The Sun.
London, England, 1861-01-12 00:00:00

CENTL4L CRIMINAL—COURT.--Jan. 11.

OLD COURT.
(Before Mr. Justice Blackburn.)
The trial of Lewis Robert Poole, for :perjury,
was resumed this morning.:
Sergeant Ballantine, Mr. Holl, ar d Mr. Harri-
son appeared in support of the prosecution, and Mr.
Best and Mr. Poland for the defendant.
John Woodford, the witness who was examined
on the former trial, was again called, and he gave
evidence as to his having assisted to remove the
trunks full of shoes and boots to Kingsthorpe, to
the residence of Chapman, by the orders of the
defendant. He also spoke to taking the trunk to
the railway station to be conveyed to Landon, and
to Ventris having come up to him and Beard upon
one occasion when they were taking goods from the
warehouse, and telling them that they were watched.
Cross-examined—Both he and Beard thought
that things were not altogether right; but they
did not say anything until after they had been
abused by Poole and Chapman in the public streets,
and because they could not get any information
why they:were so abused, they went and " peached"
against them.
Evidence was then given to confirm the state•
ments of the witnesses Beard and 'Woodford as to
the removal of the property to Kingsthorpe, and to
the house of a person named Billingham, at
Northampton.
The witness William Ball was next examined.
He proved that the defendant asked him to assist to
get the goods back after they had been seized by
the messenger of the Court of Bankruptcy, and that
a statement was drawn up at the office of Mr.
Dawson, who was the solicitor for Mr. Cooke, to
the effect that his agent was in the habit of pur-
chasing goods of the bankrupts, and that shortly
before the bankruptcy he was present, when he
purchased a large quantity of miscellaneous stock,
to
which he packed, and assisted afterwards remove
tn e d
aHy
-eb also
o k
toroCvhedapbmeaning's
sreenstidteonLceonaato.
Kingsthorpe.tofet
p
and the ledger friottm
tVheentcrougur,
course
et
oQfatthlteertraanndsaßetailort:
office, and that
the defendant said that Cooke would be a good sort
of person to come forward and claim the goods.
In answer to questions put by Mr. Best, this
witness said that when he signed the statement
referred to he was perfectly well aware that every-
thing contained in it was false, but he was never
told he should have to swear to the truth of that
statement, but Mr. Poole merely said that if be
signed it it would be all right, and they should be
able to get back the goods.
In re-examination he said that when he heard
that Mr. Poole had been taken into custody, he
thought it very possible that he might himself get
into trouble, and he therefore gave information of
what had occurred to Mr. Newton, one of the
assignees.
Mr. Bryan, the partner of the defendant, proved
that the entries in the day-book relating to the
supposed sales to Mr. Cooke and Captain Poole,
the defendant's father, were in the handwriting of
the defendant, and he had no knowledge whatever
of either of the transactions.
Mr. Best then addressed the jury for the defen-
dant, and after having again commented with con-
siderable severity upon the witnesses Beard,
Woodford, and Ball, he said that in this ease he felt
it his duty to call witnesses who would positively
contradict them upon some points of the evidence
they had given, and if he succeeded in doing this
he said he should ask the jury to discredit their
testimony, altogether, and acquit the defendant.
The following witnesses were then examined for
the defence :
Mr. Roger Dawson said—l am a solicitor at
Northampton. I know Mr. Cooke of Walsall, and
the defendant and Mr. Chapman, and a man named
Beard. On the 30th of August Chapman came to
my office and told me he was the agent of Mr.
Cooke, and that a large quantity of goods had been
seized by the messenger of the Court of Bankruptcy
which belonged to Mr. Cooke, and he wished me
to act professionally in the matter. All the parties
were strangers to me at that time. I wished to see
Mr. Cooke, and about an hour after this Mr. Poole
came to me upon the same subject. I asked
him if the goods did not belong to the creditors, and
he said they had been sold to Mr. Cooke many
weeks before the bankruptcy, and it was a
disgraceful thing on the part of the assignee to
seize them. Mr. Cooke came to my office on the
30th of August, but I did not see William Ball
there on that day or the next. I did not' see the
witness Ball until the 3d of September, a day or
two after, and I then drew up the statement that
has been referred to relative to his knowledge of
the transaction. No one else was present, and I
took down the statement from his own lips. When
I had written to the end, he said that was all he
had to say, and he put his name to it. I read it
over to him, and I also read the statements that
had previously been made by Beard and Jamieson,
the defendant's clerk. Captain Poole came to my
office on the 3d of September accompanied by Beard
and Jamieson, and he said they were the witnesses
who could prove the sale to Cooke. I put some
questions to them, and they stated a number of
facts, and I then took out a sheet of paper and
wrote down what tkey said. I never:sent Ball to
London to fetch any books; and no books were ever
brought to my office. .
Cross-examined—The parties at this time were
all strangers to me, and I had no retainer, but I
considered I was acting as the solicitor for Mr.
Cooke. I have no recollection of any message being
brought to me on the 30th of August to go to
Kingsthorpe. I will not swear whether any such
message was sent or not, or whether I sent word
back that the parties were to some to my office.
The defendant did not give me any document when
he first came to my office. He and his father, Capt.
Poole, remained in my office for several hours, and
Captain Poole talked about his Peninsular cam-
paigns, and we did not say a word about leather.
I discovered in the course of the conversation that
the defendant was cousin to an old schoolfellow of
mine. I swear that Ball was not present upon this
occasion. My son, my servant, and Capt. Poole
had a good opportunity of knowing whether Ball
was with us or not. I did not ask any questions of
the defendant about entries in his books. I should
have proceeded with the action without making any
such inquiries. I swear that the entries now in
the books relating to the sales to Cooke and Captain
Poole were not in my office, and with my pen and
ink. I asked the defendant what he did with the
money he received from Cooke, and he said that he
gave it to his father. When I was taken into cus-
tody a paper was in my possession which was a
copy of an order by Mr. Cooke for the delivery of
the goods to his agent, Mr. Chapman, on the 11th
of July. I swear that this is merely a copy. Ido
not know what has become of the original. I think
I received it from Mr. Cooke on the 11th of July.
The paper now produced is in my hand writing.
Mr. Justice Blackburn, addressing the witness—
On the 11th of July you say this paper was given
'to you. Recollect yourself, Mr. Dawson.
Witness—l have made a mistake, I see. I must
have made the copy on the 30th or 31st of August.
There must have been an original order, but do
not know what has become of it, and suppose it
must be among the papers in the possession of Mr.
Van Sandau. It never occurred to me, in the
inquiry relative to this matter, that it was very
necessary to see the alleged vendor's books. I did
not consider it necessary to examine the books.
I cannot say what was the meaning of the expres-
sion that was made use of by the defendant in his
letter, " that the witness Woodford was to be got
to my office, and I was to make a handling of him."
I put the letter among my papers and took no notice
of it, and have not the least conception what was
meant. The document referred to in the same letter
was a note of hand. I cannot say whether the paper
now produced is the same, but I have no doubt of it.
(The paper was put in and read. It was a note of
hand for £lB, which Woodford was indebted to
the defendant.) I have no doubt that the intention
of the defendant was that if the man Woodford did
what was required of him the note of hand was to
be given up to him. The same letter advised me
to " feel Cooke's purse" before I went on with his
action. I considered this was a very improper
proceeding on the part of the defendant, and I told
him so. I never saw Cooke's books, or asked to see
them, or inquired whether he had any entry of the
alleged purchase. I considered it was a legitimate
transaction, and did not think it necessary to make
any such inquiries. I understood from Mr. Cooke
that the goods were removed from Mr.. Poole's to
Kingsthorpe and placed in a barn there for the con-
venience of Mr. Chapman, his agent.
At the close of his examination, Mr. Dawson said
he should like to know where his expenses were to
come from.
Mr. Justice Blackburn said Ire could not help
him in that matter.
Mr. W. B. Jamieson, clerk to the defendant and
his partner, said he was on the premises after the
13th of August and kept the keys of the warehouse
:and he did not see any goods removed on the 1 cith,
aeal he did not see the witness Beard or Woodford
at I.lle warehouse on that day, and no goods were
xemoyed to his knowledge. The witness then gave
the same evidence with regard to the 16th. He eid
not know what occurred on the 17th, as he was
away, and he gave the keys of the warehouse to
Ventris. Ile remembered going to Mr. Dawsoa's
office on the 3d of September with the defendant,
Captain Poole and the witness Beard, and the latter
made a statement to Mr. Dawson in his presence,
of what he knew relating to the sale of the goods
to Mr. Cooke, and Mr. Dawson took it down in
writing. Witness afterwards made a statement
irelating to the sales to Cooke and Billingham.