The Sun.
London, England, 1869-01-25 00:00:00

THE END OF THE CAB STRIKE.

London is likely to be safe from any more cab
strikes, for a few months at any rate. The result of
the battle with the railways has been to break up
the two unions. Street Cabby did not care to starve
while work was so plentiful, so he turned out and did
his own work while his brother of the railway station
stayed at home. The owners of cabs were unable to
compete with the large numbers who were their own
masters, and so the matter has ended in complete
failure, both the master's society and that of the men
falling
to pieces. It is said that a new society is
about to be formea.

11119 death Qi John Daiwa s9ttii Li 411)101111Ced.

.ROCIEEDINGS AGAINZT THE DIRECTO2M
0.A7 OVEREND, GURNEY. AND CO.

The e Timinal snit against the directors of Overend, Gur-
ney, an d Co. (Limited) was resumed in the Court of
Queen's Bench, at the London Guildhall, on Saturday,
before the Lord Mayor and Sir Thomas Gabriel. The
court was crowded as before.
Mr. Lewis, jun., conducted the case on behalf Dr. Adam
Thom, be prosecuting shareholder, and the six defendants
(who occupied seats below the counsel) were represented as
follows :---For Mr. J. H. Gurney, Mr. E. H. Gurney, and
Ur. R. Birkbeck—Mr. Serjeant Ballantine and Mr. J.
C. Mathew appeared ; Mr. Barclay was represented by
Serjeant Parry and Mr. Montagu Williams ; Mr. Gordon
by Mr. Serje ant Sleigh and Mr. Ledgard ; and Mr.
Rennie by Mr. Hardinge Giffard, Q.C., Mr. Poland, and
Mr. Gardyne.
The proceeding-s commenced with the re-examination or
Mr. Edwin Watitin Edwards, the official assignee of the
bankruptcy, whose connection with Messrs. Overend,
gurney, and Co. was the subject of some amusement in
;ourt.
Mr. Lewis then went over a few of the transactions in
which witness had been acting fur Messrs. Overend,
Gurney, and Co. Witness received £5OO a year from
Xenos, who was the agent for the Greek and Oriental
Company, and this was known to Messrs. Overend,
Gurney and Co.
Mr. Lewis : In your difference with Mr. Birkbeck you
said be used coarse language about you being the cause of
certain losses. What was the language used?
Witness: Mr. Birkbeck said, "You have been connected
with all the losses."
The Lord Mayor : I suppose there was something put in
veto rote before the " losses." (Laughter.)
A letter from Mr. H. E. Gurney was received on the
following day, in which they gave him a release from
further services, on the ground that the business he had
been previously connected with was about to close,
The Lord Mayor : That is a testimonial.
Mr. Lewis : And you had £20,000 placed to your credit
n 1864?—Yes.
Mr. Lewis : You knew all the secrets of the heavy
losses of Messrs. Overend, Gurney, and Co.; and I sup-
pose it was that for which you received the money?
Witness : I did not know the secrets.
Sir Thomas Gabriel : Yon have told us that you received
£5,000 a year, and how do you account for receiving the
£20.000?
Witness hesitated, and then Mr. Serjeant Ballantine
explained that it was in respect of the agreement up to
Ist January, 1868.
Mr. Serjeant Ballantine : Are you still an official
assignee ?—Yes.
And you are a partner with Mr. O'Beirne in the City?—
Yes.
Examination continued : First became acquainted with
Messrs. Overend, Gurney, and Co. in 1859, through Mr.
D. W. Chapman, to whom witness gave advances.
t Did not it seem odd to you that a member of the old
srm should want money ?—No. Thought Mr Chapman,
might not want the firm to know. The first money
advance to Mr. Chapman was after he received the first
salary from Messrs. Overend, Gurney, and Co.
Are you prepared to say that you had no transactions
or advances with Mr. Chapman eighteen months previous
to that?
Witness : No ; not before I advanced him my £5,000
salary from the old firm. Chapman never paid it back
again.
Mr. Serjeant Ballantine then handed to witness a letter
crom Mr. Birkbeck, who accused witness of being the
cause of all the heavy losses of the firm ; that witness had
lone everything that was injurious to the firm; and that
they would dispense with his services.
Mr. Serjeant Ballantine : And you received a testi-
monial from Messrs. Gurney shortly afterwards. You
went from the rude hands of Mr. Birkbeck to the open
arms of mild Mr. Gurney.
Witness was then pressed hardly about the payment
of £20,000. He said, in answer to Sir Thomas
Gabriel, that it was in consequence of an appli-
cation made to the , firm that he received a
letter (which in the course of the examination
spokenmesgra of.
choinmneethtieonnowtiitche
Oasveraee"
witness ceased.
twhasat Overend,
testimonial Gum eGurney,
and
dgci
Co.'s connection
Sir Thomas Gabriel : Did any of the companies that
you were connected with for Messrs. Overend, Gurney,
and Co. pass through your hands as official assignee?—No.
Mr. Serjeant Ballantine : Did not Mr. John Henry
Gurney come from Norwich in 1861 to investigate the
losses of the firm caused by you utterly deny that I
was the cause of the losses.
Mr. Serjeant Ballantine: I know you would deny any-
thing.
Witness : May I add with regard to the Atlantic Com-
pany, the debts increased monthly when the ships were
an the stocks ; but had they turned out equal to their
work, instead of a loss of £BOO,OOO there would have been
a dividend.
Sir Thomas Gabriel : Messrs. Palmer and Co. and
Messrs. Samuelson had the building of them. Did you
receive anything by way of commission with reference to
these transactions?
, Witness : No ; not a shilling.
Dr. Adam Thom, of Bedford-square, London, the nomi-
nal prosecutor, was recalled by Mr. Lewis.
Were you aware of the existence of any second deed
before taking shares?—l was not. Took the shares
because of my opinion of the honour and veracity of the
parties connected with it.
Mr. Lewis then intimated that this was all the evidence
on which he relied for the committal of the defendants for
trial on the charge of conspiracy, set out in the informa-
tion for which this summons was issued.
The court then adjourned, and on re-assembling,
Mr. Serjeant Ballantine began to address the court. He
said he felt it impossible to allow the matter to pass by, as
there had been a great deal of public comment, without
referring to the manner in which it had been conducted.
He did not corn-plain of its having been instituted, nor
lid he complain of the expression of the public in
court, because it was only natural that in the
case of a great failure it was to be expected, when
people expected large gains they must think of the risk;
and he laid down this proposition rather in connection with
the feeling in the affair than as regarded the particular
case under discussion. lie was sorry to see such persons
as the defendants before them, who were to be subject to
comments. He appeared for the old members of the firm,
and he did not follow his learned friend Mr. Lewis with
regard to the other defendants ; but he was empowered to
say that the old members had no longer the know-
ledge that would be necessary to implicate them.
They had no connection wi h these speculations ,• they
were carried on by Mr. Chapman, who was no longer
connected with them. He was almost staggered at the
nature of the transactions between Mr. Edwards and Mr.
Chapman. Going into the history of the Gurneys' connection
with the old firm, he said John Henry Gurney lived at
Norwich, on a large estate, quite ignorant of the par-
ticulars of the business, as he had 1,600 shares in the con-
cern, and it was not till 1858 that Mr. Gurney learnt that
atui rred
ra
fsnteehenrdyetoi raal el
tnni vnti estgnl. aoit nvah
having
Nrao,
filfant
positionhAi
gl I.ur rs.HetEo
eocpl
of
stopped
eta,
di penury,r
edl
ttsichotneono-edtadrwyne
hfhaei
businessnnlas and
the firm was embarking on a hazardous enterprise. The
n
t
tidteref
.yebroughtdefendants
Edwards
et
sat
Messrs.hrs h
deu esGr
when they found that the losses were increasing ; they
ought to have stopped it. But there was a weakness in
the nature of the Messrs. Gurney, and they did not wish
to abandon the enterprise when they were being held by.
The charge was that the defendants had conspired to
defraud ; there was no evidence that they were aware of
the existence of the loss. He therefore thought the case
was not ripe to go before another tribunal. He had
leaked at the case, and he admitted they had been guilty
of great carelessness, but not of that which was
charged against them. Mr. Edwards was mixed
up with all their losses, and he dished up charm-
ing companies, and, probably through the medium
of Mr. Chapman, told the Messrs. Overend, Gurney,
and Co. that the parties with whom they were
dealing were likely to cow e round. When they find out what
had been going on they began by dismissing Mr.
Edwards, and they wished to return to their own legiti-
mate business as bill-brokers. They thought if they could
get fresh capital they would likely come round ; and under
those circumstances the public must have known that
when fresh capital was wanted, there was something
the matter. The Messrs. Gurney had lost everything ;
and he thought the court ought to take that into
consideration in dealing with this criminal charge,
There was no criminal intent. The Messrs. Gurney had
their private estates of £1,500,000, so that when they were
going to throw that in, the risk that they were turning
over would be reduced to £1,500,000. They did not think
then that the new company would be a failure ; they did
not think that the change of name would affect public
confidence, and bring down a great immediate demand.
The public suspected that something was wrong, and
accordingly business was diminished. It turned out that
the estates had only realised £700,000, and that was a
mistake of calculation. He asked whether the judgment
Jle defendants formed of their circumstances showed a
\riminal intent.
Tin. Lord Mayor: You are not quite accurate. In
dealing with the figures you ought to be correct.
Mr. Serjeant Ballantine said lie was dealing with the
matter generally on the question of criminality, and the
defendants :night fairly, without any criminality, estimate
their affairs in the way he had suggested. The Norwich
3state had been expected to realise £2,300,000.
The Lord Mayor : I never heard of that.
Mr. Lewis (interrupting): All the matters of which you
have been speaking there has been no knowledge of, and
it is contrary to what has been done.
Mr. Serjeant Ballantine said he was dealing particu-
' laxly with Messrs. Gurney, and lie had only mentioned
the fact of Mr. John Henry Gurney not having been
aware until IS6I or 1862 of the losses. Mr. Birkbeck and
Messrs. Gurney attempted to come to an understanding
to do away with the hazardous part of the business, and
they expected to clear themselves, and that everything
afterwards would be plain and successful sailing. The
learned counsel then spoke of the issue of the prospectus;
ie contended that there was nothing like fraud in it.
These men never dreamt of fraud, they never thought of
such a thing ; and he hoped the court would say that these
gentlemen, however careless they might have been had
no criminal intent. The learned counsel sat down,
after hoping that his clients would not be committed.
(Applause and hisses )
Mr. Serjeant Parry (who appeared for Mr. Barclay)
submitted that his client had not been guilty of anything
4-hat would send him before a jury.
Addresses were also delivered on behalf of other defen-
-4110, and the court adjourned untillYkkenty,.