The Sun.
London, England, 1859-05-16 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, MONDAY EVENING, MAY 16, 1851

makers. The knife had blood upon it. The knife,
which was concealed, had apparently been lately
sharpened.
The prisoner, in, an impudent manner, said he
did not wish to ask the witness any question.
Mrs. Elizabeth Reynolds, 96, West-street, Ber-
mondsey, said on the sth of this month she went
to visit a friend at Kingsland, at the house of
whom the injured woman was acting in the ca-
pacity of nurse; She (witness) asked her the way
to Abney Park, and she offered to show her the
way. Before they started, the prisoner came to
the door, saw the injured woman, detained her
some time, and had some very angry words with her.
She (witness) left the house with Mrs. Page, but
they had not proceeded but a very short distance,
when the prisoner came up, made use of violent
and disgusting language to the deceased, and
made three stabs at her with a sharp shoemaker's
knife. After he had done this, the prisoner said,
with an oath, that he would murder her, if not
now, at some other time. The prisoner wanted the
injured woman to tell him where his wife was, but
she refused, saying he was a very bad man, that he
had been parted from her for some time, and that
he was continually getting drunk. After he was
taken into custody, he again threatened her, and
said he wanted his wife.

The prisoner, who treated the matter with the
greatest indifference, declined to say anything in
his defence, or to ask the witnesses any questions.
The prisoner was remanded until Saturday next.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.—May 14.

OLD COURT.
(Before Mr. Justice Crowder.)
THE WAGNER FORGERIES.

The prisoner Bateman cross•examined Chandler
for nearly two hours, and behaved with the greatest
effrontery. Chandler admitted, in answer to the
questions put to him by the prisoner, that he had
been concerned in more than 20 forgeries, but he at
the same time said to the prisoner, in a very ra-
tional and apparently truthful tone, " Why you
know all about these things as well as I do, for you
and Wagner and the others were all concerned."
The effect of the cross-examination was merely to
show, what was before quite apparent, namely, that
Chandler had for a great many years been pursuing
a course of crime, in which it appeared equally clear
the prisoners were at the same time involved.
The prisoner Bateman, on being called upon for
his defence, made a long speech to the jury, the
principal portion of which consisted of abuse of the
witness Chandler, whom he accused of getting up
the charge against himself and his companions in
order that he might escape punishment for his own
crimes, and who, he said, had been a thief and a
forger all his life, and who, if he had his deserts,
would be at that moment hanging outside the gaol.
(Laughter.) He concluded by stating that he hoped
the jury: would not infer, from the facts that
had been inquired into during his cross-examination
of Chandler, that he must have been concerned in
the matter or else he could not have been so well

acquainted with them, as the fact was he had only
received the information from other persons a few
hours before, and he said he should be able to prove
by respectable testimony that the letter in the
name of Wilson, which was the principal evidence
against him, was not in his handwriting, and also
that he carried on a legitimate and respectable
business, and was not connected with any gang of

forgers.
Bramwell also addressed the jury at some length,
and•declared that in the presentation of this check
he was merely an innocent agent, and that he had
been sacrificed by, the witness Chandler.
The prisoner Bateman then called as a witnesss a
gentleman named Rigby, who stated that he was
connected with the works at the Holyhead harbour
and breakwater, and tb at the prisoner was employed
under him from the year 1856 to 1858, and during
that period he behaved in a very exemplary man-
ner. - -He had very extensive returns to make, and
he had frequent opportunities of seeing prisoner's
handwriting, and, having looked at the letter that
had been produced, signed in the name of Wilson,
it appeared to him that it was very different from
the prisoner's ordinary writing.
Mr. Bodkin asked the witness by whose recom-
mendation the prisoner came into his service ?
Bateman, in an excited manner, exclaimed, " I
object to that question." (A laugh.)
• Mr. Justice Crowder told the prisoner he had no
right to object to the question. He had called the
witness, and the counsel for tie prosecution had a
right to cross-examine him.
The question was then repeated, and Mr. Rigby
stated that the prisoner came into his service from
the convict prison at Portland under a ticket of
leave. The chaplain recommended him strongly,
Col. Jebb, the prison inspector, also interested him-
self in his behalf. The returns the prisoner had to
make were mostly figures.
A gentleman named Martin was then examined
on behalf of the same prisoner, and, in answer to
the questions put to him, he said that Bateman had
introduced persons to him for whom he had dis-
counted bills ; but he added that he had been
swindled of the money he had advanced up to the
present time. He also said that he understood the
pprsons who were to have had the money had also
been swindled by the prisoner. (Laughter.) The
witness then said that he had been subpoenaed, and
kept waiting about the court for four days.
Bateman, in an impudent manner, said that it
was this, no doubt, that had made him so angry.
The witness said he was there, and was ready to
answer any questions the prisoner might think fit
to put to him.
Bateman said he had no more questions to put.
The witness had proved that he was carrying on a
legitimate business. (Laughter.)
Mr. Bodkin (to the witness)—l have nothing to
ask you, sir. You may stand down. (Renewed
laughter.)
Mr. Justice Crowder then summed up. He said
there could be no doubt that Chandler was a most
tainted witness, and that the jury ought to look
with great suspicion at the evidence that was given
by such a witness. Still, however, they had had
an opportunity of seeing his demeanour, and the
manner in which he had given his evidence, and the
corroboration that had been given to it in a great
many important particulars, and it was for them to
say, upon a consideration of all the circumstances,
whether the charge was established against any or
all of the prisoners.
The jury retired at half-past 3 o'clock, and re-
turned into court shortly after 4, when they gave a
verdict of guilty against all the prisoners.
John Spitall, one of the City detective police, was
then called, and he proved that Wagner was con-
victed in 1852 of uttering a forged cheque for £340,
and sentenced to 10 years' transportation.
Edward Funnell, another City detective, proved
that Bateman was also convicted of felony in 1852,
he having been at that time previously convicted,
and was sentenced to 10 years' transportation.
Mr. Justice Crowder inquired the nature of the
second offence, and it appeared that the prisoner
while in gaol had become acquainted with another
prisoner, and that when he got out he went to that
prisoner's friends, who were very poor people, and
induced them to send a small sum of money under
the idea that it would be the means of procuring
some benefit to their unfortunate relative, and that
the prisoner obtained possession of the money and
applied it to his own use.
The other prisoners, Foster and Humphreys, who
were convicted on Friday, were then placed at the
bar.
A police-constable informed the Court that the
prisoner Foster had been summarily convicted of an
attempt at housebreaking, and sentenced to three
months' hard 1 b3ur.

Mr. Bodkin informed the Court that nothing was
known against:the prisoner Bramwell previously,
and he believed that his family were respectable.
The prisoners were then called upon in the usual

form to state whether they had anything to urge
why judgment should not be passed upon them?
The learned Judge then, addressing the prisoners,
said that Wagner, Foster, Humphreys, and Bram-
well had been convicted on the previous day of
uttering a forged cheque for £265, knowing it to
be forged, and to-day Wagner, Bramwell, and the
other prisoner Bateman, had been convicted of
forging and uttering another cheque for £270. The
crime of which they had been convicted was one of
the deepest dye, and in the course of the investiga-
tion of the various transactions such a systematic
course of forgery and fraud had been developed as
he should think had rarely been exhibited in any
court of justice. The ingenuity that had been em-
ployed to carry out these offences appeared to ha: e
been most extraordinary, and he could not but re-
flect that if the same talents had been devoted to
legitimate objects the whole of the prisoners must
have been successful in any walk of life, and they
would have been able to procure a competence for
themselves and families. They had all, however,
preferred to honest industry speculating in this
most nefarious trade, and they had done so to an
extent that must have astonished any one who had
listened to these proceedings. One good effect he
hoped, however, would arise from the detection of
such a gang, that bankers, from the disclosures
that had been made, would invent some mode to
protect themselves from such devices, and that the
severe punishment which he should feel it his duty
to inflict would also tend to prevent others from
rushing into such dangerous transactions. W ith
regard to Wagner, it appeared that in the year
1852 he was transported for ten years for uttering
a forged cheque for £340, and that in some way or
other he obtained his liberty in 1856, and that
nearly as seen as he was liberated LP resorted to
oldhid courses, and engaged In the most extensive