The Sun.
London, England, 1861-01-15 00:00:00

lIIE BOILER _EXPLOSION AT 117111TECIIAPEL.

Yesterday afternoon an inquest was held at the
London Hospital. by Mr. John Humphreys, coroner
for the Eastern Division of Middlesex, to ascertain
the cause of the deaths of Johann Reicles, aged 30,
and John Plumb, aged 22, two of the sufferers by
the terrific boiler explosion which took place on
Friday last on the premises of Messrs. John Craven
and Co., sugar refiners, 3, Great Garden-street,
Whitecb apel.
Mr. Alfred Turner, solicitor of Great Alio-
street, \Vhitechapel, attended to watch the pro-
ceedings on the part of Messrs. Craven and Co.
The jury having been sworn, proceeded to view
the bodies, after which the coroner said that he
only proposed to take the formal evidence of the
identification of the bodies, and then adjourn to
give the,jury an opportunity of viewing the pre-
mises and seeing a model of the boiler.

Abbay Reichles, the wife of Johann Reichles,
said her husband told her, on the Friday morning,
after the accident at Messrs. Craven's, that the
boiler man had sent him to the blacksmith's shop
and sent another man to the boiler, who burst it.

By Mr. Turner—Before my husband went to
work at Messrs. Craven's he had been a stoker at
Mr. Holmaer's.

By the Coroner—My husband only went to work
at Messrs. Graven's on the day before the accident.
Robert Burns identified the body of Plumb, who
had been at work for Messrs. Craven between
eight and nine months.
The inquiry was then adjourned.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COU.R2.—Tan. 14

OLD COURT.
(Before 'Mr.-Justice Blackburn.)

Thomas Chapman was indicted for wilful and
corrupt perjury.
Sergeant Ballantine was again specially retained
for the prosecution,with Mr. Hill and Mr. Harrison;
and Mr. Sleigh and Mr. Orridge appeared for the
defence.

This was another charge arising out of the
leather frauds.

The defendant, it will be remembered, was con-
victed on Wednesday, with Poole and Ventris, of con-
cealing the property belonging to the former, after
his bankruptcy, with intent to defraud the creditors,
and the present charge arose out of the same trans-
actions in connexion with the fraudulent bank-
ruptcy of the prisoner Poole, at Northampton. The
defendant was examined as a witness in the Court
of Bankruptcy before Mr. Commissioner Holroyd,
on the Bth November, and he then swore that no
goods were removed to his knowledge from the
warehouse of the bankrupt between the 15th and
20th of August, and although he admitted that a
great number of trunks were taken to his house at
Kingsthorpe, he swore that the transaction took
place in June or July, and thatthey were so removed
by the orders of Mr. Cooke, who he understood had
purchased the goods from Mr. Poole.
The evidence given in support of the charge was
precisely the same as that which has already ap-
peared, the principal witnesses being the two men
Beard and Woodford, who were in the serviee of
the bankrupt, who swore to the property being
I removed from the warehouse to the defendant's pre-
mises on the 16th and 18th of August, and that at
12 o'clock at night it was taken from the coach;
house, where it was originally placed, and put into
a barn, defendant being present the whole time and
sanctioning their proceedings. The evidence given
by these witnesses was corroborated in several very
important particulars, and there appeared to be no
reason to doubt that they weregiving a true account
of the transactions in which they had been engaged,
or of the complicity of the defendant in the gross
fraud contemplated by the bankrupt and his asso-
ciates upon his creditors.
Mr. Sleigh addressed the jury at some length in
behalf of his client, and he endeavoured to satisfy
them that he had substantially spoken the truth in
saying that the goods had been taken to his house,
and that he might possibly have been mistaken with
regard to the date of the transaction.
Mr. Justice Blackburn having summed up, the
jury retired to deliberate upon their verdict, and,
after being absent nearly an hour, they returned
into court, and found the defendant guilty.
Shortly afterwards the whole of the prisoners—
Lewis Robert Poole, Frederick Walter Ventris,
Thomas Chapman, and William Billingham, were
placed at the bar.
A motion was then made in arrest on judgment
on behalf of all the defendants, in support of which
Mr. Sleigh, Mr. Metcalfe, and Mr. Poland severally
addressed the Court at considerable length. The
arguments were of a purely technical character, and
would be quite uninteresting and indeed difficult to
be understood by persons out of the legal profession,
and it is therefore unnecessary to report them.
Mr. Justice Blackburn, after listening attentively
to the arguments of the learned gentlemen, said he
should not arrest the judgment, or, as at present
advised, reserve any points that had Seen raised
for the consideration of the Court of Criminal Ap-
peal. If, however, upon further consideration he
should think that there was anything in the tech-
nical objections that had been raised, the prisoners
should have the benefit of them.

The learned Judge then addressed the prisoners,
and said that three of them—Poole, Ventris, and
Chapman—had been originally convicted of felony,
but he did not consider himself justified in acting
upon that verdict without hearing more of the case,
and therefore thought it right that the other
charges should be inquired into, and the result had
been that five different juries had found them all
guilty, and he had no hesitation in expressing his
opinion that the decision they had 'arrived at was
the only one that could be come to upon the evi-
dence that had been laid before the Court, and that
it was impossible to come to any other conclusion.
A great many technical objections had been raised
on their behalf by the ingenuity of their counsel,
and they should have the benefit of them, if upon
consideration they should be found in law to be
available; but ,:he must say, at the same time,
that he should be very sorry if such a result
should be arrived at. In the meantime, and
acting upon the belief that those objections were
not sustainable, it was his duty to pass sentence
upon them for the offences of which they
had been convicted. It appeared to him that
Poole was the principal delinquent. There could
be no doubt• that he knew perfectly well that bank-
ruptcy was inevitable, and that while in this posi-
tion he deliberately set about removing his property
with a view to defraud his creditors. This offence
was regarded by the law as one of so serious a cha-
racter that it gave the power to pass a sentence of
transportation for life. He should not go to that
extent, but still he felt bound to regard the case as
one of a very serious character. The offence was
of that description that any one committing it must
be perfectly well aware that he must necessarily
add to it that of wilful and corrupt perjury, because
he knew that he would be called upon to give an
account of the manner in which his property had
been disposed of in the Court of Bankruptcy, and
that he must deliberately prepare to take a false
oath. It was also necessary that he should not only
wilfully commit perjury himself, but that he should
induce others to assist him in committing the same
offence, and he must confess that he was astonished
at the amount of false evidence which the defendant
had been able to procure, and at the readiness with
which many others appeared inclined to commit
the same offence. He hoped, however, that the re-
sult would be that all persons would know, that
although false testimony might be obtained to an
extent that he should hardly have credited to be
possible in this country, it would not have the
effect of defeating the law, and that those who were
guilty of such proceedings subjected themselves to
serious punishment. Under all the circumstances,
so far as regarded the prisoner Poole, he felt it his
duty to order him to be kept in penal servitude for
the space of six years upon the indictment for
felony, and ho should order the same sentence upon
the conviction for perjury, so that if, as he before
stated, it should turn out that any of the technical
objections that had been raised were found to be
available, he would not escape punishment unless
it should appear that they applied equally to both
charges. With regard to the prisoner Chapman,
the observations he had made as to Poole equally,
applied. There could be no doubt but he had com-
mitted perjury himself, and that he had endeavoured
to induce others to commit the same offence. Still,
however, he did not consider that he was guilty to
so great an extent in the matter, and he should,
therefore, only pass upon him a sentence of four
years'penal servitude, the sentence being upon each
charge, as in the former case. As to the prisoner
Ventris, it appeared that he was clerk to the
accountants, Messrs. Quilter and Ball, and that
being sent down to Northampton by them to
examine the accounts of the bankrupts, he consented
for the sake of a bribe, to lend himself to the scheme
for defrauding the creditors, and he did this know-
ing, in his position as clerk to the accountants, that
it must be followed by the commission of the crime
of wilful perjury. He did not certainly appear to
have been any party to the subornation of perjury
by others, but still his offence was a very serious
one, and he felt it his duty to pass upon him the
same sentence as upon Chapman, namely, four
years' penal servitude. With regard to the remain-
ing prisoner, Billingham, he did not consider his
case in so bad a light as the others. He did not
appear to have been any party to the original
scheme of fraud, although he had undoubtedly
taken an active share in concealing the property
after it had been removed. He had, however, de-
liberately committed the crime of perjury, and he
was bound to pass such a sentence upon him as