The Sun.
London, England, 1857-09-14 00:00:00

SET' TEMBP,R, 143 165 7

POLICE INTELkIGENCE.—Sept. 12.

BOW STREET.—Mr. Henry Smart, picture
dealer, 10A, ~Tichberne-street, and Mr. T. Gloss,
also a picture dealer, Charlotte-street, Blackfriars,
appeared before Mr. Jardine to answer a summons,
charginc, them with having conspired to defraud.
Mr. H. Fitzpatrick, of Sheffield, of 1301., by sell-
ing him a landscape painting, purporting to be the
original production of the eminent artist John Lin-
nell, well knowing the same to be a " evy " only.
Mr. Metcalfe, instructed by Mr. G. D. Webb, of
Carey-street, appeared for the prosecution • r.
Abrahams defended Smart ; and Mr. Austin de-
fended Closs.

After a statement of the case by the learned
counsel, who explained that the present transaction
occurred after his client had seen the original pic-
ture at Mr. Smart's shop, and refused to give 2001.
for it, the following wituesies were examined.

F. 'W. Adams, of King-street, Covent-garden,
deposed that he was a picture dealer, and knew the
prosecutor as a customer. On 24th July last the de-
fendant Close (also a customer) called upon him and
said he had a picture by Linnell, which Mr. Fitz-
patrick wanted to purchase. Witness said, "Is it
the one Mr. Fitzpatrick saw at Smart's ?" and he
replied "Yes," adding that he did not want his
name mentioned in the matter. He requested wit-
ness to say that a gentleman had brought the pic-
ture to him (Adams) and that it was for sale. Witness
said, "Is there anything wrong about it ? because
if it is only a copy, or there is anything not right,
I would not do such a thing for 501., Mr. F. bewg
a customer of mine." He assured witness that the
picture was a genuine Linnell. The picture was sent
round, screwed up in a case, and Mr. Fitzpatrick
was conferred with on the subject, witness telling
him that the gentleman (meaning Close) was anxi-
ous to sell it, being very short of money. Close had
told him to say this, and also to refer Mr. Fitz-
patrick to Mr. Smart if he expressed any doubt
about thepicture. Witness had several conversations
with the prosecutor, and was eventually authorised
to purchase the picture for 1301., telling him "the
gentlemen" represented that he should be a loser
of 401. by the transaction. Witness agreed with
Close to give him 1201., so that he- (witness) had
10/. fur his own trouble in the matter. Mr. Fitz-
patrick requested a warranty that the picture was
genuine, but witness told him that the gentleman
did not wish his name to appear in the matter, and
there was no doubt about the genuineness of the
picture. Witness said this, believing that Close
would not deceive him in the matter. Mr. Fitz-
patrick paid witness the amount, giving him a
cheque for 251., and three acceptances (at two,
three, and four months) for 151., 40/., and 501.
respectively. Witness gave the checque and the
two latter bills to Close, keeping the 15/. for his
own commission ; although he was new. prepared to
give it up to Mr. Fitzpatrick.
By the Court—Closs told me that Smart had seen
the picture and guaranteed that it was genuine.
I did not either tell Closs or Mr. Fitzpatrick that I
had got 10/, on the transaction. Closs agreed to
I sell it for 1201., and Mr. Fitzpatrick agreed to
give 1301.

Mr. Jardine—That seems very like a fraud, to
me. You represented that you gave 1301. for what
only cost you 1201.

Witness'—Not so. I obtained the picture for
Mr._ Fitzpatrick at the price he agreed to give for
it. It is usual in- the tride to take a commission
upon a purchase, and I have often got 101. upon a
picture of 101. value.

Cross-examined—l am not a judge of Linnell's
pictures, having only.seen them at sales. No in-
voice was given nor any receipt for the bills. 1
believe the picture to be genuine; owiug to what
Gloss said.

Mr. Fitzpatrick, of Angel-street, Sheffield,
corroborated this evidence, and said that he first
a.vs, Mr. Smart about the picture on the 21st
or 22d of July. At that time a person
was in the shop, whom he uow believed to be Closs.
He showed witness the original picture of Linnell's
and. asked 2001. for it, which witness declined to
give. The picture which Adam's afterwards gave
him (from Closs) was in the same. frame and box
that he had seen the original painting in. After
buying it of Adams he took it to Smart, and said
tdMina, "Ts that the picture you showed me in
your house the other day ?" He replied, "Yes,
there can be no doubt about it." Smart said, " I
sold it to a gentleman. How did you come by it
so quickly ?" Ltold him it had been left for me to
look at, and I asked how it was that the owner did
not come forwari with his name ? Smart replied,
" Perhaps he wants to raise the wind, and don't
wish it to be known." Ho told me he gave Mr.
Linnell 175/. for it. I asked him to give me a war-
ranty. He replied, " I cannot give you one, but I
will give one to the gentleman who bought the pic-
ture of me." I thought the picture was the same.
By the Court—l would not give 151. or 51. for
the copy.
Mr. Metcalfe—Don't hurt the feelings of the
artist.

Oros3-examined—l considered the copy like the
original certainly. I am not a judge of Liunell's
pictures. I sold the copy to a gentleman at Shef-
field for 1501. ; but when I discovered the fraud, I
told him of it. He has never paid me the money.
I had no receipt fur the cheque and bills paid to
Adams, being in great baste to save my train for
Sheffi-ld. I cannot swear it, but I believe the
frame of the copy to be the same that I had seen on
the or;ginal, at Mr. Smart's shop.
Mr. John Linnell, of Redhill, the veteran artist,
examined' (both the pictures were produced in
court)—He identified the original. and said that he
should have known the other to be a copy, upside
down. He painted the original for Mr. Grant, and
sold it in February last to him for 1751. Had known
his family for fifty year...
_ _

Cross-examine(i—LThe colours are well imitated
in the copy. I consider the signature in the copy,
" John Linnell," to be a forgery.
Mr. James Lloyd, of Gracechurch-street, deposed
that he purchased the original of Mr. Clogs (defen-
dant) on the 14th July last. °loss said he Nought
it of Smart. .EEe sold it again afterwards. -
Here the investigation, having occupied several
hours, was adjourned to next week.

WORSHIP-STREET.—Mary Ann Villiers, the
wife of a retired publican, residing in Mansfield-
street, Kingsland-road, was chargedwith feloniously
cutting and wounding her husband, with intent to
murder him.

Oa entering the witness box the complainant,
who appeared with his face nearly covered with ad-
hesive plaister, and presented a most ghastly spec-
tacle, said—lt is not my intention to proceed with
this case, as I have reason to believe that the in-
juries T have sustained were accidentally inflicted by
my wife, and
.I hope you will allow•me to abandon
the prosecution. _ _ -

Ile magistrate, peremptorily refused to accede to
the request in a case of.such a serious nature, and
having inquired if there was any other evidence,
Sergeant Townsend,- No: 23, stated that in con-
sequence of information he had received, he pro-
ceeded on the previous evening to the residence of
the prosecutor, whom he found seated in the par-
lour with the blood gushing down from two fright-
ful wounds in the face. Witness asked him how he
had received the injuries, and before he had time
to reply, the prisoner, who-was standing near him,
stepped boldly forward and exclaimed—" It was
done by me, but I meant to cut Lis throat, and
now you may lock me up." The prisoner was
immediately taken into custody, and on her way to
the station-house, she declared that it was her set-
tled determination to murder her husband, and
assigned as her motive for such vindictiveness that
he had boastfully acknowledged the fact of his hav-
ing formed an improper intimacy with her sister.
Police-constable, -N 370, gave corroborative evi-
dence, and added that the prisoner had attacked
her husband with, the carving-knife produced,
which had been since handed to him by the laud-
lady, stained with blood, as it now appeared.
Mrs. Jane-Jones, the wife of a builder in Mans-
field-street, stated that the prosecutor and his wife
had occupied apartments in her house for several
months; during which period they had lived on very
unhappy terms together, and consequently quar-
relled from morning to night. On the previous
evening she heard-an unusually violent commotion
in their apartment, on entering which she observed
the prosecutor -in the mang:eS and bleeding condi-
ti:m. described by the officer. The prisoner, who was
standing over him in a menacing attitude, coolly
avowed that she had inflicted the wounds in his
face while attempting to cut his throat, at the same
time pointing to knife- on the table, the
blade of which was stained with fresh blood. Wit-
ness instantly secured the weapon, with which she
hastened into the street, and gave information to
the police. The witness added that the prosecutor
hail formerly been in affluent circumstances, but
was of such profuse and extravagant habits that he
bad expended no less than 5,0001. within the last
tine.)
.yelr.-1.

Mr. 7 G. 11. Coward, the divisional surgeon of
police, having deposed to the serious nature of the
wounds, one of which had completely cut through
the cheek to the extent of four inches.
The prisoner, who exhibited throughout the most
reckless indifference, was remanded for depositions.

ROMAN CATHOLIC CHAPLAINS FOR INDIA.—We are
informed that two Roman catholic clergymen have
volunteered their services as chaplains to the army in
India, Lamely the Rev. Mr. Dyne, of St. Peters-chapel,
aerkenwell ; and the Rev. Edwafd Lescher, one of the
priests attached to tho Chapel of the Holy Family, Saf-
"n-hill- They have been already armed with the
necessary
.spiritual " raculties" from Cardinal Wise-
man, and will leave London for their destination in- the
East with as little delay as possible.

Names of
Companies.

Ashin &Oldh
Birmingham
Coventry....
Derby .. •...
GrandJunetill
Do., 6 pr. Ct.
Grand Union
FEennt & Avn
Leeds &Livrp
Leicester....
Leicstr &Nth
Loughlorogh
Macclesfield.
Neath
0xf0rd......