The Sun.
London, England, 1866-02-14 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 14, 1866.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.—This Day.

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.
- (Before the Lord Chief Justice Cockburn and a Special
Jury.)
WALKER V. MILNER AND ANOTHER—THE CORNHILL
BURGLARY.
This was an action brought by Mr. Walker, the jeweller
and watchmaker, the\ burglary at whose premises in Corn-
hill a short time ago created so great a sensation, against
Messrs. Milner and Company to recover the value of the
loss they had sustained by relying on the warranty given
to a certain safe purchased of the firm, it being represented
as a burglar proof and fire-resisting safe.
Mr. D. Seymour and Mr Brown appeared for the plaintiff,
and Mr. Edward James and Mr. Webster appeared for the
defendants.
The case for the plaintiff having been stated, which was
in effect a repetition of the facts connected with the bur-
glary, which are so well known,
Mr. Walker, the plaintiff, was called. He said—l wished
to purchase a safe to secure my stock of watches and jewel-
lery on the premises I was about to open in 1858 in Corn-
hill. Went to Messrs. Milner's establishment iu Moorgate-
street, and there I saw Mr. Hopley, the manager. I told him
I had taken a shop in Cornhill, and was going to open it
for the sale of jewellery and watches, and there being no
convenience for a person to sleep on the premises, I wished
for an iron safe that would protect my property when I
left. I and my son went over some safes, and fixed upon
one. We talked over the matter, and thought the one se-
lected would be very suitable. I asked the price, and I
think he said five or six and twenty pounds ; but he said
it was not the kind of safe he should recommend. He said,
I will show you one of strong holdfasts, thief-proof safe.
I asked him if he could warrant the article, as being thief-
proof, and he replied, " I can, no thief can break into that
safe." I asked him two or three times whether I
should be perfectly safe in leaving my valuable
property in the safe, and he said "Yes, perfectly."
I said, " Then we will have the safe, according to your re-
commendation." I asked him the price, and I think he
said 40 guineas, but lam not quite sure. I paid for it by
cheque, and Mr. Hopley said he would send it to Cornhill,
and that he would fix it by his own workmen. The safe
is the one now in court. There was a discount of 10 per
cent. off. [lnvoice and cheque for £36 produced. The
invoice was for the delivery of one holdfast fire-resisting
safe, £42 Os. 6d. No. 41- B, No. 3.] I was given a printed
circular in the shop, but I did not preserve it. I have
searched for it, but cannot find it. It was a printed paper ;
it had figures of safes, numbers, andprices upon it; similar to
the one nowplaced in my hand. I find 41 B, No. 3, in it. It
is the same as the one supplied, and the price, I perceive,
is £4O 2s. 6d. Ido not know where this order came from.
The safe was placed in Cornhill, where I 'occupy two
rooms on the ground floor. It was put in the back room,
and means were taken to make the safe visible to the
police at night. Holes were cut in the shutters. The
windows of the back room looked into Sun-court, and the
shop was kept lighted with gas all night and on Sundays.
The door of the safe was painted white. I also had a
mirror placed in the back room, so that any person looking
through the shutter could see the safe, or any person
at it. A policeman, had he looked through, could see
all that was going on. Sir Charles Crossley occupies the
first floor ; in fact, they aro all offices in the house, except
the top floor, which is occupied by a photographer. I did
not occupy the whole of the ground floor ; part of it was
occupied by a tailor next door. I bought a safe of Messrs.
Milner for my other place of business in Princes-street,
Leicester-square.
Mr. E. James objected to any question relative to other
safes than the one in court.
The examination, however, proceeded—The safe put up
in Princes-street was the one that Mr. Bramell, the engi-
neer, experimented upon.
Cross-examined by Mr. James—l have a distinct recol-
lection of all that took place between myself and Mr.
Hopley. The circular I have been speaking of seemed to
me to be the identical one given me when I purchased the
safe for Campbell, but I cannot say distinctly. I did not tell
Mr. Hopley the value of the articles to be placed in the safe,
and did not say whether it would be either £l,OOO or
£lO,OOO. There was a partition in the back room behind
where my men worked ; it was sft. or 6ft. high. It was
put up at the back window for two men to work at, but
they could not be seen from the shop. It did not extend
right across the shop, the safe being placed in the corner;
looking from the shop into Sun-court the safe would be
in the left-hand corner. Holes were made in both front
and back shutters ; looking through the shutters from
Sun-court the partition would intercept the view
of the safe. The partition was put up about two
or three years ago. The safe was placed in its position in
1858. It did not extend up to the ceiling. There were
two holes in the shutters in Sun-court, and looking
through these holes the person would see the safe.
The Lord Chief Justice—What, perfectly?
Witness —Yes, my lord. Looking from Sun-court into
the glass the reflection of the safe was seen perfectly.
Mr. James—The partition, then, as I understand you,
did not at all tend to confuse the sight of the safe ?
Mr. Walker—lt did not.
Mr. James—Please look at the circular and see whether
there is not a higher class of safe than that which you se-
lected.
Mr. Walker—l cannot say if there were, but if you will
point out the exact item, then I will look. My eight is
very defective.
Mr. Tames—Don't you see now at the place indicated
that thero are higher class safes than that you purchased?
Don't you now see No. 4 extra strong holdfast safe, No. 5
first-class extra strong ditto ?
Mr. Walker —Yes.
Mr. James—Did you tell Mr. Hopley anything about
burning gas in the shop all night, or holes in the shutters
for the police to look through ?
Witness—No, nothing.
Mr. James—You have iron bars now up in the front of
the shop at night ?
Witness—Yes.
Mr. James—On the principle, I suppose, of shutting the
stable door after the steed has been stolen ? (Laughter.)
Witness—No, I cannot say that.
Mr. James—Well, they have been put there since the
robbery ?
Witness—Yes.
Re-examined by Mr D. Seymour—The fastenings of the
shutters were previously lined with iron. An attempt had
been made to break into the shop when I had the shutters,
and in consequence of their recommendation I had the gas
kept alight and the holes cut in the shutters. I throw my
shop entirely open at night.
Lord Chief Justice—Don't some person sleep there at
night ?

Witness—No, my lord; it would kill them to sleep in the
shop.
By Mr. Seymour—The partition did not come higher
than the mirror. It was, in fact, above the partition.
Lord Chief Justice—You could see it from the holes ?
Witness—Yes, my lord.
Mr. D. Seymour—What—did you tell Mr. Hopley the
nature of property to be placed in the safe ?
Witness—l told him I was going to place in it watches
and jewellery.
Eord Chief Justice—Mr. James only asked a question as
to the value of the stock to be placed there.
Mr. D. Seymour—Were you aware when you bought
the safe there was a higher class than that you purchased ?
Witness—No, certainly not, my lord. Had he said the
price for an article of the description I required was £lOO
I should have bought it.
Mr. Frederick Walker—l am son of the plaintiff. I ac-
companied him to Moorgate-street to tho shop of the
Messrs. Milner. He told the gentleman attending there
that he was about opening a watchmaker's and jewellers shop
in Cornhill, that his stock would be very valuable, and
there not being convenience for a person to sleep on the
premises he should require a good safe to keep valuables
in at night. He told the gentleman that ho had been re-
commended there by the Messrs. Mappin. The witness
then went on to confirm the statement of his father with
respect to the conversation between him and Mr. Hopley
when the safe was purchased in 1858. Tho safe in
court was sold to my father as being one of their best hold-
fast, fire-resisting, and thief-proof safes. That I recollect
perfectly. The price of the safe, as compared with others
in Messrs. Milner's shop, was remarked upon by my father,
and Mr. Hopley said it was occasioned by the quality of
the iron and the strength of the workmanship. My father
asked him if he was certain the safe was burglar proof, and
he said we might leave our property in it with the greatest
security, and rest perfectly satisfied that the safe could not
be opened without the aid of the key. My father then con-
sulted with me, and we agreed that it was best to take Mr.
Hopley's recommendation, my father remarking, "Of
course you can warrant the safety of any stock in the
safe ?"
Lord Chief Justice—What answer was made ?
Witness—Mr. Hopley said, You seem not perfectly
satisfied, Mr. Walker, but I have given you good advice,
and that you will never regret having purchased this safe."
Mr. Hopley gave us several certificates, and asked us to
recommend them amongst our friends.
Mr. Seymour—Was any higher priced safe than that
purchased by your father mentioned ?
Witness—Certainly not. I recollect the robbery. I was
sent for from Regent-street. Mr. Hopley came.
Mr. James—l object to Mr. Hopley's conversation; ho
is not in the position of agent to make admissions.
The objection was sustained.
Cross-examined—l shall bo 20 years of age in Septem-
ber. I don't know anything about the management of the
establishment at Cornhill.
Mr. John Thomas Walker—l am the eldest son of the
plaintiff. The whole of the portable stock of the shop in
Cornhill was placed in the safe at night either by myself or
Mr. Smith, the foreman. Mr. Smith put the stock away
on the night; previous to the robbery. I wont to the pre-
mises on the 6th. I was not the first to arrive. I found
the safe had been broken open and the stock taken from it,
The value of the contents in the safe at that time was be-
tween £5,000 or £6,000. We have recovered some of the
property, but the loss to the firm by the robbery amounts
to £2,326, exclusive of the trust property, which amounted
to over £l,OOO.
Mr. Smith, the foreman of Nous. Talker, was ex-

amined—He said he never heard that the police had repro-
' sented that the partition obstructed their view, and that
the glass in the mirror was not kept bright. After the
robbery he did not hear that the police had complained of
the want of care on the part of Mr. Walker. There were,
however, complaints made about other portions of the pre-
mises. The glass was cleaned as often as it required. It
might have gone for a month.
Thomas Casley, ono of the burglars, was then placed in
the box ; ho wore the convict's uniform which bore on the
right arm a mark of good conduct. He said I was sen-
tenced to 14 years penal servitude on the 10th of last April
for my participation in the Cornhill burglary. I went to
Mr. Walker's premises on the 4th in company with four
companions. 1 know Sun-court well. (Laughter) I
went into 68 Sun-court at 10 minutes past 6. We wont
into the floor over Sir C. Crossley's and sat down. (Laugh-
ter.) i had two companions. We sat there until we received
a signal that Mr. Smith had gone home in the omnibus.
Wo then went into Sir C. Crossley's offices, the floor above
Mr. Walker's. We opened Sir Charles's safe first-
(Laughter.) We remained in Sir Charles's until 12 o'clock
on Saturday night before doing anything. Wo commenced
operations to get into the tailor's shop at 12.20 on Satur-
day night. We cat holes in the ceiling to get through.
Mr. Webster—You let yourselves down, then ?
(Laughter.)
Casley—Just so. (Laughter.) We gat into Mr. Wal-
ker's shop at 5 o'clock on Sunday afternoon. We got into
the back office from out of the tailor's cutting-room. We
cut away the ceiling and flooring to do so. I and another
man took some tools with us, such as crowbars. (Laugh-
ter.)

Mr. Webster—What did you do when you got in ?
Casley—The first time ?
Mr. Webster —Yes.
Casley—We had to go back again because wo had a
signal that the police were coming round. (Laughter.)
Mr. Webster—You got in again. What did you do ?
Casley—We tested the safe to see whether it was pos-
sible to open it under the disadvantages we were labour-
ing. (Loud laughter.)
The Lord Chief Justice—What do you call " testing" ?
Casley—By placing a wedge in it.
Mr. Webster—Was the safe locked ?
Casley—Oh yes, Mr. Walker always locked his safe.
(Laughter.)
The Lord Chief Justice—Of course, or how could they
have broken it open.
Mr. Webster—What did you do first ?
Casley—We drove in a wedge and found it held the
wedge, and then we knew it would give. A good safe
would resist the wedge. The policeman on the boat did
his duty. He looked through the aperture every time he
came round. We had to take the wedge out every time,
so I knew it. (Laughter.) We opened the safe at the
bottom of the door. We could not work above a foot above
the ground for fear of being seen. We put in a testing bar
first, and found the door give. I said " The door's open:,
We put in a second bar, and the door at once yielded.
Mr. Webster—How long were you in opening the safe ?
Casley—We went to the shop at 5 minutes past 3. The
whole property was secured, and we were in Sir Charles
Crossley's washing ourselves at a quarter to 4. (Loud
laughter.) There was about 400 watches, but I can't be
sure of the number. We did not expect to find the
safe in Mr. Walker's place was Milner's. We thought it
was one by Tann. His is easier to open than Milner's,
and Griffiths' is easier to open than Tann's. (Loud
laughter.)
Mr. Webster—You've had a good deal of experience in
opening safes.
Casley—Unfortunately, yes. We have experimented on
two of Milner's safes furnished for the operation. One
took us six, and the other seven hours, because we had to
use unlawful means. (Laughter.) That is, means that
could not be used by a burglar, because they made a noise.
(Laughter.) This was in 1859. The safe we practised
upon was a No. 4 Milner. It was fully opened in six
hours.

Mr. Webster—Was that with lawful means?
Casley—You must now speak in your own way
(Laughter.) You are no: a burglar, you know. (Loud
laughter.)
Mr. Webster—Well, then, what you call lawful means,
that is you used the best tools known.
Casley— Yes ; we opened it in six hours.
Mr. Webster—Did yon use smooth or rough wedges ?
Casley—Never used a rough wedge ; I have never seen
them. A wedge might get rough with use. (Laughter.)
We use the wedge to get the alderman in. (Laughter.)
Lord Chief Justice —What is the alderman ? (Roars of
laughter.)
Casley--The long bar, my lord ; it will open anybody's
safe--(laughter)—it don't matter how good it is.
Lord Chief Justice—Well, then, when tho alderman is
got in it's all up with the safe ?
Casley—Yes.
Mr. Webster—Have you a lord mayor to use ?
Casley —No ; we've got a citizen—(laughter)—and
smaller ono still that is called the citizen's friend. (Loud
laughter.) It would not do to call things by their right
name, you know. It would not do to say " Get mo a crow-
bar." (Laughter.) "Hand me the alderman" is much
better. (Loud laughter.) "Just send a citizen to me"
would not occasion much curiosity. (Loud laughter.) The
safe, as I have said, made but a faint resistance.
(The case is not expected to conclude to-day).

- .
AMERICA.

SOUTHAMPTON, Feb. 14.

The Hamburg and American Company's steamship
Germania arrived here this morning with 126 passengers,
45 bags of mails, $160,660 for England, and $l,OOO for
Hamburg. She met with westerly winds throughout her
passage. On the 9th inst. she spoke the French steamer
Washington, from New York, bound for Havre.
The Germania left New York on the 3d inst.; her news
has, therefore, been anticipated.

The Inman Company's mail steamship City of Boston
arrived at Queenstown at noon to-day (Fob. 13). She
brings $139,900 and 121 passengers, of whom she landed
11, and proceeded at 12 5 p m. for Liverpool.

NEW YORK, Feb. 3.
Mr. Seward promises that if the Mexican Express Com-
pany shall in any Way infringe the laws and treaties of the
United States with the Mexican Republican Government,
the Federal Government will take steps to obtain redress.
The Virginia Legislature has passed a resolution which
endorses President Johnson's policy, and donoun ces those
who represent the Legislature as being opposed to it.
President Johnson has accredited a Minister to the
Dominican Republic.

The Ranchero, of Matamoras, states that Bagdad was
abandoned by the Liberals on the 26th ult., and that a
Federal guard was stationed there. The Imperialists took
possession the same day.
Coranas and Escobedo had left the neighbourhood of
the Rio Grande.

The leading merchants of Matamoras, both foreign and
Me::ican, have published a protest against the proceedings
of the Federal civil and rnilital y authorities on the Texas
side of the Rio Grande, charging them with the responsi-
bility of the troubles and outrages peipetrated on the Rio
Grande by aiding the partisans of Juarez—a party which
they declare has at present no more foothold there than is
afforded by Federal officials. The Consuls of Great Bri-
tain, France, Spain, and P. assia testify to the truth of the
protest.
The Etna has arrived out.