The Sun.
London, England, 1859-12-09 00:00:00

Mr. Jas. Lawton,a hoot and shoe maker, elaime(

for £lOO 10s., on account of the representatives of
John Paul, the clerk. Two or three days after their
account was sent in for this claim they received a
cheque drawn by the guardians for the full amount.
The cheque was paid into their bankers, and it was
duly honoured, bnt in a clay or two afterwards Paul
came to them and told them that the account of the
guardians was very short or overdrawn, and there-
fore he should be much obliged if they would give
him a cheque to help the guardians along. A cheque
was given to him, " Payable to John Paul, Esq., or
bearer," and he gave witness his cheque in return,
as security for the £lOO 10s., which they made.
They had previously paid the guardians' cheque to
their account at their bankers. They knew that
the cheque for £l5l 12s. 9d. had been honoured
when they made the advance to which he had
alluded. Similar transactions had before taken
place between them, for no sooner had they got a
chcflue from the guardians than either a letter
came, 0: Paul himself, telling witness that as he
coul not pz;:y
the cheque in for a week they might
as well lend it 1,0 him, and he gave witness his own
cheque in return. These cheques were made all
riglit at the bankers'. They had supplied the union
with shoes for the last 17. years. They only supplied
them once by contract; and for the other part of
the time by tender.
Mr. Charles Kingsford, a flour dealer, said he
claimed £1,055 of the guardians of the City of Lon-
don for flour delivered at the workhouse in the
Bow-road. The date of the first transaction was
from the 25th of March to the 25th of June, 1856,
and the last up to December, 1856. His tenders
were accepted by the Board of Guardians.
By Mr. Roche—He never received any check
from Mr. Paul, and had nothing to do with him
except occasionally pressing him for money.
Mr. Rushworth, of the firm of Baiss Brothers,
wholesale druggists, said they claimed £163 ss. 4d.
for goods supplied to the Guardians of the City of
London Union—drugs and medicines. They were
sent to the workhouse from orders :signed by Mr.
Paul, or by Mr. Bunting, the medical officer.
Several other similar cases were brought forward
and the proceedings were adjourned.

THE BRIBERY PROCEEDINGS AT
AORTVICIL

Yesterday the Norwich magistrates were engage d
for nearly four hours in further hearing the charge
preferred against Mr. Albert J. Collins, of conspir-
ing with Mr. H. Croxford and others to bribe Mr.
Joel Fox, by offering him £5OO to vote for eight
Tory aldermen on the 9th of November.

Mr. Power, Q.C., again appeared to conduct the
case on the part of the prosecution, and Mr. Ser-
geant Ballantine and Mr. H. Holl for the defendant.
Mr. Mendham, town-clerk, having stated that the
Town Council had, in accordance with a resolution
adopted on Tuesday, retired from the prosecution,
said he did not appear further in the matter.
Mr. Sergeant Ballantine submitted that unde r
these circumstances Mr. Power had no locus standi;
if any one were the prosecutor it must be Mr. Fox,
and the question was whether that gentleman in-
structed his learned friend.

Mr. Fox, in reply to questions from the Bench,
said he was ready to give evidence as before, but he
had not instructed counsel.

Mr. Power stated that he appeared for several
gentlemen who were anxious that justice should be
vindicated ; they .were Messrs. J. J. Colman, R. N.
Bacon, C. N. Bolingbroke, E. S. Holland, J. New-
begin, J. Pyman, the Rev. G. Gould, and the Rev.
J. crompton.. Mr. Fox was not a sufficiently
wealthy man to engage in a contest with persons
possessing the means. of those who instructed his
learned friend, but he occupied the same position as
before, the only difference being, that the gentle-.
men whose names he had mentioned had anunied
the attitude formerly taken up by the Town Council.
A lengthened argument took place on the sub-
ject. Various modes of proceeding, such as the pre-
ferring an indictment before a grand jury, or the
filing of an cx officio information by the Attorney-
General, being mentioned, and .Mr. Power inti-
mated that, in the event of the decision of the
Bench being adverse to him, those who instructed
him wonld lay the matter before the Government.

On the magistrates proceeding to a division on
the question,
The Mayor objected to Sir Samuel Bignold's
voting, upon the ground that he had been men-
tioned as an alcused party in the case.
Sir S. Bignold persisting in his right to vote,

Mr. Sultier also protest—ed against'his doing so.
Sir S. Bignold rejoined by observing, with some
warmth, that a junior magistrate who had been
pitchforked on to the bench would show more de-
cency if he kept himself quiet.
The voting then proceeded, and
The Bench decided by 12 to 10 that Mr. Power
had no locus standi.

The learned counsel applied for permission to,
prefer a fresh information, but

The Magistrates declined to entertain the appli-
cation until the case before them was disposed of. .
-Several clerks from the banking establishment
of Messrs Harvey and Hudson were examined,:
and it was proved that Mr. Collins was paid £5OO
in three £lOO and four £5O Bank of England notes
on the morning of the 9th Nov. ; also, that Sir S.
Bignold and Mr. Collins. had had un interview in
the course of the morning with Mr. R. J. Harvey.
This gentleman, on being asked by the Mayor to state
what passed on the occasion, declined to answer the
question, lest by his answer he should criminate
himself. Mr. Harvey stated, however, that it was a
nightly practiceto send for notes from London, and
the notes to which reference had been made in the
case were not sent for specially from town. He also
said that Sir Samuel Bignold did not sign on the
occasion any cheque, promissory note, or bank
guarantee for £509, nor did he pass his word with
a similar object.
The Mayor said the case could not be considered
to be concluded, but the question was whether the
magistrates ought not to put the matter in a train
for further investigation,
Mr. Sergeant Ballantine said the magistrates
might certainly exercise their responsibility by
sending the matter for trial, but before they did so
it would be his duty to address some observations
to the bench. • The_ learned gentleman then pro-
ceeded in eloquent terms to denounce the whole
prosecution as a party proceeding got up by the
Liberals as a set-off to their exposure before the
late committee of the
-]douse of Commons. The
Liberals had, in fact, baited a trap with Joel Fox,
thinking to catch his 'client. The inquiry had. not
been set on foot for the public good, but simply to
gratify feelings of reVenge, and for the purpose of
"slowing up" the Conservatives, as the Liberals
had been exposed before the election committee.
The Town Council had on reflection evidently come
to the conclusion that it was not desirable that they
should be any longer prosecutors in the matter ;
and it was one of the most wretched circumstances
of the whole wretched inquiry that Mr. Harvey,

who, from motives of commercial honour, had not
thought it consistent with his duty as a banker to
divulge what passed at his bank, was placed in a
position which, although no man of honour would
take advantage of it, might be distorted by malig-
nant people. As regarded his client Mr. Collins,
the learned sergeant contended that it was not
proved that the notes which he had received at
Harvey's bank had been handed by him to Mr.
Croxford ; that there was no evidence to implicate
him in the charge with Croxford (who had left
Norwich), and that under these circumstances ne
jury would convict. It was to the interest of no
one to have the matter forced further, and it would
be unjust to ruin Mr. Collins to gratify petty ma-
lignity and serve political objects.
The Mayor, at the conclusion of Mr. Sergeant
Ballantine's observations, said there were three
courses open to the magistrates-Ist, to commit Mr.
Collins for trial; secondly, to dismiss the case;
and, thirdly, to call upon Mr. Collins to enter into
recognisances to answer any charge which might
be preferred against him.
On these questions the magistrates retired to
consult in private, and it was dcdided by a nia.je"
rity of 15 to 6 not to commit the defendant, but, at
the same time, it was determined by 12 to 10 W
call upon him to enter into tivo rocognisances of
£250 each, and himself in £5OO, to answer [MY
future charge.
On this decision being annottnced,
Mr. Sergeant Ballantine said he should advise
his client to decline entering into the proposed re;
cognisances, except under protest, and until he he",,
been taken into custody by force. This " force
having been theoretically exhibited by' one of the
officers of the court laying his hand on Mr. Collins,
the recognisances were entered into, and the Pr°-
ceedings in the case terminated, at any rate for the
p resent.
Mr. Sergeant Ballantine announced that it Vias
not his intention to offer any evidence to support
the charge of bribery at the general election pre"
ferred against Sir W. Foster and the Messrs. Wilde
,;
Mr. Askew, solicitor, also withdrew, anti"
slight laughter, the counter-charges preferred 11
the Liberals against Sir Samuel Bignold, Captaill
Ives, and other Conservatives.