The Sun.
London, England, 1842-04-02 00:00:00

RE JOHN HARLOW.

The insolvent formerly carried on business as a
tobacconist and snuff manufacturer at No. 7. Leicester-
square, and subsequently at the house No. 16, in the
same place, and his actual debts for value received
amounted to about 7501.

His petition to be discharged was supported by Messrs.
Cook.: and Woodruffe, and opposed by Mr. Nicholls; on
behalf of Messrs. Poole.

It appeared, from a very lengthened investigation, that
in the year 1833, the insolvent took the house No. 7,
Leicester-square, from a person named Warren,
at the ra.e of 2001. per annum, the upper part
being, according to the insolvent's deposition, at
the time, and up to the present moment, let
oat as gambling rooms. Sir Jacob Astley and Colonel
Quin had a mortgage on the entire premises, which was
sold to the opposing creditors, and the insolvent, leaving
in the year 1835, after paying up all his his rent, a
mesne process was brought against several persons, who
acted as landlords and trustees over the premises, by
the Messrs. Poole, for some alleged act of trespass,
and the insolvent included among the defendants, when
a verdict was given in litvonr of the plaintiffs, and he
thus - became liable for his share of the costs and
damages. Being indebted to Mr. Fry, tobacconist and
snuff-manuincturer, of Smithfield-bars, (in a large
amount, and also to several other creditors; he exe-
cuted a deed and • warrant of attorney in
their favour, for the purpose of making his
property available to those whom he considered
to be bona fide creditors, to the exclusion of the Messrs.
Poole, to whom he did nut consider himself morally, al-
though he might be legally indebted.
Mr. Mcnou,s having urged that the insolvent in point
of law was guilty of an undue preference towards certain
of his creditors to the exclusion of others,

The Learned COMMISSIONER said he could see nothing
in the case to induce him to a remand, and he
should, therefore, order the insolvent to be discharged
forthwith.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
MANSION HOUSE.

Herbert Godfrey, the policeman who on Saturday
charged an elderly woman, named Sarah Lewis, marine
store dealer, with having received stolen goods. and was
on Monday charged by her with having, iu conjunction
with another man, robbed her of a cloak and a time-
piece, was brought up, and, at the request of Mr. llobler,
junior, who appeared for the prosecutor, remanded till
this day, when the extraordinary investigation will be
closed, by the commitment of the prisoner, after the exa-
mination of some important witnesses. Reynolds, who
was accompanied by the prisoner into Mrs. Lewis's
house, has not yet been found ; and Mr. Wontner, the
solicitor for the prisoner, complained, on the part of
his client, that active measures had not been adopted for
taking that person into custody, although the prisoner
had expressed the strongest wish to be confronted with
him.

llobler, junior, observed, that the inactivity of the
police upon this occasion, if any actually existed, ought
to be complained of to the Commissioners, and not to the
Magistrates, who had nothing whatever to do with the
force.

Two girls, named Sarah Shaddock and Mary Tighe,
each of them eighteen years old, were charged with
having robbed one of the poor old inmates of Bishopsgate
workhouse.
The two prisoners have been, almost from their birth,
living in the workhouse, in which they frequently distin-
guished themselves by breaking windows and pelting
the orderly residents with bread, appeared, upon being
put to the bar, as quiet as mice.
The assistant matron stated that the prisoners had
just returned to the workhouse from Bridewell, where
they had been confined for smashing windows, and upon
reaching their old quarters stole the pocket of an old
pauper, in which were contained the poor woman's
savings, amounting to threepence -halfpenpy.
Mr. Booker, one of the parochial officers, said that
the prisoners, when they took a fancy to change from
the workhouse to Bridewell, committed violence o some
kind, and thus contrived to have a little variety to their
taste, and they had been for a. length of time ungovern-
able in the former place.
Alderman GIBBS said he should try what a little extra
discipline would do towards correcting the girls, and
sentenced each of them to be confined two months in
Bridewell at hard labour, and to be locked up every
other alternate week during that period in a solitarj
cell. The Alderman said that he should take very par-
tiAilar care that the diet of the prisoners should be as
low as would he consistent with the preservation of their
health.---Tk3 prisoners were then committel.
• BOW-STREET.

Three boys, varyirg from about 14 to 17 years of age,
named • Smith, Barrett, and Cassidy, with the most vil-
-I,nous casts of countenance which one would meet with
in a day's march through the mighty Babylon, were
charged with stealing some cigars from the shop of Mrs.
Cecille Lewis, in Clare-market. The fair complainant,
whose tongue declared her to be.a native of La belle
France, stated that yesterday evening, the three boys
at -the bar went to her shop and asked for a penny cigar,
which she supplied them with ; almost immediately
afterwards a little boy informed her that the three boys
had puShed aside a small piece of wood from the inside
of a broken window, and had decamped with some cio-ars;
she immediately gave chase, and in company with a police-
Man succeeded in capturing the youthful depredators, when
the little boy who had informed her of the robbery, at
once recognised them as the offenders. She had seen
the two prisoners, Smith and Barrett, lurking about her
shop on a previous occasion.
A litth boy neat entered the witness-box, and swore
most positively that be saw the boys take the stolen
property.
Tyrrell, the gaoler, said that the two prisoners, Smith
and Barrett, were well known; the former had been con-
victed more than once, and Barrett had been convicted
about six times.
Barrett—No, no, that won't do, old feller, stick to the
truth ; only three.
The policeman said that he had seen Cassidy often in
the-company of thieves, and he was in the habit of going
dancing about Jim Crow on his head.
At this juncture the prisoners all three commenced
setting up a defence, and as they all spoke at once, the
following is the combined harangue of the three which
we collected :—" Yer wertship the good lady never see
me 'near her shop ; no, yer wertship, nor me neither ;
I never goes there. Did you, good lady, see me near
the shop ? innocent, yer Lor'ship, of the crime ;
when wants a couple 0' ha'pence I sings and dances on
my 'ed. I Wits never up afore—l've on'y been conwic-
ted three times, yer wertship ; him and me's been here
afore, but this one (pointing to Cassidy) vos never hup
before ; he sings on his 'ed--the good lady never seed
none of us."
How long this jumble would have continued it is im-
possible for us to say, had not Mr. JARDINE here cut
short their orations by asking them if they thought it
likely that he believed what they were saying, when it
had been distinctly sworn that they were seen to take
the cigars from the shop window. Ile should commit
Smith and Barrett to three mouths each, and Cassidy to
one month's imprisonment in the House of Correction.
The prisoners were then removed, apparently pleased
with having got off so easily.
MARL BORO UG STR EE
Charles Redhead, a dissipated-looking young man,
was charged with unlawfully pawning certain materials
entrusted- to him by his employers to make up.
Mr. George Scott, of the firm of Scott and Edwards,
of Conduit-street, Bond-street, tailors, stated that the
prisoner had been in their employ for many years past,
and was entrusted to have his work out. On Monday
last ' a number of doe and chamois skins, toge-
ther:vvith trimmings, were given to him to
, jup by Wednesday, to complete au eaten-
-4.17
. '

sive order the firm were executing. However, in-
stead of going to work on them, he directly proceeded to
Westminster and pawned part of the property, and on
the following day the remainder, and spent the produce,
145., in drunkenness, and afterwards had the impudence
to call at witness's house, while in a very intoxicated
state, and demand money on account, which being re-
fused him, he made a great disturbance, and used very
abusive language.
Mr. HARDWICK inquired what was the value of the
property pawned by the prisoner.
Mr. Scutt said at least 61., but through the prisoner
not executing the work in time, the injury done was
irreparable, as he had that morning sent home a part of
the order, of which the articles in question formed aj
part, and they had been returned on his hands.
The property having been produced from the shops of
Messrs. Roberts and Harding, of York-street, West-
minster, pawnbrokers, was ordered to be given up to the
complainant, without his paying the amount advanced
on it, as Mr. Hardwick considered that such property,
and to so large an amount, should not have been taken
in from a person of the prisoner's appearance.
Mr. HAnnwicx said he should make an example of
the prisoner, for the sake of masters generally, and
therefore fined him 4/., in addition to the value, 61, and in
default of payment six weeks' imprisonment to hard
labour.—The prisoner earnestly implored forgivenness,
but of course without avail.
Seven females, well-dressed, and five of whom stated
themselves to be married women, were brought up on
warrants issued against them on the application of the
parochial authorities of St. James's, Westminster, under
the provisions of the Act of Parliament, .15th Geo. 11.,
for keeping " disorderly houses, or acting or assisting
therein.' As in several cases recently brought before
this Court, a professional adviser appeared on behalf of
the defendants. The identity of the relative parties
having been proved, they were ordered to find sureties
to answer and plead to indictments which will, in the
course of law, be preferred against them. The nuisance
complained of is stated to be of a most revolting charac-
ter. Its locality it confined, in the present proceedings,
to John's-court, Golden.square, and the immediate
neighbourhood.
The defendants readily obtained the sureties required,
and were liberated.

Cornelius M.Carty and James Murphy, sturdy young
Irishmen, were charged with vagrancy.
Wm. Horsford, one of the constables belonging to
the Mendicity Society stated, that about half-past six
o'clock on Thursday evening he saw the prisoners in
company together in St. James's-square, beg of several
ladies and gentlemen, and receive alms—their plan was
to follow up the persons they solicited until they ob-
tained something or else abuse them. When they met
with unprotected females their importunity was in-
timidating ; the prisoner Dl`Carty actually followed two
gentlemen to whom he was evidently a perfect stranger
into the hall of one of the club houses. They. were both
old offenders, and had been committed from different
Police Courts for similar offences. They resisted vio-
lently on being taken into custody.
Mr. HAanwicK said he was determined to purge the
streets of this .decriptien of sturdy beggars' and com-
mitted each of the defendants to one month's imprison-
ment, and ordered a record of their convictions to be re-
turned to the Sessions. _

Horsford stated that just at night fall on Thursday
evening he counted no less than 25 young sturdy beg-
gars in Pall-mall, within 14 minutes.
Mary Smith, a young woman, was charged with being
concerned with a gang of other females, two of whom
stand committed for trial from this Court at the Central
Criminal Court, for robberies e&cted by the means of
false or skeleton keys, in different lodging-houses in the
neighbourhood of Seven Dials. The gang contrived to
ascertain when the occupant of an apartment was absent,
and availed themselves of the opportunity of entering
and plundering the room of every portable article they
cotud meet with, great facility t commit this species of
robbery being offered by the street-doors in this neigh-
bourhood being continually left open.
The prisoner was fully committed on two separate
charges, she having been proved to have disposed of the
stolen property immediately after the robberies had
taken place.
UNION-HALL.

George Walker, a pawnbroker, was summoned for
taking more than the legal interest on a pledge.
The information against the defendant was laid by a
common informer who sent t boy to the shop to pledge
an article, and in the hurry )7 business a farthing more
than the legal interest was demanded and taken.
The pawnbroker said that the information was laid
by the informer out of revenge, owing to his not giving
him an annual allowance, as many o the pawnbrokers
did for not laying informations against them.
The MAGISTRATE condemned the conduct of
inpawn-
brokers and said, that if such a system prevailed the
trade it was scandalous, and he tined the defendant 20s,
and costs.

SMUGGLING.—A French sailor was charged with
smuggling. He wa: taken into custody on landing from
a Boulogne steam-vessel, and a bladder containing half
a gallon of cognac brandy was concealed in the waist of
his trowsers.

The defendant was fined 101., and in default of pay-
ment was committed fur a month.
WORSHIP-STREET.

A young
man, named Henry Fern, was charged before
Mr. BiNGHAM with having been found carrying a bladder
containing upwards of a gallon of spirits, without having
a permit.
The offence was fully established by the evidence of a
policeman, and of Whiskin, an officer of excise.
The prisoner rested his defence upon the old story,
that he was employed to convey spirits to a given desti-
nation by a stranger, who promised to give him a shil-
ling for his trouble.

The prisoner was amerced in the mitigated penalty of
251., or three months' imprisonment.
All the other night charges were wholly uninteresting.

ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE.

NORTHERN ClRCUlT.—Liverpool, March 30.
CROWN SWE—(Bef'.re Mr. Baron PARKE.)

Henry Ward was indicted for cutting and wounding
his wife, Catherine Ward, with intent to murder her.
Another count alleged an intent to do her some grievous
bodily harm.
Mr. James for the prosecution. The prisoner was not
defended by counsel.
The prisoner, it appeared, is a fruit-seller in 'Wigan,
and on the night on which this occurrence took place,
came home in a state of intoxication. He accused his
wife of having got his watch, and on her denial attacked
her with brutal violence. Some of the neighbours heard
her crying out "Oh dear !" repeatedly, as if in great
pain, and heard the noise of blows. On going in they
found her lying at the foot of the stairs, seemingly
severely hurt. The prisoner was not at that time beat-
ing her, but on going away the attacks, it would appear,
had been renewed. Her cries were again heard,
mingled with the oaths of the prisoner, demanding
to know where his watch was. The neighbours again
came in, and found the unfortunate woman lying
partly under the bed up stairs, quite insensible, and
bleeding copiously from several wounds in the head.
The police were called in, and the prisoner was taken
into custody. He said he • didn't care if he had killed
her, and shouldn't mind being hanged for her. On exa-
mination by the medical man, it was found that the vic-
tim of the prisoner's violence had received several
wounds on the head, to the number of six or seven, some
of which had penetrated to the skull, and divided a
branch of the temporal artery on each side. They were
of an irregular rounded form, and had evidently been
produced by kicks from a heavy shoe. Almost every
part of her person gave evidence of the shocking vio-
lence which had been used towards her. Iler legs were
frightfully bruised and swollen. She was dangerously
ill for souse weeks, and for a long time was not perfectly
recovered.

The prisoner said he was intoxicated, and knew no-
thing of what had occurred.
The Jury found him Guilty on the latter count, alleg-
ing un intent to do souls grievous bodily harm.
His LORDSHIP said it was necessary to repress such
brutal violence by severe punishment, and sentenced him
to be transported for life, intimating that his lot would
be cast among those wllo would work in gangs upon the
roads.

The prisoner was taken from the bar, howling fright-
fully, and his cries were heard for some time, growing
fainter and fainter as he was taken along the passages
leading to the Bridewell.

WELSH ClRCUlT.—Denhigh, March 25.
SERIOUS CASE OF MANSLAUGHTER.—After church on
Friday, several criminal cases were disposed of, and
amongst them a very bad case of manslaughter, in which
Elias Jones was found guilty of killing and slaying John
Jones, of Eglwysfach, on the Bth of September.
It appeared that the prisoner had gone to the above-
named Tillage on that day, and after drinking a consi-
derable quantity of ale he had quarrAled with several
people, and was turned out of a public-house, when he
appears to have become quite frantic, and walked up and
down the high road brandishing a pair of tailor's shears,
declaring he would stick them five inches into the heart
of any one who oppOsed him. When opposite the house
of the deceased the prisoner used some abusive language
towards him, on which the deceased came out and struck
the prisoner two or three blows with a walking-stick,
whereupon he stabbed the deceased in the groin, making
a wound six inches deep.
Verdict—Guilty : transported for 15 years.
MARCH 26.

BURGLARY, NEAR WREXHAM, WITH VIOLENCE.—The
greater part of this day was consumed in trying six men,
Hugh Price, James Price, John Price, William Junes,
Thomas Capper, and Hugh Roberts, for a robbery near
Wrexham, at a public-house kept by Mr. T. Ellis, called
the Greyhound, on the road to Holt.
The prosecutor, Thomas Ellis, had entered upon the
Greyhound public •house in the early part of November,
1841, and on the 25th, at 11 o'clock in the forenoon,
he went, accompanied by the maid-servant, to Wrexham
market, leaving his wife, 'Lytle Ellis, alone in the house.
In a spare bed-room up stairs were a box and a tea-caddy,
the box containing about 30/. in gold, some hand-
kerchiefs, and other articles ; and the tea-caddy 15s.
in silver, an old guinea, and an old half guinea,
half a dozen tea-spoons, and a gold seal, all of which were
seen safe just before the prosecutor left home. Between
12 and 1 o'clock the six prisoners, together with a man
of the name of 'William Clarke, not in custody, went to
the Greyhound, and called for some ale, and, after a
short time, two of them, James Price and Thomas Cap-
per,
began to dance to a tune on the fiddle, played by
who, it appears, is a strolling mu-
the prisoner Roberts,
sician, Capper having taken off his shoes, and Price
dancing in clogs, and making a great noise. In the
meantime the landlady, an elderly woman, was sent out
of the way on various pretences, to draw ale, fetch to-
bacco, &c., seven or eight times, and about an hour after
the prisoners had come to the house she missed. Clarke
and Capper. Further on in the day, Clarke and Capper
being still absent, the other prisoners pretended that
some tobacco they had been supplied with was of short 1

weight, and forced the old lady to go into another
room to weigh the tobacco, where they detained her
about a quarter of an hour. Afterwards the pri-
soner, W. Jones, pretending to be drunk, squared at
the old woman with his fists, and obliged her to re-
treat into the road, outside the house, where he de-
tained her ten .minutes longer. The prosecutor
returned home , about half-past three, and at that
time the prisoners were still at the house, but left shortly
afterwards. In less than a quarter of an hour after they
had left, a person came to the house for change, and it
was then discovered that the boxes containing the money
had been opened, and the robbery effected. The pri-
soners, J. Price and Capper, were seen about three
o'clock by two witnesses in a field near the road, called
the Blossoms ; and on the spot where they were seen,
the handkerchief and some of the other stolen property
were found next morning, covered over with grass. All
the prisoners, except Roberts, the fiddler, were also seen
the same everting, in company with Clarke, of whom they
took leave, and the jingling of money was heard,
The Jury retired, and after an absence of a quarter of
an hour returned a verdict of Guilty against all, except
Roberts.

HOME ClRCUlT.—Kingston, April I.
(Before Baron GURNY. and Common Juries.)

NIPPER V. HOLE.- THE WEST MIDDLESEX ASSURANCE

CO3IPANY SWINDLE.-CURIOUS DISCLOSURES,

This was an action brought by the plaintiff against the
defendant as the originator and principal in the esta-
blishment of the West Middlesex Assurance Association
to rocover from him the sum of 900/., which he had paid
to that Company for an annuity of 7€l. 10s., and of
which sum, it was alleged, that he had been defrauded by
the defendant, and also that the Association had been
merely got up for the purposes of fraud.
Mr. Platt and Mr. Gurney were for the plaintiff, and
Mr. Chambers for the defendant.

lir. PLATT, in opening the case, observed that in the
year 1836 the defendant set on foot an establishment,
which was called the West Middlesex Assurance
Association, and from which the public were to derive
great advantages. Prospectuses, of a most alluring
description, were circulated, and, in the course of a
short time, sums, to a very considerable amount, were
deposited for the pnrchase of annuities. The prospec-
tuses set forth that the capital of the Company was one
million, which had been raised by the sale of 20.000
shares, at 50/. each ; and the names of fifteen persons,
all bearing the title of esquires, were duly advertised as
Directors ; and it was further announced that the
bankers were—the Bank of England, the Bank of Ire-
land, and the Western Bank of Scotland. For about four
years the concern appeared to be going on prosperously,
but at last the bubble burst, and it was then ascertained
that the whole was a fraudulent scheme, concocted fur
the purpose of entrapping the unwary and plundering
them of all their property. It would be distinctly shown,
that of the fifteen Directors announced in the pro-
spectuses, ten or twelve of the names were entirely ficti-
tious, and the others were persons in a very humble
station in life ; that not only was there no capital what-
ever, but that none of the shares alleged to have been
taken had ever been paid for. The learned Counsel,
after alluding to the alluring character of the prospectuses,
concluded by saying that it was evident the defendant
at the time he commenced the undertaking, was aware
that it would not be profitable—that he embarked in it
for the-purpose of defrauding the unwary—that the whole
scheme was founded in fraud, and for the express pur-
pose of applying to his own use the money invested with
the alleged Company.
The following witnesses were then called.
Mr. H. Harvey said, I was clerk in the office of the
West Middlesex Assurance Association from the month
of October, 1837,• till its close in January, 1841. The
offices were in Baker-street, Portman-square ; the pro-
spectuses produced were issued from the office ; they
contain the names of fifteen persons as directors, amongst
them was that of Mr. Henry Alexander ; never saw
a gentleman of that name at the office, neither did
I ever see more than three or four of the persons named
as directors. The book produced (a ledger con-
taining an account of the annuities granted) was
kept by me ; it contains an account of the money
received. The defendant generally received the money,
and always receiVa'inoney paid for annuities. It was
part of the defendant's duty to examine the entries in the
book. The defendant was secretary' and treasurer
from the commencement of the concern, till the end of
September, 1839. lie informed me, in October of that
year, that he had resigned his office. He attended the
board, and also signed policies. The board met every
Friday. There was another clerk in the office, when I
first went there. The defendant acted as manager,
and I always received my instructions from him. When
the establishment was broken up there were a great
many persons applying for the money.
Mr. Cross, clerk to the plaintiff's attorney, stated that
he had endeavoured to subpoena Mr. Williams, senior,
solicitor, of Hart-street, Bloomsbury, whose name was
inserted in the newspapers as one of the directors, and
who was also solicitor to the Company, but was unable
to do so, as he was at present, and had for some time,
been abroad.

Mr. Wm. Wilson said, I was one of the Directors of
the Company in question. When I first became con-
nected with it, I kept a school in the Edgeware-road.
I solicited employment as a clerk in-the office. The de-
fendant said I should be in the office, and he at once
placed my name in'the list of Directors. It was subse-
quently arranged that I should receive 5s per week for my
services. I was only required to attend one day in the
week, that was on board-day, for the purpose of signing
policies. I used to sign all the policies and annuity
deeds which were laid before me. A number of shares
were allotted to me when I was appointed a Director,
but I never paid anything for them. The Company never
had any capital that I am aware of. I continued
to act as Director till the breaking up of the concern.
The defendant was secretary and manager nearly the
whole of the time. I signed the deed of partnership
previous to the opening of the office. That was in 1836.
Amongst the Directors are the names of Henry Alex-
ander, Esq., Bedford, Esq., B. Ayre, Esq., Hope,
Esq., Fergusson, Esq. Ido not know any such per-
sons. Never saw them at the Board, or at any of the
meetings. There are also the names of William Wilson,
Esq., and Thomas P. Price, Esq. on the list. lam the
person first alluded to as W. Wilson, Esq., and T. P.
Price, Esq, is a youth about sixteen years of age, who
was employed in the office as writing clerk and to go on
errands. A certain number of shares were allotted to
each of us, which of course we never paid for. The de-
fendant always paid me me my salary; he also paid all other
persons employed in the concern : it was agreed that I
was to have ss. a week for signing the policies, &c. for
the first year, and 10s. a week afterwards. After I had
been a Director for two years I was promoted to the
situation of clerk, at 75/. per annum, but still retained
my seat at the board; For my last year's services I re-
ceived 3001.; but that was after the defendant left the
concern. I received the letter produced from the de-
fendant ; it is in his handwriting. The following letter
was then read :

" April 23, 1840.
" SlR—During the time of my Secretaryship, the fol-
lowing sums were paid me :—Knowles, 4,040/ ; Mr.
Williams, 4,0381. ss. ; Ditto, as Solicitor for office bu5i-
ne55,1,8571.45.;Mr.H01e,7,3571.; Ditto, on retiring,lo,oool.
in manner following—Houses in Gloucester-place, Sur-
rey-street, and Maida Hill ; to Hole, thefreeholdsB,9oo/.
Total to Hole, 26,2571. I have the cheques to prove the
sums I have paid to Knowles and Williams ; therefore
whoever said I had more than this is a liar, like unto
Peter, who denied his master, and afterwards went and
wept ; or like unto Judas, who betrayed his master, and
went afterwards and hanged himself. All that I have
said or written I can prove.
"Yours, &c., "W. HOLE."

Cross-examined—l keep a small school now in the
neighbourhood of Hoxton. I gave up my school, but I
went to the Assurance Company as clerk. I received
altogether about 700/. during the four years I was in the
concern. I insured my life for 1001. in the office. The
office was finally closed in January, 1841. Did not think
I was doing wrong when I went to the Board. I thought
the Directors were all honourable men. I was not
startled at the large liabilities I signed my name to, as
I was assured by the defendant there was plenty of funds
in the establishment. Certainly did not consider there
was anything wrong when I saw myself described as a
Director, with Esquire attached to my name. The de-
fendant is my brother-in-law. I placed some reliance
on what he said. All the annuities were paid up to the
quarter previous to the dissolution of the Company.
Be-examined—l insured my life in the concern for
1001., and allowed discount for present payment, and I
received 901. I got the money immediately after I in-
surde. The defendant gave me the amount.
Three cheques for 500/. each were here put in. They
were signed " William Hole," and made payable to Mr.
Williams. One cheque was on the Bank of England,
and the others on the Western Bank of Scotland.

The witness said, he understood from the defendant,
that that money was sent to Scotland, to release Mr.
Williams, who had been arrested there by some of the
annuitants.

By Mr. Baron GURNEY—The concern was broken up
through want of funds ; did not know whether there
were any assets when it was dissolved.
Wm. Edward Taylor said, I was one of the Directors,
and was appointed when. the Association was first esta-
blished ; previous to that period, I was a journeyman
locksmith and bell-hanger, and was in the employ
of a Mr. Greathead. The defendant married
my wife's sister. I was applied to by the de-
fendant and Knowles to become a Director ; was in
• the habit of attending at the board on Fridays. I re-
ceived 2s 6d. for each attendance, for a year and a half.
I afterwards received a salary of 804 per annum, though
I only attended as a director to sign my name to policies.
Knowles was Chairman of the Directors. I was desired
by the defendant to sign my name. I signed all docu-
ments laid before me. It was at first arranged that I
should sign for three years, and 31r. Williams was then
to take my place, but at the expiration of that time, he
said I might as well continue signing as it was all the
same.
Mr. PLATT—Did you receive any directions with re-
spect to
and were ordered to wear
yes, We were to dress well,
rings and jewellery.
Mr. PLATT—Did you dose ? llritnessi—Yes, and the
defendant gave us rings to wear.
A paper in the defendant's handwriting was here
read, upon which was a memorandum, dated September
15, 1839, to the following effect :—" Taylor fined for
not having on his ring."
The witness said they were afterwards fined for a
similar offence.
Cross-examined—Many fines were levied and exacted.
Was ordered by the defendant to sign the documents.
Mr. Baron GURNEY observed that thew itness and his
colleague appeared to be the " directed," instead of the
directors.

Re-examined—Knowles and Williams acted as se-
cretaries after the defendant left the concern. I had no
suspicion that anything was wrong. - I placed great reli-
ance on the defendant. Williams, Hole, Hastier, and the

defendant, used to be in a private room together, except
on board days.

Joseph Packer, a law-stationer, stated that he was em -
ployed to engross the deed of the Company, which
was dated 26th September,- 1837 ; saw the first nine
names of the list of shareholders signed on that day„
He was.afterwards desired to obtain other signatures to
it ; he did so during the vacation in 1840. lie applied
to persons indiscriminately to put their signatures to it,
and it remained at his office for that purpose. He was
employed by Knowles and Williams; recollected being
at the Company's office one morning when the de-
fendant and his wife was there. The post had just been
delivered, and he saw the defendant open some letters
and take some Bank notes from them; he made some
observation to his wife; believed the. words were—
" Look here." - He then put the notes into his pocket
and went away with his wife. Whenever he got any
person to sign the deed, a number of shares was always
placed opposite their names.
Cross-examined—Knowles married his (witness's)wife's
sister. Knowles employed him to engross the deed.
The deed creating the Company was then read, by
which it appeared that the defendant was appointed
secretary, and, ex officio, a director for life ; it further
stated that he was to be allowed, besides his salary,
70 shares ; and his wife, as a provision for her, and for
absolute use and benefit, was to be allowed 700 shares.
Another letter, of which the following is a copy, was
then put in. _ _ _

"France, 9th Janstary, 1841.
" Knowles,—Thou art a scoundrel, and thy son no
better. I shall print and publish all the bye-laws and
proceedings which relate to any transactions which I
had with the Company, and expose your villainy to
Mackenzie, and others; and I give you and your
lying rascal of a b notice, that if you or
he should dare to publish any slander relative
to my character, I shall instruct my solicitor to
prosecute you, you d—d perjured scoundrel—you base
wretch—swear against your own hand-writing—what,
swear you never borrowed my money of me for the office
--Oh 1 wicked wretch, I have your signature, and my
solicitor has seen it—base—base—base—hang thyself
with your friend Williams.—Truth.

" WM. HOLE.
" P.S. I have heard you have again plundered the office
—Ah ! how many times wretch.

" Address to kr. Thos. Knowles, 44, Cambridge Ter-
race, Paddington, London."
This was the plaintiff's case.
Mr. CHAMBERS then addressed the Jury for the
defendant, and in a long speech tried to make the best
of a hopeless case. _ _ _

Baron GURNEY addressed the Jury, and said the
,plaintiff in this action sought to recover from the defen-
dant a sure of money of which he had, as was alleged,
deprived her by fraud, and if they believed that the
money was obtained by fraud by defendant or
by others, acting in concert and conspiracy
with him, the plaintiff was entitled to a ver-
dict. The Jury would look at all the circumstances
of the case, and, upon these circumstances, it would be
for them to decide whether or not fraud had been proved.
It appeared this Association was established in 1836 ;
that it professed to have a capital of a million ; that
names were put to the prospectus issued to the public,
describing persons as " Esquires," some of whom were
not in existence, and others were persons of low station,
who were paid small sums weekly for signing their
names. It also appeared that the defendant was the ori-
ginal promoter of the undertaking, and that he had
the entire management of it. The question for
the Jury- was, whether this was really a bona
fate Company, established for the purposes of an
ordinary insurance association, or whether it was not a
scheme, by unprincipled persons, to get possession,
of the money of all those whom those prospectuses lured
to invest it with them, and then apply it to their own
use. In the former ease they would find a verdict for
the defendant ; but if they thought that the ground he
suggested had been proved, then they would return a
verdict for the plaintiff.
The Jury immediately returned a verdict for the
plaintiff—Damages, 900/.