The Sun.
London, England, 1841-04-15 00:00:00

Mr. Lloyd said that Mr. Brown at 'ended along with
etiv.rs, to sac'', the prln'ing fr Dm tad Dir,cors -:: e
names were appmded to the proipeet us, before he (Mr.
Lloyd) and his partner became sees •' taries, Previously
Captain Hooker was secretary to t Company, which
was by no means what was termed a bubble, but was
I commenced with the most pure 'intentions; to the best
of his belief.,s.ubsequently to' 'the appointment of the
it successor to Captain Hooker, question of some legal
importance, as regarded the Company, arose, and
Messrs. Hardwick and Davis were the solicitors con-
sulted, who stated that the Cqmapatly was not so legally
formed as to justify them iisigning their names ; and
itv that, if certain legal steps ere riot taken, they would
resige. As the steps sugg sted were not adopted, they
did resign, and he (Mr. I loyd) finding that the Direc-
tors were impracticable ulon the subject, also tendered
his resignation. The &Tire were then removed to the
office of a ilighly respcvtable solicitor, and the Com-
pany were in his (Mr, I.,loyd's) debt 1501., to recover
which he would feel greatly obliged to Mr. Brown to
render him assistance. J
Sir P. LAURIE—Wb6 concocted the Company? Mr.
Lloyd—l do not knotti. It was formed before I had
anything to do with itf
Sir P. LAURIE—Iiow was the 2001. spent ? Mr.
Lloyd—ln bringing Samples of the coals to London.
The samples of the North Staffordshire collieries were
displayed in this very house ; and if the plan had been
carried out, the same sort of coals which are now upon
sole in London, would be, now selling at a considerably
lower price, - It was an Unfortunate connection for me,
and I quitted it. I can state this positively, that every
Director, whose name was stated in the prospectus, gave.
his came.

.c
r olt;.ibtu::
:erm I
ur int(
to' he
q,
the C
Avis v
;El e
;g st
lo
alor
Ape
sect

Sir PETER LAURIE—What, was Mr. Maclean, who
has so distinctly denied it, a Director?
Mr. Lloyd said that ho feared he was making himself
a- witness against the Directors, but he was desirous of
rendering Mr. Brown all the assistance he could, and
he felt that he was in a position to prove against all the
Directors. Mr. Brown might surely have brought
.ctions against the Directors, and against him too, and
he was disposed to afford every facility. It was, there-
fore, not very courteous in Mr. Brown to bring the mat-
ter before a Megistrate.
Sir PETER LAURIE said that in eases relating to
bubble companies it was, ho was sure, much more wise
to complolo at the Mansion-House than to appeal to a
Court of Law. He had, he was convinced, done some
good in the exposures he had made, He had obtained
a Committee of the House of Commons to inquire into
Joint.stock Companies by calling the attention of the
Government to the atrocious West Middlesex Assur-
ance Company, In the Times of that day he observed
that My was recommended to go to A mwica4 tU whiPh
place he (Sir Peter Laurie) had recently banished the
tooth-manufacturer, and where he believed some of the
Directors of the Assurance Company alluded to were
located, He trusted that he shonld stlceced in cxpatri-
sting many more of the but it was quite icepos•
Bible that he could answer tie many letters he received
requesting him to state what Companies were good and
what bad.

Mr. Lloyd---I lobmit that thin is dog opting dog, I
am a greater loser than Mr. Wpm', and am willing
to give evidowe for him. if Mr. Woollea thinks
proper to defy that he knows anything at ad of the
Company. I am ready to state upon oath that he at-
tended a Beard of Directors as a Director. His ab-
solute ropudiuron of the Company frees nie from all
obligation as between secretary and director.
Sir PETER LAULIIE-1 believe that Mr. Lloy3 is a
more severe sprferer than Mr, Brown by this Company ;
nd I cert iinly advise an action to In brought against
some of the Directors for the amount of Mr. Brown's
accon ot.

Sr Pete; then rral over the list of ranee in the
prospectus as D:rcctors, and Mr. Broxn declared that
they were, most of ti.ern, to his Itnewledgo, Directors.
He also particularly asserted that it hail no bubble in-
tentions, and that when didioulties pre-Jented the a-
ielves it was stopped at the earliest time possible.

Mr. INLlclean, who had been mentioned as a Direc-
tor, and had bc&a icr by Sir licter Itauric, }NIT:Iog
entered the Jnstice•room, and etteily denied any eon-
ii-ction of any kind with the Company, who had, ho
declared, used his name without permission or au-
thority,
Mr. Lloyd stated that he had called, together with a
person of the name of Houseman, upon Mr. Mac-
lean, at Mr. Maclean's office, and left some prospee-
tascs of the C,,rnpany there. He at the sonic time
;I.linitted that he had never seen Mr. Maclean at the
Beard or any where else before the present moment.
Mr. Maclean—l refused to have anything to do with
it, and I wrote a letter denying that I was either Di-
rector or shareholder.

Mr. Lloyd—DA you, ever, Mr. Maclean, writ:, to
the Company disclaiming any connection with it ?
M. Mac:ean—Why I should I write disclaiming
any connvc'ion with seals a Company ?
Mr. Lloyd—Your name was attached to it as a
Director before I had anything to do with it, and your
name constantly appeared in the advertisements on this
subjcct. _ _

Mr. Maclean—l repeat that I had nothing whatever
to do with it, and I am mint thankful to Sir Peter
Laurie for giving me the opportunity of most distinctly
disavowing all connexion with it, and I am sure the
public are deeply indebted to him.

Sir PETEIt LAURIE Said he thought it was very im-
probable that Mr. Maclean would havo anything to do
with such a concern, and strongly advised Mr. Brown
to bring an action against the Directors, and subpcena
Mr. Lloyd as a witness.

Mr. Brown returned thanks, and said that he Ann'
rollow the advice of the Alderman to the letter.

BO IV-STREET.
Monr PosT-OrricE ROBBERIES.—James Roose, a
young man of respect:lbl° appearance, was charged
before Mr. Twyroan with stealing, whist on duty in
the employ of the General Post-office, a letter con-
taining a sovereign, the p-operty of Mrs. Ann Lance-
field. • - .

Mr. Peacock attended on the part of the prosecution;
John Forbes stated, that he was a messenger belong-
' ing to the General Post-office ; that he was on duty
• on Wednesday morning in the inland-office, and that
the prisoner was engaged in the same office. It was
then eight o'clock, and he was sitting close to him
ri (witness), occupied in the examination of postage
• stamps, fixed upon letters, which had arrived by the
morning mails. Towards the close of the work, there
was a small packet of letters left on the table where the
prisoner was sitting. Witness " reached over" to take
these letters, fur the purpose of putting the date stamps
upon them, it being part of his duty to do so. He then per-
ceived what he conceived to be the corner of a letter
" standing out" from under the inkstand, which he
moved a little, and observed that it was a money letter,
and that it bore two postage stamps. Witness was
somewhat surprised at seeing a money letter placed in
such a position, but he made no remark ; and in about
five minutes he observed the prisoner move the ink-
stand several times, and afterwards go to the " Scotch
division" of the office. At this moment his (witness's)
duty called him to another part of the office. He could,
however, still see the table on which the inkstand was
placed, and he saw the prisoner take up the inkstand,
and afterwards come towards the door leading down
stairs. The prisoner passed close by him, and witness
then perceived that he was concealing something, which
appeared to be a letter, by means of the inkstand. He
opened the door, and went down stairs into the wash-
ing room, still holding the inkstand in his hand. Upon
this witness gave information to Mr. William Blott.
The letter was produced, and•the witness identified
it as being that which he saw in the prisoner's hand at
the time in question. It was addressed, " Mrs. Lance-
field, 32, Felix-terrace, Islington, London."
William Blatt deposed that he was a clerk in the
inland office of the General Post-office. The prisoner
was employed in the same office, and was on duty this
morning at eight o'clock. Witness was also on duty at
the same time, and in consequence of a communication
lie received from the last witness he went down stairs
followed by him (Forbes). He saw the prisoner in
the washing-room, and, taking hold of his arm, said he
wished to speak to him up stairs. Witness then led him up
into the superintending president's office,where he saw Mr.
Benjamin Vandergucht, the president on duty. He (wit-
ness) then told the prisoner that he had received in-
, formation of his having put a letter into his pocket, and
asked him whether he had done so or not. The pri-
soner hesitated a moment, and said, " lam sorry to
say it is too true." Thereupon he took from his left-
hand trousers pocket a letter which he gave to Mr.
Vandergucht. The letter bore the Edinburgh post
stamp, and was dated 12th April. In the regular
course of business the letter would arrive at the General
Post-offree on Wednesday morning, and was one of the let-
ters which the prisoner was employed in examining. After
the prisoner had left the table the letter in question
ought to have been stamped with the inland-office
dating stamp. It bore no London stamp, and conse-
sequently could not have reached the stamping-table.
Mr. Benjamin Vandergucht said he was one of the
presidents of the inland office, and was present when
the prisoner was taken into custody. Witness asked
him how he could do such a thing. He replied that
he went to Greenwich fair on the previous night and
get drunk. He did not know what he had been about.
Mrs. Ann Lancefield, wife of Alfred Lancefield,
stated that she resided in Felix-terrace,
Islington, and
that her husband was a land surveyor. The letter
produced was addressed to her. It was from her mo-
ther in Edinburgh, and contained a so% e:eign•
The prisoner said nothing in his defence, and was
committed to Newgate for trial.
another letter,ewasthen
which
hadgierloa
with
having e
i mosey,s possession a
arrived at the General Post-office in the regular
e dd
h

course. •
Mr. Pcacock stated that.jle expected to be enabled
at a future period to producdmore evidence ; and the
Prisoner was consequently remanded till Wedne3day
next.

BA 7' 7' O.N- GARDEN.
, Hodgson, the driver of one of Wihon's omni.
Dussel to the Batik, No. 3,931, appoarcA to a sum-