The Sun.
London, England, 1861-03-07 00:00:00

THE COMMERCIAL BANK FRAUD.

BO WSTREET.--(THIs DAY.)
John Durden, of 9, Park-village East, Regent's-park,
clerk at the late Commercial Bank of London, and James
Holcroft,'of 109, Hatton-gardens, agent and wholesale boot
and shoe dealer, were placed at the bar on remand, charged
with having defrauded the directors of the said bank of
three sums of money—viz., £156 65., £149 6s. 4d., and £66
9s. 11d., together with other sums, the said Holcroft being
charged as an accomplice.
Mr. Humphreys said the progress of the cause was
stopped owing to the professional accountant not having
completed the examination of the previous accounts. He
regretted, although the professional gentleman had been
engaged in that work ever since the last examination, they
had not nearly completed the task, ani that it would take
at least a fortnight. There were three accounts standing
in the name of each prisoner, which were of a very extensive
character, and he was stopped in his progress entirely owing
to want of the report of the accountant. He had six witnesses
in attendance, but he did not propose to examine them that
day. The only witness he proposed to examine was a gen -
tleman named Freeman, who, in 1851, paid a cheque of
Hoare's for £9l on the Commercial Bank into the hands of
Durden, who was at that time officiating as a cashier, the
gentleman occupying that position being temporarily absent.
This cheque, Durden, instead of posting it to that gentle-
man in the ledger, entered it to himself but he carefully en-
tered it in the cashbook to Freeman's account, so that when
that gentleman's pass-book was made up it would appear
quite regular and correct. This charge would affect only
Durden, but with respect to Holcroft, he had a gentleman
from Nottingham who would give some evidence.:
Charles Freeman, of Westbourne-park Villas, Notting-
hill—On the 6th of May, 1851, I paid the sum of £9l Os.
7d. by cheque, drawn upon Hoare's and Co. I found the
amount credited to me in my pass-book.

Mr. Dyson, clerk in the Commercial Bank, said the sum
was not entered to Mr. Freeman, but to Darden. in Dur-
den's own handwriting.
Mr. Wright, one of the ushers of the Court of Bank-
ruptcy, produced a petition of the prisoner Holcroft
to the court, dated sth September, 1860. The petition
was afterwards dismissed, the creditors being satisfied.

Mr. Gardner said—l am a boot and shoe manufacturer
at Wellingborough, Nottingham, and knew the prisoner
Holcroft. He was my agent, but he ceased to be so some-
time about the middle of August last. I have had to apply to
the prisoner Holcroft for money, and I have accompanied
him to the Commercial Bank in Henrietta-street on such
occasions. I went there about July last. I went there,
as he said he was going to see Durden,
to see if he could lend him some money or do anything for
him. I saw Durden there, and he and Holcroft had a
communication together. I did not hear what took
place. I came up in July to see about the goods and
money.

Mr. Henry—What was the amount of your debt ?
Witness—Over £1,600.
In the latter end of August I was in town relative to a
bill of mine that had been returned, due by the prisoner
Holcroft. He said, in referring to the debt, "I hope what-
ever comes of this matter, you'll say nothing about
me and Durden." I said I don't know what you mean. I
afterwards agreed to accept a composition of 4s. in the
pound. I was obliged to compound with my creditors in
consequence of losing this money. I paid 15s. in the pound.

Mr. Sleigh—You went to the bank with Holcrolt to see
if the manager would assist him in the usual way ?

Witness—Yes.
Mr. Henry—But Durden was only a ledger keeper.

Witness, in answer to further questions, said that Mr.
Darden had often lent him money as he was a very wealthy
man.

The prisoners w ere again remanded.

LAW INTELLIGENCE—(This Day.)

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.
(Before Mr. Commissioner Fahe.)

IN RE HOOPER AND PARKINSON-ANOTHER GREAT

LEATHER FAILURE.

These bankrupts were described as of Seething-lane, City,
leather factors and merchants, and to-day came up for their
certificates.

Mr. Linklater, for the assignees, said this case presented
%uch the same features as that of Messrs, Mortimore and
Co., in which Mr. Commissioner Holroyd yesterday deli-
vered judgment. He proposed to examine the bankrupts.
__ __ _ _

Mr. Parkinson was called, and was under examination
when this report left.

SHERIFFS' COURT.

WAITERS FEES.-EXTRAORDINARY ACTION BY A WAITER,

AND IMPORTANT DBCISION.-ELSASSER Y. SIMONDS.

In this case the plaintiff is a waiter at an eating-house in
Doctors' Commons, and defendant is a clerk in the Probate
Court. The action was brought to recover ss. 6d., but the
point involved is both novel and important to every person.
Plaintiff stated that he accepted a situation as waiter at a
dining-room, and he agreed with his master to be paid by
fees from the persons using the rooms. Defendant dined
habitually at the house, and the present claim was for the
multifarious pennies consequent upon such dining, and his
(plaintiff's) attendance.
His Honour was quite surprised at such a claim. It
was, no doubt, usual at some places to give the waiter a
penny, but surely it was not compulsory ?
Plaintiff averred that it was compulsory.
His Honour—Do you mean to say that if he had refused
you the penny you would not have brought his dinner ?

Plaintiff—lndeed I do.
His Honour—And you would not have attended upon
him ?

Plaintiff—Certainly not.

His Honour—Then if I had been your master I would
have bundled you out neck and crop. (A laugh). Did you
ask the defendant for the penny when you brought the
dinner ?

Plaintiff—He receives his money once each quarter, and
I thought I should get it then.
His Honour—But did you tell him he would hays to
pay it.

Plaintiff—No. It was customary.
His Honour (to defendant)—You should give the man
tho penny at the time, and then we should not be troubled
with such ea traordinary actions. Plaintiff cannot recover in
this case, and he will be non-suited.

Defendant—And am I to be brought here with impunity
upon such a cause ?
His Honour—No.

Defendant—What am I to do then ?
His Honour—Just take no notice of the summons. You
must think me a great blockade to entertain such an action
as this. Plaintiff non-suited.

Plaintiff was much dissatisfied with this decision, and
expressed himself so loudly and strongly that he was called
to order by the judge.

POLICE IN7ELLI iENCE—(This Day).

BOW STREET.

Caroline Palmer was charged, with another person now
on remand, with attempting to obtain, by false pretences, a
cheque-book of Messrs. Coutts and Co., bankers, Strand.
William Samson, living at 15, Exmouth-street, Hamp-
stead-road, said he was a messenger and porter. He had
known the prisoner for several years, and had occasionally
done jobs. He knew her when she lived at Tucker's-rents,
Ossulston-street, Somers-town. About two months ago
he lost sight of the prisoner. About the end of January
he saw her. On Friday, the 15th of February, she came
to him at Mr. Costin's public-house, near King's-cross,
and asked him to meet her next morning near the
Angel, Islington, as she had had some mosey
sant up from • Hertford, but the bank in
that town had sentit to Coutts's. She said she was told, in
order to get the money out, she would require a blank
check, and he was to see her to go with her to get it. He
told Mr. Costin what had passed, and on the following day
he (witness) met her near Pentonville. She asked him
where she could buy a blank cheque-book. They went to
several places to see if they could get a cheque-book. When
they got to Gray's Inn-lane, she said she knew a
pawnbroker, and she would go and see if he banked at
Coutts's, if so, he would give her a cheque-book. She left
him for a short time, and returned and told him he did not,
but that she knew Mr. Young, of Gray's. in.n 'square, did
so. She asked him to go to that gentleman and ask him if
he would oblige her with a cheque. He did not go to Mr.
Young, but he told her Mr. Young was not at home,
and that a piece of blank paper would do as well as the
cheque. She replied that it would not, that it must be a
regular cheque. She said she had been told that, by mak-
ing use of the name of any party banking at Coutts', a
cheque-book could be obtained, and sbe told him to go in
and ask for one in the name of Mr. Young, as she knew he
banked there. He said he hoped there was no fear of danger
to do so, and she replied there was not. He went in and
asked for the book, which was not given, but he was
detained.

The prisoner denied ever sending Samson to the bank at
all.

The prisoner was remanded.

MARLBOROUGH• STREET.

THE LEICESTER-SQUARE NUISANCE.—Two shabbily-
dressed females, named Catherine Ellis and Elisabeth
Martin, constant frequenters of Leicester-square, ,were
charged with annoying gentlemen in Leicester-square.
James Waterson, 144 C, proved the case.

Mr. Sturt, stationer, corner of Green-street, Leicester-
square, said he wished to complain of Ellis, who was in the
constant practice of annoying every gentleman that passed.
As soon as a gentleman approached she would pull up her
crinoline to an indecent extent, and, in fact, gentlemen
could not approach his shop owing to her conduct, in
addition to which the tradesmen residing in the square
had their business spoilt, no respectable person being safe
from the annoyance of prisoner and her companions. He
had expected Mr. Nind, of the Sabloniere Hotel, also to
have attended.

Mr. Tyrwhitt said he was very much obliged to him
(Mr. Start) for coming for.v::u cl to support the police.
The police ought to be supported. He should commit
Ellis for 14 days as a regular nuisance, and Martin for
seven days, and he hoped eventually the nuisance would
be altogether stopped.