The Sun.
London, England, 1869-05-18 00:00:00

T.TIE`ENGLTSH 70:TNT:STOCK BANK:

. .
• At the Mansion House, on Mon day morning, Mr. Samuel
Greenway Finney, the manager of the English Joint-
stock Bank, Mr. James Abbiss, Mr. Thomas Brad-
shaw, and Captain C. E. Mangles, the directors of the
bank, were brought before the Lord Mayor upon the
charge of conspiring together to defraud the share-
holders by means of false representations and false
balance•sheets.

Mr. G. Lewis appeared for the prosecution ; Mr. Met,
calfe, Mr. Poland, Mr. Ormond, Mr. Straight, and Mr.
Montague Williams appeared for the defendants.
At the commencement of the proceedings Mr. Lewis
took occasion-to explain that on a former occasion he had
Stated. that 'a sum of £1,250 had found its way into
the Pockets of Mr.. Bradshaw. He had since, however.
ascertained that this was not the case.

7
'Mr. C. Bradlaugh, who described himself as a financial
agent, of Old Bond-street, was examined, and he stated that
he had had business transactions with the defendants.
and among other matters he had negotiated the purchase
of the Nottingham Bank for the English Joint-Stock
Bank for a sum of £lB,OOO, and he received £2,250 as
commission for the transaction from Mr. Finney, the
manager. There were also some negotiations for the
purchase .of a bank at Norwich. Witness negotiated
a loan of £7'5,000 for the bank, and it was
arranged that • a sum of £4,000 should be paid
as commission for the loan. The directors of
the 'English Joint-Stock Bank afterwards refused
to carry out this arrangement, and witness was very
angry, and commenced legal proceedings against them.
The result was that the bank only received £25,000, and
they gave £2,000 as interest on that amount, and witnesr,.
in addition, received a sum of £l5O for himself. Witness
was very dissatisfied with the operation.
Mr. Metcalfe obierved that the transaction turned out
to be a totally different one to that which was opened by
the prosecution.
Mr. Siebel, accountant and broker, carrying on business
in the City, proved that he negotiated the loan of £25,000
with the City Bank, and it was arranged that, the
English Joint-Stock Bank should give their own deposit
note as security. He received the £25,000 in Bank of
England notes, and took them to the English Joint Stock
Bank, and witness afterwards received a cheque for
£1,350 for his commission for obtaining the loan.
Evidence was then. given to shew that £20,000 out
of the £25,000 received under the circumstances above
stated'were paid as part of the purchase-money for the
-goodwill of the business of the bank of Rogers, Olding,
and CO., and Mr. Lewis said he should shew that £2,000
were paid in to the private account of Mr. Tinney.
Mr. Howard, a solicitor, proved the sale of the goodwill
:of "the bank of Harding and Co., at Bideford, to the
English Joint-Stock Bank for £12,000. The witness
received £2,000 as commission for negotiating the sale of
the business, and he said that a "suggestion" was made
that a poition of this sum should be paid to Mr. Finney,
the_manager of the English Joint-Stock Bank, and he
subsequently handed one-third of the £2,000 to that
gentleman.

Mr. Oswald Howell, the accountant, said he had been
retained by Mr. Lambert, the piosecutor, to investigate
the books of the English Joint-Stock Bank, and he had
been so engaged for some time. " He had seen the balance-
sheet as made up to the 31st of becember, 1865,13 y. which'
the net profits bf the bank were stated.to be £14,173-15s:
He. had carefully examined the books, and the bank had
certainly not only not made this amount of profit, but,
according to his calculation, it had not made any profit at
all. It further appeared by the books that a sum.of_oyer.
£140,000 had been expended in the purchase of other banks,
fittings, &e., and the preliminary expenses were stated at
£22,358 3s. 4d., and £12,500 of this amount consisted of
the purchase of the West Surrey Bank, which belonged to
the defendant.

Captain Mangles : The books did not contain any
entry of the payment of the 12,000. to Mr. Howard, and
the books did not contain any minute of the directors
authorising such a payment.
Mr. Howell was examined at very considerable length,
and the effect of his testimony appeared to be that it was
his opinien that a number of items which appeared in the
books in the character of assets ought to have appeared
in the profit and loss account, and he said that they were
originally so placed, but the mode of keeping the books
appeared to have been changed.
The inquiry was then again adjourned.