The Sun.
London, England, 1858-03-01 00:00:00

TRIAL OF TIIII ROYAL BBITISII BANK
DIRECTORS.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, GUILDHALL.
(Sitting at Nisi Prius, before Lord Campbell and a
Special Jury.)
TEE QUEEN V. BROWN AND OTHERS.

TNIRTEENTI DAT.
'The fallowing appeared is SIICCOI4iTO editions of The SUM
or Saturday :--1
The trial of the information against the directors and
manager of the Royal British Bank for conspiring by
false pretences to defraud the shareholders and cus-
tomers and the public, was this day resumed.
The same counsel appeared as before.
The interest in these proceedings was greatly increased
this morning from the fact that they would be this day
brought to a close; and long before the time for opening
the court the avenues were densely crowded, and by 12
o'clock every available space was occupied by an anxious
auditory ; amongst whom were many respectably dressed
females. On the bench were the Hon. Misses Campbell,
his Lordship's daughters, Lord Overstone, the Hon.
Miss Jones Loyd, and several of the ladies of the
families of the jury.
Punctually at 12 o'clock his lordship took his seat on
the bench and commenced summing up. He said the
anxious task now devolved upon him of summing up the
evidence in this remarkable and very important case ;
and he said it most unaffectedly that his anxiety was
greatly diminished by considering the character and
qualifications of the gentlemen whom he now ad-
dressed. If it had been his duty to have tried this
came at the Assizes in the country before country gen-
tlemen and farmers, he should have been much more
embarrassed, for he probably would have known more
than the jury, and it would have been his difficult and
irksome task to have tried to communicate informa-
tion to them which they stood in need of ; but the
jury now trying this case knew more_ of the subject
under investigation than he did, and it was most satis-
factory to him to think that they were so well qualified
to decide and do that justice he was sure would be done
tee the country and the defendants by their verdict.
After the long and laborious trial he thought
they were ~now at the thirteenth day, during
which time they had devotedly attended to
the evidence as it proceeded, and they seemed to him
to thoroughly understand it as it proceeded step by stop
and therefore his task was now comparatively easy, and
he should only feel it his duty to state to them the ques-
tions of law as they arose, and to direct their attention
to what he considered the principal points for them to
determine. It had been his fate on the trial of a cause
as judge to occupy two days in summing up the
evidence, and if he thought that he could do
any good, or at all assist them by going through the
whole of his notes, page by page, he would not hesitate
a moment to do so, nut he thought that in this case were
he to do so he should be perplesing them rather than
assisting them, and he thought ha should be best dis-
charging his duty by bringing the few plain points of
the case before the e, and upon which their verdict was
to pass between the Crown and the defendants. They
were aware this was a criminal information filed by
her Majesty's late Attorney-General, a gentleman
of great learning and high honour, and who had filled
the office of her Majesty's Attorney-General with great
distinction and benefit to the country, but whatever
might be the result of the prosecution, no one could for
a moment impute the slightest particle of blame to him
for the course he had adopted. After the disaster of the
failure of the bank, the ruin it had brought upon
hundreds, and the scandal it had caused, it was essen-
tially necessary a judicial investigation should take
place; and he had only put the defendants on their
trial or what was termed an ea officio information,
which was a course of proceeding of an eminent character
and perfectly constitutional, The information charged
the defendants with having conspired together to repre
sent falsely and fraudulently that the Royal British Bank
and its affairs had been during the year, ending Dec. 31,
1955, in a sound and prosperous condition, producing
profits divisible among the shareholders. That was the
alleged conspiracy, and there were several overt acts
alleged, the principal of which were the report of the
directors to the shareholders of the state of the bank
up to 31st Dec., 1855, the issuing of new shares ; the
balance sheet of which they had heard so much which
professed to give a true account of the condition of the
bank at that time; the payment of dividends of Q per
cent, out of supposed profits, and the buying of shares
to keep up the price. It had already been stated to
them by the learned counsel for the prosecution that by
the law of England the crime of conspiracy may be com-
plete without any overt act being committed, but at the
same time overt acts were material to be looked at by
juries, because from them they might draw inferences whe-
ther the alleged conspiracy ever took place. It had also been
truly stated that it was not necessary to prove conspiracy,
that evidence should be given of the formal cousulta
tion of the parties accused, or their having deliberately
resolved that they would commit some illegal act, or
resort is illegal means to gain any object,
but if, as reasonable men, a jury could say
there was a common design or acting in con-
cert to do what was wrong, it would be a ground
upon which a jury might suppose and reasonably draw
the inference that such a conspiracy was actually formed.
The manner in which the prosecution proposed to prove
the charge of conspiracy, was first to show that the bank
was in a state of insolvency at the end of 1955 and the
beginning of 1356, and that being known to the defen-
dants they entered into a design to represent that the
Lank was then in a flourishing condition, for the pur-
pose of deceiving and defrauding those who were
shareholders, or the public who might wish to become I
shareholdere or have dealings with the Royal British Bank.
It would beyfor tam to say whether, on the part of the
prosecution, they had established their case. He must,
however, caution them against supposing that,
although one or several of the defendants might
have done what was improper, it would not
be sufficient to establish the charge against
then for example, if any of this went on after the reserve
fund had been exhausted, and they had lost more than
one-fourth of the paid-up capital without their know-
ledge of the fact of it, would not establish the charge of
conspiracy to misrepresent for the purpose of deceiving
and defrauding the public, fur there must be
a , joint act with a guilty knowledge. He
should first call their attention to whether there had
been generally such a conspiracy as was alleged on the
part of the Crown, and then he would draw their atten-
tion to the case as it practically affected the defendants.
He. had already had occasion to observe there was a
considerable difference with regard to evidence against
them, leaving the jury to discharge their duty in
distinguishing between them, and pronounce their guilt
or innocence. The great point for their consideration
was the real state of the bank at the end of 1355 and
beginning of ISsfi, or, more strictly speaking, the 31st
Dec., 1855, the date of the baiance-sheet which Wa,
published on let Feb., 1856, by which the bank was
represented to be in a flourishing condition. The pro-
secution had undertaken to prove it was false and frau-
dulent, and the noble lord recapitulated the
evidence that had been given on that point with
reference to the debts owing to the bank.
The exact amount of the debts, nor the manner in which
they were contrected, were material, because they were
not taxing them for imprudently granting advances to
those who had dealings with them, but only to look and
see the actual state of the bank in a pecuniary point of
view at the time to which he had drawn their attention.
He should therefore spare them from entering into there.
The directors may be blamed for it, but that would not
support the charge against them, unless as a leading
disaster contributing to bring about that state of insolvency
which they wished to conceal. Having referred to the cha-
racter of the debts, the past due bills, &c., and the credit
taken for 100,0001. of bad debts, with only a reserved
fund of 309/. ls. 7d. for bad debts, his lordship said it
seemed to him it was strong evidence for their eonsidera-
then that there was credit taken in that balance sheet for
sums of money for which credit ought not to have been
taken, and had a certain tendency to deceive those who
read it. The learned judge then read the evidence of
Mr. Barnard and Mr. Crawford, which he said went to
prove that although Mr. Cameron was not a director,
he was answerable for the balance sheet as made up and
rinted. It was for them to say, from the general view
of the case he had laid before them, whether the direc-
tors must have known of the bank's insolvency, and
knowing it, they entered into a design to deceive the
public and the shareho'ders by misrepresenting the state
of the affairs of the bank, and were guilty under the
information. The information contained the names of
eight defendants, but only seven had surrendered, Mr.
Cochrane having been outlawed. He should go through
the case as the evidence affected them, but in
a different order
He from'cthat adopted by the
?pro-
secution. should begin
with Mr. Stapleton s
case, and the others in the following order :—Mr.
M'Leod, Mr. Paece,araMerr. Kennedy, Mr. Esdaile, Mr.
Brown and Mr.
blame appeared to be
imputed against Mr. Stapolnelonl,ltohough it was right his
conduct should be inquired inttol,aeancd he had hoped that
at the close of the case for
an intimation
would have been riven that there wrownnnAatsufficient evi-
aaselearnetdhat gentle-
dence to be submitted to the jury
men ; but it was not for him (the'
Staplejtoundgevs)
interfere. He thought that Mr.
was
more of a victim than a victimiser of others, and
the jury should agree with him, Mr. Stapleton would leave the Court without a stain upon his character, and
h.eg.(.st!e learned judge) should be glad to see Lim hack
In practising in that Court over which he presided.
bituthan
wa.,, case the evidence was stronger against
Mr. McLeou's
gaTtint:t Mr. Stapleton. Ila found no
positive proof a
thoughthimae
rather slight cas4B had 11‘,:ier,: MiaLdesodo,,,taan:lailriiest
Was, no apeculat.,r, nor hand
so, and, what was /nor, e bad; any advanc9ii to do
settled on his w;{® on Ast,i7r al4rrvie't" the mon°
ri:v
-aa:nTlneetir:!t7;:vtiikiebthrainiukty;.•
Against, Mr. 0 men there
cane from his having been longer c
still it appeared to him there was a 'ant of
direct evidence of his knowledge of the exact state of
the bunk, though from his having been an original
director it might have been presumed so. No corrupt
motive had been attributed to Mr. Ower., who when the
bank failed was a creditor. He next came to two pain-
ful cases—those of Mr.4..Esdaile and Mr. Al Berman
Kennedy, and the evidence in referents to them was of
a most serious charaeter,
evidence enc required the Mr. mostAaltdteernmt iavne
g
consideration.
Kennedy went torisheowe that he was aware of theifnasiosle-
contributed to the
vent
state
of
the
bank,
andsentaonstate, sof its ti question for their
reprebut the
•
consideration was his guilty knowledge. Mr. Alderman
Kennedy, like the others, had received an excellent
character, and had introduced many of his friends to