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

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 it
balance of £1,421.

The CHAmmiusT, in moving the adoption of the report,
said he believed the lino would be as remunerative as the
Lynn and Hunstanton, to which it would be a valuable
adjunct.

The report was adopted, and the proceedings closed with
a rote of thanks to the chairman and directors.

BISHOPS'-CASTLE.

The half-yearly 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 Bltihops'-Castle were in so
forward a state as to insure its opening for traffic in June
next.

The 4CHAMMAN, in moving the adoption of the report,
thought it must be highly satisfactory to the shareholders•

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 chairman for his great attention to the inte-
rests of the company concluded the proceedings.

The Great Fires at Dockhead.

-O-
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-surgeants 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 Aruett "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 mostly 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 ho 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 hiniself had delivered some goods without a pass. 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 Radmall 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 Fag°, and some others
were present. He heard the witness Page 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
hot be put in evidence.
Witness continued—He found„ then, that there were 378
bales by the Onwards. Nothing passed betiveen 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-
nation. 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 ono 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
Page 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 Fage 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. He 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. Ho
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.
Whiting was present and heard it, and was also present at
the meeting. He did not hear it mentioned, and believed
it 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
813117 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
tho 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 hiniself 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 rage 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 there was a committee formed
upon that occasion, and it was decided to confer with
Mr. Humphreys. Several meetings had been held 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-
dants were issued. The defendants were in the employ-

ment of Messrs. Barry, at the time they were aPPrehen e cr.
Mr. Giffard said that was as far as he proposed to caril
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 tyro,
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 redh ight well hate
done in the discharge of his duty, if orderto do so by hi;
employers, Messrs. Barry, and which he contended was D:t
sufficient to justify his being kept in prison until the ne.id
examination, and he therefore hoped the alderman WO;
admit him to bail on good and substantial sureties, 01

which he was quite prePared.
Mr. Giffard opposed the application, and said if the 319;
secution were well founded, there could be no doubt thma
the insurance offices had been defrauded of many thous° „
of pounds, and if, as it had been already suggested on tli3;
part of the defence, it should turn out in the course of the
proceedings others were behind, there could bo no °the
they were persons with ample means who would We re,
deepest interest in getting rid of the men who were heat
Pre-
sent under charge ; and until it was fully ascertaineu "de.
shape the charge would take he thought certainlY the
fendants ought not to be admitted to bail. ' behalf
Mr. Lewis, in reference to the same subject, sail on
of Arnett and Sedgewick, for whom he appeared, tbAthat+ the
charge upon which the prisoners were being exan'ine here
-
one of conspiracy, and was an offence upon which theY ot
entitled to be admitted to bail by the law, even
theyc iflasi ;
were committed for trial and the evidence was
against them ; and how then ought it to be where ll3
merely under charge with such scant evidence as there had
been brought in the present case ; The evidence ,aidh 4;35
been adduced that day did not amount to more thanbeo
contained in the information. But his clients had
not
many years in their employment, and had borne acetbeir
characters, which ought surely to go a great waY tto
favour, and Fage himself had said that Arnett was °bad
blame, and it was said that not a farthing of the nme9.,..1
gone into the pockets of the defendants, and that it 70;,,
impossible that they could gain anything by the transet
He considered a great injustice would be done the de
dants if they were detained in prison until the nest esvfa
nation. Why had Mr. Giffard not the boldness to Ch7so
those who he insinuated were in the backgrosed't to
was torturing the defendants because he had 'lit" Ay
courage to charge Messrs. Barry. It was 11°1-d eat
they would run away. They were apprehellue;tteo
their 'homes, being still in the same employ" and ha
days after the conversation with Mr. Whiting, ,iei-ct ba
trusted under all the circumstances justice wo
done, and the defendants would be admitted to Ds' Toll
Mr. Alderman Stone said he was presiding for flje.totiff
Mayor, and he did not see anything in the evidence deeded
him in altering his lordship's decision, and he had ;C:
not to admit the defendants to bail. It was there'e;melii
duty to refuse to admit either of them to bail in the
instance.

The prisoners were then again remanded.