—l am a merchant,
carrying on business at 2 and 3, Lime-street-square. I
have one partner, and trade under the firm of P. and C.
Van Notten and Co. There is not a Mr. Vast Notten
in the firm. I bank with Messrs. Martin, of Lombard-
street, and always make my bills payable there. The
acceptance to the bill of exchange produced is not my
handwriting, nor is it in that of my partner. It. was not
written by my authority. I know of no other firm of
the same name as ours in London. Ido not k now the
supposed drawer. I know the prisoner, and have had
mercantile dealings with him. I have never given him
my acceptance to any bill of exchange. He has not drawn
upon me at any time. The acceptance to the bill in
question is a bad resemblance of my hand-writing.
Mr. Chapman—My lord, I beg to make one observa-
tion with reference to the taking of this bill. When Mr.
Freese offered this bill, I did not consent to take it
without asking him several questions and getting: his per-
fect assurance that he knew Mr. Anderson perfectly
well, and that he was a highly respectable man. I said
to him, "You are quite sure of this ?" And upon this I
passed the bill. In the afternoon, after the apprishension
of the prisoner, Mr. Ryder called in company with Mr.
Freese, and said that he was the person who ha .d intro-
duced and recommended Mr. Anderson to Mr. Freese.
I say this in justification to myself in takinc, such an
amount, and also for the purpose of showing where 6 Mr.
Freese got his information as to Mr. Anderson.
Mr. Pole—My lord, in answer to a question whether
we always made, or, rather, I always made, bills drawn
upon us payable at our bankers, I answered, "Always."
It did not occur to me till this moment, that in cases
of goods that are sometimes sold with hypothecation of
documents, those we accept payable at our own office.
This being the whole of the evidence in reference to
the second charge, the prisoner, who had buried his face
in his pocket handkerchief during the whole of the pro-
ceedings, and who seemed deeply sensible of the painful
position in which he was placed, was again asked whe-
ther he wished to say anything. As in the first case,
he replied through Mr. Nobler that he should reserve
his defence.
He was then remanded for a week, when it is under-
stood another charge of a different character will be gone
into

On the application of a solicitor who attended on be-
half of the creditors of the prisoner, against whom a fiat
in bankruptcy has been issued, Daniel Forrester was
ordered by the Lord Mayor to deliver to the official as-
signee any documents which he bad seized relating to
the prisoner's monetary transactions.
Mr. Hobler said that his client was most anxious to
afford the assignees every assistance in his power.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.

CLEIZKENWELL.—George Strutt, hair dresser, No.
10, York-street, Camden-town, was charged at the in-
stance of the London Gas Light Company with stealing
700 cubic feet of gas, their property, value 3s.
Mr. H. Larkin, one of the inspectors of the company,
produced the contract signed by the prisoner for one
burner. He called at the prisoner's shop on the .5111
instant, when he observed the fittings for two gas lamps.
There was a burner with a shaving-pot over it under
the shop window or show board. On the 23d he again
saw the same burner, and a light in the same position,
and a pipe which was covered over with play bills for
the purpose of concealing it. Witness asked the pri-
soner what it was ? He replied, "I suppose I can get
over it by paying for it." He also said he had been in
the country, and it was done while he was away. The
burner would consume five cubic feet of gas in one hour.
• Mr. James Newman, an inspector in the employ of
the company, gave confirmatory evidence, and added
that the prisoner said he had been consuming the gas
for three weeks. He used it for heating the water to
shave his customers with.

Mr. Tyrwhitt remarked that the case was one of con-
siderable importance. It was a mistaken notion that
gas could not be stolen. He should send the prisoner
to take his trial.

MAIILIIOIIOUGII-STREET. John Jones was
charged with having stolen a quantity of valuable pro-
perty belonging to Lieutenant Bland.
Lieutenant Bland, of St. James's-place, said the pri-
soner had been in his service as valet for about 31 years.
In August last witness gave the prisoner his gold watch
to get repaired, and after waiting a reasonable time, he
inquired of him whether it had been done ? The prisoner
said he had called at the watchmaker's, but the job was
not quite finished. Witness subsequently discovered
that the watch had been pawned by the prisoner, and
on further investigation found that other property, con-
sisting of studs, sash, rings, pin, &c., were missing.
Inspector Monekton took the prisoner into custody,
and found 29 duplicates in his possession, many of which
related to property stolen from the prosecutor.
Several pawnbrokers produced property pledged with
them by the prisoner, The watch, studs, gold sash,
studs, &c., were identified by the prosecutor.
mitt The prisoner admitted his guilt, and was fully com-
ed.
John Tripe, who first gave the name of Charles Jones,
was charged with having robbed Mr. Stephen Mills of
Dundee, of 60/, in notes and gold.
It appeared that the complainant, recently from Scot-
land, fell in. with the prisoner, and went with him to
Ben Caunt's public house, in St. Martin's-lane. After
drinking together for some time, he felt his companion's
hand in his pocket, and in a few minutes after he missed
his money—either 60/. or 641.—he could not tell which.
won't;
hahliys
Complainant asked the prisoner to
give The in
I've loek o n
gmootnseoy/.., Iprwisoonn'etrgrivepe ylieodu, back a farthing." A po-
liceman was called in, and the prisoner was given into
custody.
Tlremparinded forasonerd week.
eniewdallknowledge of the robbery, and
was

The following have been sent for the poor-box :
Madame de N., of Brighton, 51. ; E. L. 51. ; and some
smaller sums.

MARYLEBONE.—Frederick Henderson, a painter,
residing at 10, Eden-street, Hampstead-road, was charged
with stealing a newspaper from the Royal George Hotel,
Drummond-street, Euston-square.
George Bence, one of the waiters, deposed that on
the previous night, at nine o'clock, the prisoner entered
the back parlour and stood for a few moments by
the fire. Witness was called to the counter, and
on his return shortly afterwards to the parlour he
missed a newspaper which' he had left on the
table. The prisoner, after shuffling about in a
suspicious manner, quitted the premises, followed by
witness, who, on overtaking him, said, " Come, old
fellow, give me up that paper you have stolen." Pri-