The Sun.
London, England, 1869-10-22 00:00:00

THE PROSECUTION OF THE ALBEBI
ASSURANCE COMPANY DIRECTORS.

Mr. Hamilton Bromby, accompanied by Mr. Edward Lee,
one of the prosecutors in the charge of conspiracy against
the directors of the Albert Assurance Company, Waterloo-
place, attended before Mr. Knox, at the Marlborough-street
Police-office, to make an application for fresh summonses
against the directors. . _

Mr. Knox said he should be sorry to comply with the
application. What he had said on the last application wall
if Mr. Straight attended before him with Mr. Lee he would
grant fresh summonses.

Mr. Bromley understood when Mr. Knox dismissed the
summonses last Saturday, that he said if Mr. Lee would
appear with counsel he would grant fresh summonses•
Mr. Lee was present, if the magistrate would like to 11c3ar
him.

Mr. Knox said on the last occasion, out of consideration
for Mr. Straight, the senior counsel for Mr. Lee, and his
great earnestness in the case, it being apparent that ilr.
Straight was convinesd of that which ho (Mr. Knox) Or
tainly was not, that there was bond fides in the prosecution
he intimated that if Mr. Straight would appear with 311'
Leo and ask for summonses they should issue.
Mr. Bromby explained that Mr. Straight was out of
town, and further he did not know whether Mr. Straight
would have been imtructed to make this application, but
at all events he (Mr. Bromby) was instructed to do so, and
Mr. Lee was present to answer questions if needed. rle
was there as Mr. Lee's counsel, instructed by Mr. Murrill,
and he now asked that the magistrate's promise last Sat°.
day be carried into effect, and that fresh summonses might
be granted.
Mr. Knox said, in deciding on this application, he must
take the whole of the facts into consideration, and al
justice to all parties. Mr. Lee had already applied an"
obtained summonses against the directors, and had been
examined in chief by his own counsel in support of hig
caso. Mr. Lee had been partially cross-examined by the
counsel for the defence ; and it was well understood that I'll
serious cross-examination was to be reserved for the neat
hearing. Instead of appearing and affording an opportunitl
of being cross-examined, Mr. Lee has chosen to absent hi
self, on what he did not hesitate to say was a trivial and
trumpery excuse, namely, that he had gone into the car
try to collect some debts.

Mr. Bromby wished to make a few remarks personal to
himself. He was partly responsible for Mr. Lee's absence'
and what had operated on his mind in advising Mr. Lee
was this, that it was extremely hard on a private indl-
viclual to have to incur considerable expense and COr
siderable personal inconvenience in endeavouring to set
the law in motion against persons whom, rightfully °r
wrongfully, he believed to be criminally responsible.
Lee was not aware that he would be required to be proet,
at the next examination, believing that the witnesses
be Called would occupyall the day with their.examinatiorl'
It was Mr. Lee's intention to have attended at the 1014
examination, and to have afforded the counsel for the
defendants an opportunity to complete his cross-exarainly
tion.

Mr. Knox said it was well understood that the erosil'_,.
examination by the couns.el for the defence on the fa"
occasion was merely preliminary to a more serious cost'
examination, which was to have taken place on Satura!/
last. Mr. Lee chose to absent himself. He (the inagli
trate) now said he absolutely and peremptorily decline
to grant fresh summonses, except they were applied for
by Mr. Straight, and an assurance given by that gentle
that he had carefully looked into the case, and was satin fief
there was bond fide ground for a prosecution. As be 411!
not consider that Mr. Lee was a bond fide shareholder, n"
did not feel himself justified in bringing the directori
to the court again, and must therefore refuse the aPPIi
cation. 1‘