The Sun.
London, England, 1856-10-31 00:00:00

CRIMINAL COURT.—(This Day.)

OLD COURT.
(Before Mr. Baron Martin and Mr. Justice Erle.)
THE CRYSTAL PALACE VRAUDS.
IYilliant James Robson was again placed at the bar,
the case being set down in the ordinary course for trial

to-day.
Mr. Gifford applied to their lordships to postpone the
trial till next sessions, on an affidavit that had been sup-
plied to the solicitor for the prosecution. That affidavit,
sworn to by Mr. J. G. Lewis, of Ely-place, Holborn,
the prisoner's attorney, stated that the prisoner was
committed on 13th October last on two cases of larceny,
and that he (Mr. Lewis) had only been retained for the
defence within the last ten or twelve days. Hearing it
rumoured that other indictments were to be preferred
against the prisoner, he wrote on Friday last to the
solicitor for the prosecution to be furnished with
the particulars of the charges. Late on Satur-
day night he received an answer in reply, and
on Monday at an interview with the prisoner he
informed him of the nature of the communication.
Want of information on the multiplicity of charges to be
preferred against the prisoner, and the number of cases
the deponent had to attend to this session, prevented
him from making the necessary inquiries, and the effect
of pressing on the trial this session would be that the
prisoner would be undefended. The letter received from
the prosecutor's solicitor enumerated the charges which
were to be preferred against the prisoner for stealing
eight certificate shares, belonging to Mr. Robertson, of
Leith ; five do., belonging to John Bond and Jonathan
Dun, and the various charges of forgery, amongst which
was one for forging the name of " G. Grove," at the
back of a check for 3611. 14s. 6d. These charges were
to be supported by 20 witnesses, and probably more,
the names of whom were communicated to Mr. Lewis
in the same letter. The late hour at which that com-
munication was received on Saturday night had pre-
cluded him from making the necessary inquiry into
the nature of the charges and the evidence by which
they were to be supported. He (Mr. Gifford) hoped
their lordships would not allow this trial to be forced on
under the circumstances, and the prisoner deprived of
being defended.
Mr. Sergeant Ballantine said the prosecution had no
unjust desire to press on the charges for trial against the
prisoner, and he (Mr. Sergeant Ballantine) had no wish
to press charges against persons in the unhappy position
of the prisoner. It was, however, his imperative duty
to do so on this occasion, in consequence of the nature
of the charge and the great number of persons who had
been brought from all parts of the country to give
evidence on the trial, at a great expense to all concerned.
The witnesses and the company feel that a postpon.
ment of the trial would be of great injury and annoy-
ance to them, and the latter that they had an extra
ground of complaint from the prisoner's conduct on the
present occasion. He would call the attention of the
court to two letters that had been forwarded to the
company by Mr. Robson, and he thought their
lordships would concur with him in thinking that
the present course was adopted in an endeavour
vexatiously to annoy the company, and to put them to
further inconvenience and expense than be has already
done. It was well known that Mr. Robson was taken
into custody in another country, and when brought be-
fore a magistrate he was prosecuted by the Crystal
Palace Company. At the last hearing Mr. Hawkins,
barrister, who attended for the prosecution, expressed
his willingness to adjourn the case for further investi-
gation, in order that the whole of the charges to be
preferred against the prisoner might be first investigated
before a magistrate, whereby the prisoner would be in
possession of all the facts; but Mr. Robson, wishing to
save as much publicity as possible, stated his desire
that the charges should be got rid of as shortly. as
possible, because he intended to plead guilty, and in con-
sequence of that two charges only were entered into, just
sufficient to warrant the prisoner's committal, it being
intimated to him at the time that others would be preferred
against him at the Old Bailey. His answer to the affidavits
put in was contained in two letters forwarded by the
prisoner to the directors of the Crystal Palace Company.
In the first letter he said—" May I ask, as 1 intend to
plead guilty, and make every reparation in my power,
whether it is not possible for me to be charged with one
large offence, instead of many small ones ?" In conse-
quence the company, instead of indicting him on a num-
ber of charges of larceny as a servant, charged him with
the committal of forgery, and it appeared rather extra-
ordinary that now, after they had complied with the
prisoner's request, he should complain at their proceed.
ing with the trial this session. In the other letter the
prisoner said—" I intend to make no defence, but plead
guilty. I shall pray for an immediate committal, as it
will save the company much expense, and anxiety •to
those few left who still love me." He thought it must
be obvious to all who had heard the discussion on the
application for the postponement of the trial, and who
knew anything of the case, that no injury could by
possibility be done to the prisoner by the trial proceeding
in the ordinary course at the present sessions. He was
ready to give prisoner's counsel every information con-
nected with the charges of forgery. He, therefore, felt
bound, under all the circumstances, to object to the ap-

plication.
Mr. Gifford said that the letters which' had been read
by Mr. Sergeantliallantine had reference to the charges
of larceny, and not those of forgery ; and had the charges
of larceny only been proceeded with, the prisoner would
have pleaded guilty to them, but he had always pleaded
not guilty to the charges of forgery. The objection to
the postponement of the trial had varied since yesterday.
Then it was founded on the illness of a material witness,
but now it was based on the inconvenience of the direc-
tors and the witnesses. The guilt or innocence of the
prisoner was not to be assumed by either side in this
application—their only question fer consideration now
being, whether the prisoner had bad sufficient time al-
lowed him to prepare his defence to the charge of forgery
that had been preferred against him, and to inquire into
the conduct and circumstances of the facts which up-
wards of 20 persons were to depose to. He thought he
was entitled (not knowing the facts to which these wit-
nesses would depose) that the postponement of the trial
till next sessions should be granted.
Mr. Justice Erle said the application, ought to be re-
fused. It appeared to him that the ground of complaint
on which the application was founded was brought about
by the conduct of the prisoner himself. So far as he
(Mr. Justice Erle) could gather from what had been
stated, the whole of these charges would have been pre-
ferred against the prisoner at the polioe•court, where he
would have heard the whole of the facts connected with
them, had he not wished. to avoid publicity, and asked to
be committed.
Mr. Gifford said the.mageutors had not filed affidavits
to that effect.
Mr. Baron Martin—Bat there are the letters written
by the prisoner, the authenticity of which can be proved.
Mr. Gifford—Yes.
Mr. Baron Martin—You should have objected to the
non-production of affidavits by the prosecutors before the
letters were read.
Mr. Justice Erie said that what the' prisoner now
complained of was the result of his own conduct.
He Could not allow the consideration of the multiplicity
of the engagements of an attorney engaged to defend a
prisoner to 'be placed against the inconvenience of a
number of persons summoned from different parts of
the country, and compelled to attend here to carry on
this prosecution. He did not apprehend the least in-
jury to public justice from the decision he had come to.
A conversation took place between the learned coun-
sel when the trial should take ' place, and to-morrow
(Saturday) was named, Mr. Gifford still protesting that
by such a course the prisoner would virtually be un-
defended. ft was then suggested by the prosecution,
and assented to by the court, that the trial should be
proceeded with at once, and again that it should take
place to-morrow (Saturday).
Mr. Gifford asked if he understood rightly that the
trial was then to proceed ?
Mr. Justice Erie said he declined to proceed then

with the trial.
Mr. Gifford said he hoped his lordship would express
an opinion that the prisoner should be supplied with
the nature of the evidence to be brought against him.
Mr. Sergeant Ballantine said he had no objection to do
so, or, if the learned counsel wished it, he might read
his brief. (Laughter.)
Mr. Justice Erle—Will that satisfy Yuri, Mr. Gifford?
Mr. Gifford—Yes, my lord. (Laughter.)
The trial was accordingly fixed for tomorrow, to be
taken by the Lord Chief Baron.