The Sun.
London, England, 1833-11-27 00:00:00

THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL V. GAMMON.

This was an Excise information agains► William
Gammon, a glass-manufacturer at Birmingham,
charging him with defrauding the revenue by re-
moving certain quantities of glass from a leaz before
the Excise officers had weighed it, and also chars.
ing him with not giving a true description of the
pans put into the leaz.
The SOLICITOR•GENERAL, Mr. TANCRED, and
Sir GEORGE GREY conducted the information, and
Sir JAMES SCARLETT, Mr. BLACKBURNE, and r.
HILL were for the defendant.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL, after stating the case,

called Smith, an excise officer, who stated that he
was put over the defendant's glass-house on the
29th of September, 1832, and that the defendant
told him " he might have any glass he wanted, and
hoped they should be comfortable together." The
witness then stated, that having reason to suspect
the defendant, he wrote to Mr. Oldham, an excise
officer, in London, and he, with another officer
named Knapton, came to Birmingham on Saturday,
the 12th of January last, on which day witness
had surveyed the glass-house. The defendant had
given a notice that he should weigh glass on the
Monday. Witness, with Knapton and Oldham,
went to the defendant's premises early on Monday
morning, and got upon the roof by means of a rope
ladder, when witness looked through a skylioht,
which commanded the reweighing room, and there
saw the defendant's servants remove a basket of
glass, and some other glass. They then all went
down, seized that glass, and proceeded to the re-
weighing room, where they counted the pane, and
found their number to be SS, being four more than
was contained in the defendant's description given
to the Excise.

This witness was strictly cross-examined by Sir
JAMES SCARLETT.

Messrs. Knapton and Oldham stated that they
saw Smith look through the skylight, and that
Smith acquainted them that the defendant's men
were removing the glass, but that they did not
themselves look through the skylight. They then
went down, seized the glass, and counted the pan..
They all stated that the glass they seized was warm.

For the defendant, Sir JAMES SCARLETT said, the
prosecution was bottomed on the falsebooLl, fraud,
and malice of the witness Smith, who had
admitted that he had laid more informa-

tions than any other officer of Excise. He should
prove that the fires in the leaz were put out on the
Saturday morning, and were not lighted before the
seizure, anti therefore the glass seized, which was of
a description which rapidly parts -with its heat,
could not have been warm as the witnesses had
stated, who must have mistaken the change of tem-
perature of the glass-house for the warmth of the
gl.ss. The prosecutor had not thought fit to call
the supervisor, John Jones, who must have known
if any fraud had been committed. An excise-officer
who lent himself to plans for entrapping a trader to
gain penalties, was a man of as infamous and dange-
rous a character as language could describe, for from
his facilities he had it in his power to ruin many
tradesmen. Smith had a motive of revenge. He
was seen to take two goblets out of the pan, and was
forced by Coke, another officer, to return them ; for
this he vowed vengeance. He also tampered with other
officers, telling them they could make the defen-
dant fork out the blunt, for the glass manufac
turers, as well as the maltsters, were under them"
With respect to the glass alleged to bN removed, he-
would disprove that by many witnesses; and as to
what Smith alleged he saw from the skylight, ho would
produce a plan, which should be vsrified, by which
,he Jury would see it was impossible from that sky-
light to see into the weighing-room, from which
the goods were alleged to have been removed. After
the glass is melted and shaped, it is charged with a
certain duty, after which it is placed in pans in the
leaz,s, which are long passages, with a furnace at
the mouth, and they are wound by a windlass, so
as to advance and cool gradually, until they come
out at the extremity of the leaz, which opens into
the weighing-room, whereof the officer keeps the
key, to whom the manufacturer must give notice
when he wishes to weigh, and then the officer at-
tends and opens the door of the room. On the
weight ano,her duty is charged, and the present
accusation was for taking the glass, without payment
of that duty, out of the weighing-room; but he
should show it was impossible for the defendant so
to have done. Smith, to prepare for the reception
of his friends, came on the preceding Thursday, and
desired the workmen to put five pans into the
weighing-room, but they only put four, which were
also the subject of the information.
John Lancaster, examined by Mr. HILL—Put
in the model, and approved of its accuracy. A
man could from the skylight only see about a foot of
the door of the reweighing room, and could not see
above a yard into the room.
Robert Coke, an officer, went to the defendant's
premises in May, 1832. Smith came in September.
Four days before Smith asked witness how he
liked the glass. He answered " Very well."
Smith said, " If witness would join him, a good
deal of money might be very well made, for the
maltsters and glass-makers were all fraudulent, and a
plan might be found out for making them pay,
and they would divide the blunt, and he would
sood fiat' a plan by which he would trap old
Gammon." Witness saw Smith afterwards put
some Goblets in his pocket; he asked him why he
did so, and Smith replied, he should like to have a
dozen—they were very handsome." Witness
„id, "You scoundrel, unless you return them, I will
break you." Smith returned them, put his hat
over his head, and they did not speak for a fortnight.
It was Smith's business to have the keys on the
Sunday. Witness, with several others, were early

on the morning of the 14th of January In the weigh-
ing-room. No goods were removed.
James Lovett deposed, that Smith told him
" there was money to be made, for the officers had
got the glass-manufacturers under their hands,"
Nu goods could have been taken away on the morn-
ing of the 14th of January from the weighing-
room. The fire was put out on the Saturday morn-
ing, and the furnace was not lighted afterwards.
The glass was not warm.

Oilier witnesses deposed that no goods had been
removed, and one stated that Smith desired five
pans to be placed in the weighing-room.
Several of these witnesses had been suspended by
the Excise.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL briefly commented on
the evidence.

Lord LYNDIIURST said he would read all the evi-
dence, if the Jury wished it ; but the Jury (lid not
require it, and immediately found the defendant not
guilty. They also stared, for the information of the
solicitors to the Treasury, that they found that the
suspended officers had done nothing wrong.
Lord LYNDHURST was perfectly satisfied with the
verdict.

This trial occupied the Court from morning un
eight at night.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.

MARLBOROUGH STREET.

Yesterday two builders applied for the MAGIS-
TRATES' assistance in order to defeat the combina-
tion at present existing among the journeymen
builders and bricklayers.
The complaint was, that the men, one hundred or
more, surrounded a house in Jermyn-street, which
was taken to finish by a limited time from the Com-
missioners of Woods and Forests, and that they not
only refused to work, but prevented others. They
wanted to reduce the time of labour to eleven hours
per day, at 54., and then declared that they would
have none employed but the old hand,, who had
struck. Under these circumstances they were liable
to become losers to a considerable extent, and wished
to know whether warrants could not be obtained to
apprehend some of the parties.
Mr. CONANT directed Mr. Baker, the inspector
of the C division, to attend where the assemblage
then was, and if he saw a breach of the peace com-
mitted, to apprehend the parties and bring them to
the offiee.

Mr. Barren, one of the applicants, thanked the
Magistrates for their assistance, and withdrew.
QUEEN-SQUARE.

CAUTION TO THE OWNERS OF CARTS.—A num-
ber of owners of carts appeared before the
trate., to answer summonses taken out against them
by Digby, the informer, for not having their names
and places of residence properly described on their
carts.

These cases are of considerable importance to the
public, and the exposure of them may prevent in-
formers from reaping a rich harvest frcm individuals
totally ignorant of the law. Last session of Parlia-
ment an Act passed which made and provided that
the owners of carts, if they place their name and place
of abode on the back of their carts, with the words
" Common Stage Cart," the same would be exempt
from the duty. Tho•e persons who wished to be re-
lieved from the tax did so,and complied with the letter
of the law, as they supposed ; but, unfortunately for
them, they have been deceived; for the former Act,
which requires the owners to have their names and
places of residence on the off side of the csrt clear
of the wheel, is not repealed, and the informers are
making a very profitable speculation by laying infor-
mations against those persons ignorant of the law,
which, as it now stands, requires them to have their
names both at the back and on the off side of their
carts.

The defendants complained loudly of the injustice,
and produced the new Act of Parliament, and said that
it was very hard that they should be brought up and
lose their time on such paltry charges, when they had
done everything in their power to comply with the
Act of Parliament.
The Magistrates, under the circumstances, fined
the defendants in the mitigated penalties of from ss.
to Ills. each and costs.
Digby begged to be allowed to withdraw several
informations against defendants who were in poor
circumstances, on payment of costs.