The Sun.
London, England, 1865-04-26 00:00:00

The Charge of Conspiracy to Defraud
Insurance Companies.

Yesterday, again, Messrs. John Geo. Barry and Alfred
Barry, brothers, wharfingers at Meriton's-wharf, Bermond-
sey, and their three servants, Thorne, Arnett, and Sedg-
wick, surrendered to their recognisances, before Mr, Alder-
man Stone, at the Justice-room of the Mansion-house, for
further examination on the charge of conspiring together
to defraud the Royal Exchange and other insurance com-
panies by falsely representing, as is alleged, that certain
quantities of jute and other commodities of great value had
been destroyed in 1110 fires which occurred at their wharf
in June and November last.
Mr. Giffard, Q.C., with whom was Mr. Poland, instructed
by Messrs. Humphreys and Morgan, solicitors, Newgate-
street, again conducted the prosecution; Mr. Sergeant Bal-
lantine and Mr. Metcalfe, instructed by Messrs. Tilleard
Son, Godden, and Holme, of the Old Jewry, defended the
brothers Barry ; and Mr. Moss, solicitor, of Gracechurch-
street, defended Thorne.
John Still, a clerk to Messrs. Barry, was recalled. He
said, in reply to Mr. Giffard, that according to the cargo
ledger of his employers, kept by him, 500 bales of jute by
the ship Jane Porter were warehoused at Meriton's-wharf.
Of those, 10 bales were marked as delivered on the 26th of
October last, 55 on the 30th of December, and 170 on the
same day. That left 270 bales to be accounted for, and they
were entered as destroyed by fire, the entry being in wit-
ness's handwriting. On the 28th September, 1864, 500
bales of jute, by the City of Canton, were landed at the
wharf.. Of those, 10 were entered as delivered on the 10th
of October, 210 on the 31st of January last, leaving 280 to
be accounted for, and those 280 were entered by witness
as having been burnt. On the 17th of October last 1,000
bales by the ship City of Cashmere were landed at the wharf.
Of those, 900 bales were entered in the ledger by witness
as destroyed by fire, and 100 as having been delivered on
the 29th of March last. On the 17th of October, 1863, 350
bags of rapeseed from Calcutta, by the Rambler, were
warehoused at the wharf. Of these, 30 quarters and four
bushels were entered by witness as delivered on the 16th
of May, 1864, and about 148 quarters as having been de-
stroyed by fire on the 7th June last. The whole ship-
ment was thus accounted for. Witnessed explained that
the entries in the ledger as to deliveries would be made
by him from the warehouse report kept by the defendant
Arnett. The warrants sent in by Messrs. Barry to the
fire-offices concerned as to the quantities of the several
shipments above mentioned destroyed by fire were shown
to witness, and he said that the words "Destroyed by
Fire," written across them, were in his handwriting and
that of another clerk, and that the warrants were mostly
signed Mr. Alfred Barry. He added that, in the " Extra
Foreman's Book," kept at the wharf, ho found an entry
under the date of the 17th of August, 1864, "Sebastian
Gabot, 164 bales jute, put into own craft, floor No. 1," and
similar entries on the same day as to 48 bales by the
Raleigh, 74 by the William Cole, and 10 by the Alameda,
as having been " put into own craft floor No. 1." Floor
No. 1, he said, was not destroyed at either of the fires in
Juno or November.
Mr. Sharpe, a clerk to Messrs. Schilizzi and Co., of Fins-
bury-circus, said the two checks produced, both dated the
4th of January, 1865, and one being for £6,310 odd, and the
other for £2,103 odd, were received by him from the Royal
Exchange Insurance Company and the Royal Fire and Life
Insurance Company respectively,in payment of claims made
on behalf of his employers, Messrs. Schilizzi, for goods de-
stroyed at Meriton's Wharf. These, with two other checks,
he said, referred to in his former examination, made £18,930
ss. 6d., which was the sum paid in satisfaction of Messrs.
Schilizzi's claim.
Mr. Thos. Bedloe Bateman, from the London Assurance
Company, was called and shown a policy, which, he said,
was issued by that office. It was dated sth May, 1864,
and was for £5,000 in favour of Messrs. Laing and Meredew,
0f39, Mincing-lane, on merchandise stored at various places,
and, among others, at Meriton's Wharf. It ran from the
26th of April, 1864, to the 26th of October. The check pro-
duced, dated 13th July, 1864, for £1,594 2s. 3d., was issued
by the directors of the London Assurance Company in
favour of Laing and Meredew, and was paid to them on
goods insured by the policy and destroyed at the June fire,
upon the report of Mr. Harding.
Mr. Geo. Henry Whiting was recalled—The policy pro-
duced, ho said, was issued by the North British and Mer-
cantile in favour of Laing and Meredew. It was for £3,000
and ran from the 31st January, 1864, for a year. It was a
floating policy, and would cover goods at Meriton's
Wharf. He afterwards settled the claim or declaration of
loss produced by paying £1,275 odd on that policy by a
check to Laing and Meredew. It was paid on the report
of Mr. Harding, who investigated the claim on behalf of
the London Assurance and the North British and Mercan- I
tile offices.

Mr. Metcalfe called the attention of the Alderman to a
condition appended to the policies, to the effect that within
15 days after a fire the insurer was to furnish such infor-
mation as the nature of the case would admit. That would
partly account for the pressure under which the returns
were made by the Messrs. Barry.
Mr. Sefton Laing (Laing and Meredew, colonial brokers,
in Mincing-lane), deposed that in October, 1863, they re-
ceived 350 bags of rapeseed by the ship Rambler, which
were afterwards warehoused at Meriton's Wharf. Part of
the cargo was subsequently delivered into a vessel called
the Gem. His firm took out two policies, ono for £5,000
in the London Assurance Company, and another for £3,000
in the North British, to cover the rapeseed and other cehn-
modities. The warrant produced showed the quantity of
rapeseed by the Rambler at Meriton's Wharf at the time of
the June fire. Ho learnt that a part of the rapeseed had
been destroyed on that occasion, and his clerks prepared a
claim in respect of the loss, on information supplied by
Barry Brothers. The policies did not fully cover the loss
of £4OO. The claim was afterwards certified by Messrs.
Barry, and witness's firm received a check for £1,594 odd
from the London Assurance Company, and one of £1,275
from the North British and Mercantile. Their firm had
dealt in seed for many years. When seed was warehoused

the sweepings belonged to the merchants, andce;tarni;
not to the wharfinger. There was always a considerable
quantity of sweepings from seed. The seed was often piled
up in bulk, and the sweepings from the different bulks
ought to be returned to the merchant. That was the
practice in the port of London. His firm had sold many
hundreds of quarters of sweepings for merchants during a
year. He knew Meriton's Wharf, and he thought 400 quar-
ters of sweepings collected in six months would be too
much.

Mr. Edwin Radmull, clerk to Brown and Roberts, asses-
sors of fire losses, deposed that he found 475 bales of jute by
the Jane Porter at Meriton's Wharf, with certain distinc-
tive marks ; 283 bales by the City of Canton; and 209 by
City of Cashmere. He found, of the 475 bales by the Jane
Porter, 255 in the N and K warehouses, and 220 bales ap-
peared to have beon delivered before his visit and after the
fire. Of the jute by the City of Canton he found on the
premises 283 bales in the L warehouse, and of those by the
City of Cashmere the whole (209 bales) were found in the
N warehouse.

Mr. Sergeant Ballantine declined to cross-examine the
witness, observing that he did not propose to go into these
matters at all. It was very kind of the insurance com-
panies to investigate questions of sweepings and to look to
small things as well as great.
Mr. Thomas William Wright, manager of the West Kent
Wharf, St. Saviour's dock, deposed that their business
give rise to sweepings from the floors, which, however,
were of little or no value ; but that whenever anything of
merchantable value was found it wad" invariably given to
the merchants.

By Mr. Moss—The defendant Thorne, whom he had
known for many years, bore a very high character.
Mr. David Rose, manager of Messrs Lucas and Spencer's
Wharf, Bermondsey-wall, said the practice there was to
account to the merchant for all sweepings.
Mr. Thomas Perry, manager at Messrs. Richardson and
Perry's Wharf at Wapping, gave similar evidence as to ac-
counting for sweepings. Sweepings arose in the ordinary
processes of landing and warehousing. Wharfingers were
accustomed to take sample from the bulk and send it to a
broker. The sweepings were also sampled as well as bulk,
and the samples were sent to the brokers with the view to a
sale of both sweepings and bulk for the merchants. He
believed Messrs. Barry were assayers of seed, and they
would have, as such assayers, more sweepings than ordinary
wharfingers.
Mr. William Daniel Harding was called, and proved that
he investigated the claim of Laing and Meredew on behalf
of the two offices interested, and that it was paid on the
certificate of Messrs. Barry Brothers.
Mr. Samuel Lowell Price, accountant, at 5, Gresham-
street, said he was instructed by the solicitors to the prose-
cution to investigate the books of Messrs. Barry. He exa-
mined the cargo and warrant ledger, purporting to contain
an account of the cargo delivered from the ship City of
Dublin. He examined it about a month ago. It was not
then in the same condition as now. As it originally stood,
the date, which was now the 4th of April, 1865, and against
which was the mark:" Mutter's van," was "November 26,
1864, destroyed by fire." It was written over an erasure.
Tho erased entry implied that the goods were supposed to
have been delivered by Mutter's van, instead of having
been destroyed by fire. The bales said to have been de-
stroyed by fire ran from 501 to 900, and the same erasure
had been made on following pages. There were other cases
of erasure.

By Mr. Sergeant Ballantine—There was an original ac-
count given of the losses by fire, and subsequently an
amended one.

By Mr. Gifford—Witness had seen the original entry not
'urther back than six weeks from this time.

Mr. Giffard said that was the case for the prosecution ;
but he applied to have the defendants remanded to a future
day with a view to the completion pf the depositions.
Mr. Sergeant Ballantine said that being so he should
defer until that day the observations he should have occa-

sion to make on behalf of the Messrs. Barry.
Mr. Alderman St42ne remanded the defendants until the
sth of May, at 10 o'clock, but they were admitted to bail in

to meantime.