The Sun.
London, England, 1865-10-20 00:00:00

ALLEGED BREACH OF PRIVILEGE.

Mr. Deputy DE JERSEY complained of the publication by
the committee of a printed document. which he contended
involved a slander and attack upon the Commissioners of
Sewers, and moved that the publication was a breach of
privilege.

After a long discussion the Contox SERGEANT was ap-
pealed to, and declared that in his opinion the publication
of the document was no breach of privilege.
A somewhat stormy debate ensued, which resulted in a
discussion, when there appealed—

For the motion 29
Against it
The court then adjourned to Thursday next.

Attempt to Defraud the South Eastern
Railway Company.

--s--

Yesterday afternoon, at Southwark Police-court, a tall
military-looking man named George Lasenby Worth, alias
Captain Middleton, described as a gentleman residing at
Prospect Cottage, Lightwater, Surrey, was brought before
Mr. Burcham, on a warrant, charged with attempting to
obtain the sum of two hundred pounds from the South
Eastern Railway Company, under the pretence that he had
a brother seriously injured in the tidal train at Staplehurst,
on the 9th of June last.

Mr. Stevens attended to prosecute, and the prisoner was
undefended.

Mr. Stevens, in opening the case, said his worship could
not but recollect the fearful accident that occured to the
tridal train from Folkestone on the 9th of June, when ten
persons were unfortunately killed, and about thirty more
or less injured. Claims were sent in, and when found to
be just settled. On the 17th of June, three days after the
accident, the company received a letter from No. 1, Barns-
bury-street, Islington, signed "G. L. Worth," asking for a
parcel left under a seat in one of the carriages at the time
of the accident by his brother, stating that the latter was
so injured that he was unable to see about it. On the 24th
June they received another letter dated Prospect-cottage,
fLahatllv
javtienr,o
ißinaagesr_htoht,e
naSumerre3o7f
o(waphte.rmie
dthaieetopurilsorenefrerriwna:
to the letter sent trom Islington, stating tnat tfie writer
brother was still too ill to attend to his business, and re-
questing the parcel if found to be sent to the Sunningdale
station. That letter was followed by another undated, but
received by the company on the Ist July, stating that the
brother, John Worth, was so injured by the accident at
Staplehurst that he would never get over it, and was ad
vised to go to Lymington ; and with regard to compensa-
tion, the writer suggested that the company should pay
him £2OO to settle the matter at once. On the 6th of July
another letter was received from the prisoner, referring
the company to Dr. Stewart, the medical attendant upon
his brother at Lightwater. Mr. Adams, the medical gen-
tleman in the employ of de railway company, wrote to
that address, and received etch an answer as left no doubt
of the intended fraud. It wag written in such a manner as
no member of the medical profession would write. He
should be able to show thatno Dr. Stewart-was in exist-
ence at Lightwater, and that the whole of the correspon-
dence from the prisoner wag carried on with the view of
debauding the South Eastern Railway Company of £2OO.
Mr. Burcham asked whether the prisoner was the owner
of Prospect Cottage.
Mr. Stevens replied that io understood he hold the free-
hold, and, most singular 4 relate, he had instructed Mr.
Marsh to sell it that very dly at the Guildhall Coffeehouse.
Mr. Burcham here askedwhether he had any legal gen-
tleman attending for him.
The prisoner replied in .he negative. He did not require
one, as all ho relied on wa; the truth.
Mr. Edward Ward, cleit in the office of the General
Manager of the South Eatern Railway, said that it was his
duty to receive all letters lirected to the General Manager
on business and enter thesame in a book. He received all
the letters produced.
Mr. Acraman Augustei Wooding, restorer of paintings,
17, Old Bond-street, snit lie knew the prisoner, and in
March last let him a lioub, No. 1, Barnsbury-street, Isling-
ton. lie knew his hantwriting well, having reason to
know it from correspon(ince he had had with him on dif-
ferent occasions. The letters produced were all in his
handwriting. The loth/. signed " Stewart, M.D.," was
also in his handwriting. _

Eliza Winfold, in the Imploy of the post-office at Win-

dlesham, in Surrey, said she carried the letters round that
district. She knew Prospect-cottage, at the Folly, and the
prisoner lived there in the name of Capt. Middleton. Some
time ago he told her to bring all letters to him addressed
to Mr. Worth. She took several to him, and in July she
gave a letter to his son, addressed to Mr. Stewart, surgeon,
successor to Mr. Blunt. Witness never heard of any one
having met with a railway accident in that district, neither
did she know any person of the name of Worth.

Mr. John Hellier Blunt, M.R.C.S., residing at Bagshot,
in the district of Windlesham, said he knew the Folly,
where Prospect-cottage was situated. He was the only
medical man in that district, and there never was, since
1847, a doctor of the name of Stewart residing or practising
near there. Witness knew the defendant's cottage, but
never heard of any one residing there having had an acci-
dent by the railway.

Samuel Strickland, a sergeant of the M division specially
attached to the South Eastern Railway, said that on the
19th of July he received instructions from the general
manager, and on the following day proceeded to Light-
water, in Windlesham. He saw the prisoner standing in
front of a cottage. Witness asked him if Mr. Worth lived
there. He replied, " No," but he had heard of a person of
that name living:in the neighbourhood from the milkwoman
who occasionally brought milk to his house, and he had
seen the gentleman from his cottage in a chaise two or
three times. Witness asked him to direct him to his resi-
dence, when the prisoner took him about 200 yards across
the heath, and pointed out a place among some trees as the
place. Witness then left him, and proceeded in the direc-
tion, but could gain no tidings of Mr. Worth. On the 15th
Aug. last witness went to No. 1, Barnsbury-street, Isling-
ton, a fancy draper's shop, where he saw the prisoner be-
hind the counter. ; He called him out, and told him he was
the man who misdirected him at Lightwater, when he in-
quired for Mr. Worth. The prisoner said " Yes ; his name
was not Worth but Middleton." Witness then told him he
was a police officer in the employ of the South Eastern
Railway Company, showed him the letters produced, and
told him he should be able to prove they were in his hand-
writing, and that his name was Worth. He shookhis head,
and began to speak, when witness cautioned that what he
said might some day be used for or against him. The pri-
soner then commenced crying, and said he had been the
dupe of his brother, who hadreceived an injury to his back,
and was then lying at Leicester. He wrote the letters to
the railway company to try to get compensation money
for injuries received in his back. Witness asked him if
his brother was injured at the railway accident at Staple-
hurst, when he replied in the negative. The prisoner
then said if he would assist him out of his trouble with
the railway company, when he sold his property at
Lightwater he would make him a handsome present,
especially if the company did not proceed against him.
He also said that if the railway company would forego
any further proceedings he would write out a statement
revealing all he had done. Witness told him he would
mention what he had stated to the general manager, and
then left him. On Tuesday last witness went down to Light-
water and apprehended the prisoner on the present charge,
when he said he thought it was all settled ; and that his
brother had been a great scoundrel to him. In the room
where he apprehended him witness found the letter from
Dr. Adams to Mr. Stewart, the assumed medical attendant
to his supposed brother.
Mr. Stevens here said that was all the evidence he was
prepared with on the present occasion. Ho should there-
fore ask for a remand, for the attdndance of Dr. Adams and
other material witnesses.

The prisoner asked for some documents taken from him,
among which were several from influential persons in
Islington parish, where ho had for many years resided in
affluence. He was chairman to Mr. Cox's committee on his
last election, and was at the time of his apprehension
examining a bill for a banquet which had recently taken
place among the parish authorities of Islington. It was
not likely, therefore, that he would bo guilty of the charge
imputed to him.

Mr. Burcham directed the officer to return to the prisoner
all documents not connected with the present charge, and
this having been done he was remanded to •Horsemonger-
lane gaol.