The Sun.
London, England, 1860-05-05 00:00:00

BANKING D:

Proprietors' Capi-
tal £14,553,000
Rest
Public Deposits (in-
cluding Exche-
quer, Savings'
Banks, Commis-
missioners of Na-
tional Debt, and
Dividend Ac-

counts) 6,871,698
Other Deposits 13,433,233
Seven Day and
other Bills 678,20S

£38,760,840 1
w.

Dated May 3, 1860.

AVERAGE PRICE OF SUGAR.

The Average Price of Brown or Muscovado Sugar, com-
puted from Returns made in the week ending the Ist day
of May, 1860, exclusive of the duties of Customs paid or
payable thereon on the importation thereof into Great
Britain :

Muscovado, the produce of the British pos-
sessions in America
Muscovado, the produce of the Mauritius
Muscovado, the produce of the East Indies —s
Average price of the foregoing

BANKRUPTCY ANNULLED.
James Long, spirit merchant, Leeds.

BANK WU PTS.

Benjamin Oakshott, brewer, Portsea, to surrender, May
17, at half-past eleven, and June 14, at twelve, at the Court
of Bankruptcy.

Charles Sharphouse Duggan, wholesale stationer, Bridge -
hot,se-place, Newington-causeway, Surrey, May 17, at two,
and June 14, at one, at the Court of Bankruptcy.
Henry Trenter, butcher, Ipswich, May 18, at twelve, and
and June 15, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy.
Benjamin Abraham, jeweller, Taunton, May 17 and June
13, at twelve, at the Exeter District Court.

Isaac Hanson, innkeeper, Halifax, May 21, at half-past
twelve, and June 18, at eleven, at the Leeds District Court.
Benjamin Kurz, jeweller, Rathbone-place, Oxford-street,
May 14, at half-past twelve, and June 18, at eleven, at the
Court of Bankruptcy,

William Redford, baker, Middlesex-street, Wbitechapai,

MANSION-HOUSE—YESTERDAY.
[Me following appeared in our third edition of last
evening : —]
George Pullinger, late chief cashier, was placed at the
bar in accordance with remand, charged with defrauding
the directors. The sum which the prisoner is charged
with stealing is merely £350,
,but his defalcations amount
to the enormous sum of £260,000.
Mr. Giffard appeared to conduct the prosecution. Pul-
linger, although undefended, had requested Mr. Humphries
to attend and watch the proceedings on his behalf.
The first witness calla was
William Gomm, examined by Mr. Giffard, said—l ant
cashier in the Union Bank of London. I remember after
the close of business on the, 3,2 th of April last balancing
ih'edbtoiusts of the notes from the different tills. I found
that there was £350 deficient. I mentioned the
circumstance to Pullinger. He told me he had had
the notes out for miscellaneous bills. He told me to
pass the amount through my book. He told me the
numbers of the notes of which the sum consisted, which
I took down. The numbers were-82,826, 25th of Jan..
£200; 58,850, 24th Sept., £100; 31,432, 20th Jan., £5O.
The document put into my hands is in the prisoner's hand-
writing. [The document was read by the clerk—it was a
sort of voucher for £350 paid for miscellaneous bills.] Pul-
linger showed me that document at the time.
Lord Mayor—Do you wish to put any questions to this
witness ?
Pullinger (bowing)—No, my lord.
The Chief Clerk—The charge against you is for feloni-
ously stealing £350 from the directors of the Union Bank.
Have yea anything to say in answer to the charge P
The Lord Mayor—You have now heard the evidence and
charge against you, have you anything to say in answer to
if P

Pullinger—No, my lord. I have nothing to say.
The depositions were then read over, and signed by the
witnesses.
Richard John Lyttleton, lately a clerk in the Union
Bank, was then placed by the side of Pullinger in the dock,
when they were both charged with stealing £3,000.
Mr. Giffard said the joint charge would now be proceeded
with, and as the money taken was in gold, the instrumen-
tality of the prisoner Lyttleton would be resorted to.
Mr. Johl Arthur Barton—l am Deputy-manager of the
Union Bank. The prisoner Lyttleten was a cashier. I
produced the cash-book on the 25th and 27th of April,
1859. I find, on the 25th, entries in the prisoner's hand-
writing. In his account current column he entered a sum
of £3,000 as having been paid to the Bank of England in
gold. On the same day I find an entry of an exchange of
£5OO S. and M. That would be understood to mean in
exchange of notes for gold. We have some customers,
named Samuels and Montague, bullion dealers. It was cus-
tomary to enter the initials of a firm, but not of private
individuals, in such transactions. On the 27th I find two
exchanges. One is E.C.R. (Eastern Counties Railway),
£1,500. The other is £l,OOO, S. and M. Turning hack
to the £5OO exchange, I find a £5OO note was given, num-
bered 37,984, 27th of January, 1859. On the 27th the
E.C..11,. exchange I find that on one Bank of England
note of £5OO, numbered 38,611, dated January 27th,
and also a Bank of England note for £l,OOO, numbered
85,748, and dated 28th January. Turning to the other ex-
change of S. and M., I find a £l,OOO note numbered 85,778,
dated January 28th, was given for gold.
Cross-examined by Mr. Lewis, who appeared for Lyttle-
ton—When the prisoner received money to a certain
am aunt it was his duty to hand it to Pullinger,
as the chief cashier, to see that the accounts balanced, and
then to write out a docket which goes on a file to be passed
through the ledger. The docket is the only proof that the
money has been paid to Pullinger. Lyttleton did all that
was his duty. He was not expected to do more than he has
done. It was no part of Lyttleton's duty to see that the
sum was paid into the Bank of England, that was Pullin-
ger's duty. It was his duty, but it was a custom
to pay the money before twelve. I don't know
as a fact that the Bank of England will not receive
coin after 12 o'clock. I believe it is their practice not to
take it after 12. On the 25th there is an entry of £5OO
(gold) having been paid in exchange for a note S.!and M.
If the head cashier brought him gold for noo, it would
not be his duty to gi re him a note for that amount, and en-
ter it if ho directed as for S. and M. If such a transaction
occurred as to the E. C. R. exchange it would I think be
his duty to consult the manager before he did so. The
Union Bank authorities had the greatest confidence in
Pullinger. I thought him above a falsehood. He had the
confidence of every one.
Mr. Lewis—Such being so do you mean to tell:me that if
Mr. Pullinger wont to him with £1,500 in gold, and said to
Lyttleton give me notes for the amount he ought not to
have done it ?
Witness—No, without reference to the manager.
Mr. Lewis—ls there any rule to that effect ?
Witness—No, but the singularity of the transaction ought
to have induced him to consult the manager.
Mr. Lewis—Don't you by your books know it was done
constantly.
Witness—What.
Mr. Lewis—The exchange of notes for gold.
Witness—l don't know so, but by reference to the books
I find it is so.
Mr. Lewis—Why was Lyttleton not to make the ex-
change ?
Witness—Because it was so large an amount.
Mr. Lewis—A large amount—Was it because he was to
doubt Mr. Pullinger, who had been in the bank 21 years.
Witness—He ought to have consulted the manager.
Mr. Lewis—lf Samuels and Montague had brought
£1,500 or £3,000 to Pullinger, and he had taken it to Lyt
tleton for exchange, was he to hesitate about making the
exchange ?—lt would not be strictly his duty to do so, but
it would have shown a want of discretion.
Mr. Lewis—lf Pullinger had brought you £1,500 for ex-
change, would you refuse to make the exchange ?
Witness —I should have referred this to the manager, as
he is my superior officer.
Mr. Lewis—Then why should Lyttleton have done more
than you would have done ?
Witness—The strangeness of the transaction should
have induced him to do so, as the Eastern Counties Rail-
way were not in the habit of doing such business.
Mr. Lewis—Do you call £1,500 a large amount.
Witness—Yes.
Mr. Lewis—What, for a railway company.
Witness—Yes, especially as that kind of business was of
an unusual nature.
In answer to further questions, witness said—l always
looked upon him as an honourable young man. I have not
traced a shilling to have gone to Mr. Lyttleton. His books
show all the entries as true. There is no false entering dis-
covered. lam induced to say that because the Bank of
England does not give us credit for the £3,000 entered in
one of Lyttleton's books, that entry is a false one. Mr.
Pullinger kept the pass-book of the Bank of England.
Lyttleton had nothing to do with that book. If I had paid
Pullinger £3OO, and ho had put it into his pocket, and
had not paid it into the Bank, I should not call an entry I
should make a false one. The pass-book put in is the only
book between the Union and the Bank of England. There
was another book, but it was kept locked up in the bank. It
is not here, at least I have not brought it. Mr. Pullinger
used to appoint the person to carry the money to the bank.
I don't know that a porter has carried money to the Bank
of England. I know that Mr. Pullinger used to take the
money to the Bank of England. I will not, however, swear
that a porter has n)t carried as much as £15,000 by him-
se-

Mr. Humphries hero said he appeared here on the part
of Mr. Pullinger, not to offer any defence to the charge,
ut his client was anxious to state that there was nothing
to connect Lyttleton with these transactions, and that he
was perfectly innocent of any fraud. (Applause.)
Mr. Giffard—l do not intend to take Mr. Pullinger's
word in the matter, a man why has been committing frauds
upon the hank for a long series of years.
The witness Barton was then re examined by Mr. Gif-
fard—l have no means of knowing that Samuels and Mon-
tague did not come to the bank and make the exchange that
has been spoken of. Three thousand pounds in bullion
would be a large parcel. It would not attract attention to
it. Pullinger had carried such a parcel
,from counter to
counter.
Mr. Lewis—Did not Mr. Pullinger hold 30 Shares in the
bank
Witness—There is the secretary.
Mr. Lewis—Don't you know ?
Witness—He did hold the shares.
Mr. Lewis—Was not Ly ttletov's accounts duly examined,
and found correct ?
Witness—Yes.
alletaY4 Bitter, Chief clerk to Messrs, Samuel awl Nen-

tague, bullion dealers, Cornhill—They keep an account at
the Union Bank. They never sent a sum of £5OO or £l,OOO
in gold to be changed for notes. If such transactions had
taken place, it would certainly have been entered in the
book I have in my hand. It is not, however, the book of
the firm. It is merely one to show the balance I commence
-vith and close each day.
By Mr. Lewis—The cashiers at the bank always con-
sulted Mr. Pullinger about changing a large amount of
gold for notes. I have seen cashiers go to consult him.
Mr. 11. Sprole (a clerk in in the accountant's office of
the Eastern Counties Railway) said—lt was my duty to
send the money of the Eastern Counties Railway to the
Union Bank. The clerk would take with him a book which
the bank clerk would initial into the sum paid in. On
April 27 I sent £3,721 12s. Su. I did not in that exchange
£1,500 of gold for notes. I sent a person named „Lumley,
he returned with the book initialed "E. L."
[The book was handed to Mr. Barton, but he could not
speak with certainty as to their being in Lyttleton's hand-
writing. Mr. Gomm, however, said it was.]
Mr. Sheldon—On April 25, 1859, Pullinger owed me
£5OO. He paid me in one bank note. I paid that money
into Messrs. Masterman's bank. That was the only sum
of money I paid in that way. On the 27th I received
£2,500 from Pullinger__ 1,000 in the morning, and £1,500
in the afternoon. The £l,OOO I gave to a member of the
Stock Exchange who was fidgetty about the account. The
£1,500 I paid into my bankers. I received the sum in two
£l,OOO Bank of England notes, and one for £5OO. Mr.
Uzielli is the name of the gentleman to whom I paid the
£l,OOO.
Mr. G. Bloor (clerk to Mr. Uzielli, stock-broker)— On
April 27, 1859, Mr. Sheldon paid me a £l,OOO note for Mr.
Uzielli, it was numbered 85,778. I did not take the date. It
was paid into Mastermaa's bank to Mr. Uzielli's account. "
Mr. Wynn (clerkin Masterman's bank) said—Mr. Shel-
don kept an account there. On April 25, 1859, he paid in
£5OO. It was a Bank of England note, marked A. L., and
numbered 37,954. I also received the sum of £1,500 in two
notes—one for £l,OOO, marked A. E. 85,745, and the other
for £5OO, marked a A. L. 38,610.
Mr. Giffard said that was the case against the prisoners.
Mr. Lewis put it to the Lord Mayor whether any case
had been made out against his client Lyttleton.
The Lord Mayor said there was nothing for him to detain
Lyttloton on the charge, neither had there been any collu-
sion proved between him and Pullinger. He perhaps
might have been indiscreet in paying so large a sum as has
been mentioned, but indiscretion was not a crime.

The Chief Clerk—There is another charge against Lyt.
tleton.
Mr. Lewis—So I believe, but I don't know whether i
will be proceeded with.

The charge having been read over to Pullinger,
The Lord Mayor asked him what he had to say in answer
to it.
Pullenger said—l am guilty, my lord. I have nothing
to say.

Mr. Giffard said that the evidence in the next case was
not any stronger, and after the observations of the Lord
Mayor he should not feel justified in proceeeding with the
other charges against Lyttleton.
_ _

Mr. Lewis—The position in which my client has been
placed has been you unjust. For fifteen years he had been
in the service of the bank, and during the whole of that
time he had conducted himself with the greatest honour
and honesty. His books have been carefully examined,
and not a single false item had been discovered.
The Lord Mayor having complimented Mr. Lewis on the
manner in which he had conducted the case for his client,
said he must be allowed to observe that the bank authorities
had been justified in taking the steps they had done, as
they had a duty to perform to their shareholders and the
public. With respect to Mr. Lyttleton he left the court
without the slightest blemish on his character. The con-
duct of Pullinger in exerting himself to clear Lyttleton
from any suspicion that attached to him was also worthy
of praise, and it proved he had still some good qualities
left.

Lyttleton was then released from custody, and loft the 0'
justice nom with his friends, and Pullinger was taken be-
low. It may be added that before he was conveyed to New- it
gate he sent up a message t) our reporter requesting a it
public statement that he has done his utmost to atone for u
his crime by assigning everything he had in the world to
the Union Bank, leaving his wife without a bed of her own C'
to lie upon, and without any other clothes than those in a'
which she was dressed at the time.

It is understood that no other charges will be brought
against him, his plea of " guilty" being amply sufficient for
the purposes of justice.