The Sun.
London, England, 1859-06-25 00:00:00

POLICE INTELLIGENCE—June 24.

GUILDHALL.—THE ALLEGED TESTIMONIAL
FRAUDS.—Robert Marks, a gentlemanly middle-
aged man, with a very imposing appearance, was
brought up on remand, for further examination,
relative to numerous frauds which, it was alleged,
he had committed in connection with the collection

of subscriptions for the " Cort Testimonial Fund"
and a testimonial to Alderman Me3hi.
Alderman Salomons presided. Sir P. Laurie,
Alderman Copeland, Sir J. Musgrove, Alderman
Wilson, Alderman Mechi, Sir R. W. Carden, Mr..
Whitbread, of the well-known brewery firm, Mr.
Snape, a barrister, and many other gentlemen in-
terested in the case, were present during the pro-
ceedings.
Mr. Humphreys,jun., of the firm of Humphreys,
Son, and Morgan, of Giltspur-chambers, Newgate-
street, appeared for the prosecution. Mr. Beard, of
Basinghall-street, defended the prisoner.
The evidence of Mr. Thorley, the patent cattle-
food proprietor, Mr. R. Cort, the son of the inven-
tor of the pudding and rolling process in the manu-
facture of iron, and other witnesses examined at

the former hearing having been read over,
Mr Humphreys said this was a prosecution in-
stituted by Alderman Mechi, whose name had been
used by the prisoner in the matters about to be in-
vestigated, and the worthy alderman felt that great
injustice would have been done to the public had
he not taken the necessary steps to secure his
apprehension, in order that he might be tried for
the frauds alleged against him.
The following additional evidence was then called:
James Gale said—l am a clerk in the Royal
Agricultural Society's office, and I know of no tes-
timonial being got up by the society to Alderman
Mechi. The prisoner has not, to my knowledge,
ever been employed in any way by the society.
Mr. Robert James Snape said—l am a barrister-
at-law, and have chambers at 2, Stone-buildings.
I recollect the prisoner coming to my chambers on
the 31st of December last, and representing that he
was engaged in collecting subscriptions to a testi-
monial to Alderman Mechi. He exhibited a docu-

ment, either parchment or paper, containing the
names of a number of persons who, he said, were
all subscribers to the testimonial. I objected to any
testimonial. upon which he urged the claim of Ald.
Mechi to a testimonial, on the ground of his services
to the cause of scientific farming. As a further in-
ducement to subscribe, he said that every subscriber
would have a copy of Alderman Mechi's portrait or
print. I told him not to send me a print, as I should
decline to receive it ; but that as I was personally
acquainted with Alderman Mechi, and on that
ground only I would subscribe. I then gave him
a cheque made payable to the " Mechi's Testimo-
nial" for £1 ls., which has since been paid, and the
voucher returned to me. I believe the prisoner men-
tioned what the testimonial was to consist of, but I
do not recollect what it was to be.
Cross.examined—l never saw either the prisoner
or the printed circular produced before. Ido not
recollect signing the subscription list.
Mr. Beard here pointed out a signature on the
subscription list, and upon witness acknowledging
it as his writing, said the heading of the list was a
perfect answer to the charge, inasmuch as it set
forth that the subscription was for a testimonial
print, of which he had a copy present, and which,
being a very beautifully-executed portrait, was well
worth the whole amount subscribed.
Mr. Humphreys objected to the heading of the
testimonial being readin evidence, because it formed
no part of the sheet of paper containing witness's
signature.
Mr. Beard expressed surprise at the objection, as
the evidence he now offered contained the gist of
the whole case.
Mr. Humphreys said it could not be received in
evidence, as the witness did not recollect seeing the
heading of the testimonial at all.
Mr. Snape—l paid the subscription totally dis-
tinct from any print, and solely for the testimonial.
I did receive a print about a month after. I believe
there was no heading to the subscription list I saw.
Mr. Beard—He might here state that, so far
from these subscriptions being obtained under false
pretences, or without authority, the whole matter
was conducted with the knowledge and sanction of
Mr. Bazin, Alderman Mechi's partner, who fur-
nished the prisoner with a list of the subscribers
to the original testimonial. He should have to
cross-examine Mr. Bazin upon some matters, and
he therefore trusted the prosecution would call him
to enable him to do so.
Mr. Humphreys said he could not undertake to
call Mr. Bazin unless his evidence should hereafter
be deemed material to the prosecution.
Mr. Beard said—Then he should be obliged to
call him as a witness for the defence.
Mr. Humphreys said that was all the evidence
he had to offer in that case.
Bull, the detective officer who apprehended the
prisoner, said there was a witness here in Mr. Cort's
case, and he rather expected Lord Berners would
have been present, as his lordship promisedto attend
if he could.
Mr. Beard said there was no pretence for any
charge against the prisoner by Lord Berners.
Mr. Thompson said—l am a civil engineer, and
assistant to Messrs. Rendell, of Great George-street,
Westminster. On the 7th January, 1857, the pri-
soner called on Messrs. Rendell, and solicited sub-
scriptions for the " Cort Testimonial Fund."
Messrs. Rendell authorised me to give £5 towards
the fund, and on handing over that amount to the
prisoner he gave me this receipt. The prisoner
represented the strong claims of the Cort family
upon the engineerino, profession and the public, in
consequence of the father's invention for the manu-
facture of iron. I paid him the amount, believing
he was authorised to collect for the fund.
Mr. Richard Cart said—l never received one
farthing of the sum of £5 paid to the prisoner
for the " Cort Testimonisl Fund" of Messrs. Ren-
dell, in January, 1857. I regularly dismissed
the prisoner in October, 1856, by letter sent
through the post, and I subsequently told, him
myself that he was dismissed. I told him so before
the date of the payment of the £5 by Messrs.
Rendell.
Cross-examined—A committee was formed for
carrying out this-testimonial, and an account was
opened at Sir John Lubbock's bank for receiving
the subscriptions to the fund. The prisoner was
never employed by that committee. I had power over
the fund as the originator of it, for the benefit of
myself and sisters. Her Majesty the Queen sub-
scribed (from the Royal Bounty Fund through Lord
Palmerston) to the National Fund, which I com-
menced. My character has suffered through my
connexion with this man, and I wish to explain
how I became acquainted with him. I engaged him
as collector, but he violated every instruction.
Mr. Humphreys said Mr. Cort's character was
perfectly free from imputation.
Mr. G. Norgate Hooper, coach-maker, of 38, Hay-
market, said—The prisoner called on me en the 29th
of November, 1856, and represented himself as the
authorised collector for the " Cort Testimonial
Fund," and in consequence of such representation
I gave him two guineas. He produced ,a list of
names of first-rate gentlemen, and on recognising
one I knew I became satisfied the application was
genuine.
Mr. Humphreys here applied for a remand as he
had only been instructed at the eleventh hour, and
having received communications from Bath, Chester
Derby, Reading, Liverpool, Manchester, Sheffiel.
Wolverhampton, and from almost all parts of the
country relative to the prisoner and his testimonial
presentations, which he had not had time to inves-
tigate, he was not prepared to proceed further with
the case at present.
The prisoner was accordingly remanded till Friday
next.

LAMBETH. —THE DOCTOR WATTERS' GANG—
FINAL EXAMINATION AND COMMITMENT OF THE
PRISONERS.— John Nichol Watters, alias Dr.
Watters, alias Doctor Locock, and Claude Edwards
were placed at the bar before the Hon. G.
C. Norton, for final examination, on a charge of
conspiring, with others not in custody, in defraud-
ing a number of persons, under the pretence of
curing them of deafness and other infirmities under
which they. laboured.
Mr: Lewis, jun., attended for the prosecution,
and Mr. Neale appeared for the prisoner Watters.
Mr. Lewis said that from the inquiries that had
been instituted it had been ascertained that the pri-
soner Waters had, as far back as about the year
1833, pleaded guilty to a charge of arson, and was
sentenced to 18 months' imprisonment; and sub-
sequent to that had been tried, convicted, and sen-
tenced to three years' imprisonment for personating
other perions at Surgeons'-hall. His worship
would be also told by a witness whom he should
call, that the prisoner had a second fire of a very
suspicious character, but no prosecution took place.
Mr. Norton—Have you learned anything of the
character of the prisoner Edwards
Mr. Lewis—Well, sir, his story is, that he had
been brought up as a chemist, but had, unfortu-
nately for himself, fallen in with the prisoner
Watters and the Bennetts, and I do•not think I
can better illustrate his character since that period
than by reading over the
_published transcript of