The Sun.
London, England, 1868-07-17 00:00:00

TIIE EXPLOSION IN CLERKENWELL.

The Clerk of the Peace laid before the Court the
copy of a letter to the Home Secretary upon the
subject of the late explosion in Clerkenwell
Sessions House, Clerkenwell.

" Sir,--The Government having decided to move
for a Parliamentary grant to compensate the parties
who suffered damage and loss through the explosion
that took place outside the wall of the House of
Detention on the 13th of December last, they have,
on behalf of the Justices of the Peace of Middlesex,
to enclose to you a bill of Messrs. Mansfield and
Price, amounting to £6Bl ss. 4d., certified by the
County Surveyor, being the actual cost of reinstat-
ing the wall blown down, and repairing the other
damage done to the prison, and I am to request that
you will be pleased to cause the same to be included
in the proposed grant.
(Signed) "H. M. KEMSHEA.D, Chairman
of the Court of Common Council.
" To the Right Hon. Gathorne Hardy, M.P., &c."
To the above the following reply was read :
" Whitehall, July 6, 1868.

" Sir-1 am.directed by Mr. Secretary Hardy to
acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 3d
inst., enclosing the bill for repairing the prison at
Clerkenwell, which you request may be included in
the proposed Parliamentary grant, and I am to in-
form you that it has been sent to the Lords Com-
missioners of her Majesty's Treasury.
(Signed) "F. 0. LIDDELL.
"To 11. M. Kemshead, Esq., Chairman of
Account Committee."
The report was adopted.
THE DUKE OF EDINBURGH.

A letter was read from Mr. Gathorne Hardy, ac-
knowledging the address of the justices to the
Queen, and which she was graciously pleased to re-
ceive.

The letter was ordered to be entered in the
minutes of the Court.
APPOINTMENT OF ROMAN CATHOLIC CHAPLAIN.

The motion of Mr. R. SWIFT, of which notice
had been given as follows :—" That, in considera-
tion of the Roman Catholic priests attending the
House of Correction at Westminster, a salary of
£2OO per annum be awarded to each under the
provisions of the Prison Ministers' Act, 1863, as a
reasonable recompence for their ministrations to
the Roman Catholic prisoners confined therein "
was, after some consideration, adjourned to the
October county day, and the other business of a
miscellaneous character having been transacted,
The Court adjourned.

THE CHARGE OP FORGERY AND

ELOPEMENT.

Catherine Allen, of Biechyden-mews, Notting-
hill, the wife of a horse and cattle dealer, charged
with forging an order on the London and West-
minster Bank for £902 9s. 3d., and Charles Prince,
master butcher, Walmer-terrace, Notting-hill, were
brought before Mr. Knox, at the Marlborough-
street Police-court yesterday for final examination.
Mr. F. Lewis appeared for Mr. Allen, the hus-
band ; Mr. Poland appeared for the London and
Westminster Bank ;
.and Mr. Froggat for the pri-
soners.

Mr. Lewis said the original charge against the
prisoners was forgery; bat as there was another
charge against Prince for the larceny of the prose-
cutor's goods, and as the fernile prisoner soul I not
be tried on a joint indictment with the male pri-
soner, he proposed to complete the case of larceny
against the male prisoner, his frieni Mr. Poland
proposing to prosecute the female prisoner for for-
gery on the London and Westminster Bank.
Patrick Mahony, one of the Irish constabulary,
proved that he went on board the City of Cork
steamer when that vessel arrived at Queenstown,
and found the two prisoners together. He told the
except
them,
teorsf and
their
chhaeeitrirte was a charge of forgery against
xeioown
en free will. He found on the d against saying anything
them
pri-
soners £7O 103., a silver watch and gold chain, and
a ring. On coming ashore, and when at the police
office, Prince told the female prisoner that she bad
female prisoner gave witness a bag
ab o betterut h
ehra. n dTohvee r anything that she might have
which contained £69a in bank notes, and a joint
passage ticket for New York. Before taking the
prisoners into custody he hid received a letter con-
taining the numbers of the notes, which he found
to correspond with the numbers of the notes in the
bag. The male prisoner pointed out several boxes
as their luggage; the boxes were labelled "Prince."
The prisoner Prince said the property belonged to
himself and wife. _ _

Cross-examined by Mr. Froggatt—The labels
were rubbed off while the boxes were in transit to
Scotland-yard. Ilad a telegraphic message to arrest
the prisoners, but no warrant.
Henry Allen said he was married on the 27th of
June, 1853, at Harefield Church, near Uxbridge,
to Catherine Hurd, the prisoner. Had known the
male prisoner for about three years, he having been
in the habit of occasionally coming to his house.
The prisoner Prince knew that the female prisoner
was his wife. Discovered, on returning home from
Thorney Fair, Cambridge, that his wife had left
his house the night previously, at which time he
had given her £3O to take care of for him. Had
seen the boxes produced by the police, and found
them to contain property belonging to him, con-
sisting of silk handkerchiefs, bed-linen, and other
property. There was also a pair of shoes which he
had sold to the prisoner Prince some time before.
The property in the boxes was worth £2O.
Cross-examined—Never, to his knowledge, had
told his wife she might go away and leave him.
When he missed her from home he thought she had
gone to her father's, and rode 20 miles to see if she
was there.
Mr. Lewis said that was the case against Prince.
Mr. Froggatt said he would reserve the defence ;
but he hoped the case would be sent to the Middle-
sex Sessions, and bail would be taken.
Mr. Knox said it was a heinous offence, and he
could not comply with the application. There was
evidence before him that the prisoner Prince ran
away with another man's wife, and that the goods
of the husband were found in his possession. As the
woman, if committed, must be tried at the Central
Criminal Court, the male prisoner must also be sent
there for trial.

Mr. Froggatt wished that the husband should be
prevented from annoying his wife.
The prosecutor denied that he had any intention
of annoying his wife.
The case against Catherine Allen was then pro-
ceeded with. She was charged with forging a de-
posit note for £9OO on the London and West-
minster Bank.

Mr. Poland said the prisoner was charged in the
first instance by her husband with having forged
the order to receive the money. The London and
Westminster Bank thought it was their duty to take
up the matter. There was a difficulty in the case,
inasmuch as he could not examine the husband
against his wife. If, however, he proved that the
particular document was not in the handwriting of
the husband, he considered he should have estab-
lished a prima facie case for sending the wife to trial.
Patrick Mahony repeated his evidence, and
proved that he received a bag from the prisoner

which contained £695 in notes, the numbers or
which corresponded with a telegram he had pre-,
viously received.
Mr. Devalle, cashier at the St. James's branch. of
the London and Westminster Bank, said a persona
named Henry Allen had a deposit account at the
bank. It was the practice when money was die-
posited to give receipts for the amounts depositet i.
On the side of each receipt was a cheque, whit h
had to be signed by the depositor on drawing of it
the money. On the 27th April the female prison er
produced the deposit receipt for £9OO with Ithe
cheque on the side, signed " Henry Allen," and
stamped. The body was not filled up, as the ini;;e-
rest had to be calculated. 'Witness asked the p 1 i-
soner how she would take it, and she named the
notes, and he gave them to her. He compared the
signature to the deposit note with the signature in
the deposit book, and they appeared to be the same
handwriting, but having had his attention more
p irticularly drawn to the last signature, he was
of opinion it was not in the handwriting of the 1
depositor, Henry Allen. Had seen the prisoner j
at the bank three or four times before the 27th of
April, but he could not say whether she was with
her husband or not. Believed her to be the wife of •
the prosecutor.
By Mr. Froggatt—Two of the £5 notes, and
several of the £lO notes, were part of the notes
given by him to the prisoner. Had never paid any
order of the prisoner's before.
Mr. Walter Read, clerk at the bank, said when
Henry Allen opened an account he signed the book
in the usual way, and asked him to fill up the ad-
dress, Latimer-road, Hammersmith, which he did.
He should say that the signature to the receipt
note was not like that on the books.

By Mr. Froggatt—Would not have paid the note
on the signature. Had seen the prisoner at the
bank, and might have paid money out to her.
Mr. Chabot, of '25, Southampton-row, an expert,
had made handwriting hia study. Had compared
the signature to the two documents, and was satis-
fied they were not written by the person who
signed the book at the bank. The signatures to
the documents he considered were unmistakably
forgeries.

By Mr. Froggltt —Had not disagreel several
times with other experts. Was employed by the
Crown in the case of Ryves v. the Duke of Cumber-
land.

Mr. Bennett, salesman-butcher at the Metropo-
litan Cattle-market, was called, but he did not
answer.

Mr. Poland said his evidence was material, as he
had changed one of the £lOO notes for the prisoner
Prince. The witness could attend at the trial.

Mr. Froggatt said the £l.OO-note was changed
by the prisoner at the request of Mrs. Allen. He
had an important witness to call before the prisoner
was finally committed.
Mr. Poland intimated that he should not go into
any charge against Prince with respect to the
forgery.
Mr. Knox cpnsideral that the charges of larceny
against Prince and uttering a forgery against Allen
were sufficient.

Mr. Froggatt applied for bail to be taken, and
also that the money found on Prince might be given
up.

Mr. Knox could not accede to the application for
bail, neither for the delivery of the money, as it
might be part of the £lOO-note changed by the pri-
soner Prince.