The Sun.
London, England, 1842-05-18 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, MA/ 18, 1842.

say that those goods entered to Mottram and Moore were
sold to them. Ido not understand what thnse„entries
mean.

Mr. Commissioner EvANs—Do you not know what
you meant by that entry ?—I cannot say ; I do not
know. I consider I put them there because they are my
figures ; but why I put them there I cannot say. Ido
not recollect who told me to make the entries. I thought
this was the entering silk book ; but I see it is not. I
should have put down anything I was told, without in-
quiring . why. This entry, Gouger, Wood-street, is in
my writing. Mr. Gouger, I believe, is still in Wood-street.
The letter of the bankrupt, Mottram, to the official
assignee, in reply to his requisition for further informa-
tion, was read, and admitted to be satisfactory.
The bankrupt Mottram was then examined relative to
various bill transactions with Faucit, with Parish, and
with Mottram and Moore. With regard to Faucit, the
bankrupt admitted that there was a mistake in his ac-
counts, and he was told he must correct the mistake in
his account before he swore to it. With regard to the
bill transactions with Parish and with Mottram and
Moore, he offered the following explanation :—He had
drawn a bill for 1,500 L on his private account on
Mottram and Moore. Parish held it. When it became
due. Mottram and Moore paid Parish 5001., and he
consented to renew for the remainder, if Williams and
Mottram would become security. They joined in the
second bill, and therefore Parish came upon the estate.
All the bills given to Faucit were accommodation bills.
Mr. Brierly explained with regard to the payment to
him, that he wrote for 1001. on the 30th of October, to-
gether with certain bills for amounts due to him.
Mr. Mottram said, that the letter enclosing the bills
was postod on the 3d of November, but that, being put
in too late, it did not reach Mr. Brierly until the sth
of November. Mr. Brierly had, in the interval, come
to London, and had had other bills given him. While
Mr. Brierly was in London, Mr. Brierly's son had paid
away the bills remitted in the letter to the parties for
whom they had been intended consequently Mi.
Brierly had been overpaid.
Mr. Commissioner Everts—lf the bankrupt puts in
that account of purchases to which I have alluded, I
think he may be passed.
Mr. Banker, the accountant, said that an account of
purchases had already been furnished.
Mr. MAYNARD admitted that he thought it would be
all but impossible for the bankrupt to furnish the account
required. All he wanted to know was whether credit
had been taken for that parcel of French goods twice.
Do you find any entry relating to them ?
Mr. Mottram—lt never can be found out. Depend
upon it, the goods never came into our warehouse.
Mr. Commissioner EVANS—AII I can say is, that any
account the creditors require must, under the circum-
stances of this case, be furnished before I can let you
pass your examination.
Mr. MAYNARD would not press for the account.
With regard to the entries in the book, as to which
he had examined Kirby, he would ask Mr. Mottram a
few questions.
Mr. Mottram—l know nothing about them. I be-
lieve them to relate to goods sold to Mottram and Moore,
but I never sold Mottram and Moore a piece Gf goods in
my life. I gave no directions to have those entries
made, and I know nothing about them.
With regard to his transaction with a certain house in
Manchester (we understood the name to be Godfrey),
which had since become insolvent, Mr. Mottram
gave the following statement :—I had been purchasing
goods in Manchester, and these parties requested me to
deposit the goods I hadi so purchased in their warehouses
until I should require them, and they would see if they
could not purchase a portion of them of me. They
purchased 1,1001. worth, and gave their acceptances for
the amount ' • there was 4,0001. worth in their hands ; I
got nothing for the goods ; the acceptances were dis-
honoured, and they are now indebted to my estate in
that sum.
A Creditor said that the house in question had since
compounded with their creditors, and had paid 6s. in
the pound. He wished to know if they had got a release
from Williams and Mottram.
Mr. MAYNARD—The assignees have given no release.
A Creditor complained that some of the meetings had
been private, and that he had been refused admittance
at them, while at the same time the evidence taken at
those meetings had been published.
Mr. Commissioner EvAsts denied that the meetings
had been Private ; he disliked private meetings • if gen-
tlemen were to be witnesses of course they would have
to leave the room, as in courts of justice witnesses were
ordered out of Court ; and with regard to the publication
of the proceedings, he thought it of the greatest pos-
sible advantage that everything that passed should be
published.
The same Creditor then complained of having been
refused summonses for meetings at the cost of the estate.
Mr. Commissioner Everts—lf you think you can
benefit the estate, have meetings. If you benefit the
estate, the estate shall pay—if you do not, you must pay
for them yourself.
A Creditor believed that if it had not been for the
solicitor, they would already have had ss. in the pound,
which they had been offered.
Mr. Commissioner EVANS—I think it would be wrong
to let you go without stating, that if such an offer had
been made to me, I, as a creditor,' would never have ac-
cepted ss. in the pound. The statement of the bank-
rupt, when he made that offer, was so monstrous, that I
do not think the creditors would have been justified in
accepting it. I believe the creditors will now get as
much as was offered.
A Creditor did not like the one-aided way in which the
thing had been arranged. He did not like the conduct
of the official assignee, in suffering documents to be taken
from his office to Mr. Quilter's.
Mr. Commissioner EVANS—That was incorrect in the
official assignee.
Mr. Lackington (the official assignee)—lt was merely
with a view to assist the investigation.
Mr. Commissioner EVANS—I wish no documents to go
out of the official assignee's hands.
A Creditor—Mr. Lackington will no doubt be paid for
his trouble. I do not think the estate ought to be charged
with two accountants.
Mr. Commissioner EVANS—You should attend at the
audit. You may depend I will not suffer the estate to be
charged for two accountants, unless good reason can be
shown me for their employment.
Mr. Mottram stated in answer to various questions
that all the acceptances of the firm falling due the begin-
ning of November had been honoured.
Mr. Commissioner EVANS—It appears that the bank-
rupts' expenses amounted to 28,0001., while their profits,
amount to 5,0001. only. However, that is a matter for
the consideration of the creditors. If they do not wish for
any further explanations, as far as I am concerned, I
must pass the bankrupts.
Mr. Mottram could assure the Commissioner and his
creditors that he had not done wrong intentionally. He
felt much for his creditors—he felt that it was his duty
to do all in his power to make up their losses to them,
and he trusted that at some future day he should be able
to do so. No exertion should be wanting on his part to
enable him to make it up to them hereafter.
The balance-sheet having been corrected, the bank-
rupts were sworn to its accuracy, and were then both
declared to have passed their final examination.

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT.
OLD COURT.
(Before the RECORDER.)
Charlotte Drake, 17, was indicted for stealing six
silver spoons and other articles, the property of Samuel
Syred, and William Gowland, 70, and Margaret Berry,
43, widow, were indicted for feloniously receiving part
of the property, knowing it to have been stolen.
Mr. Doane conducted the prosecution, and Messrs.
Phillips and Payne appeared for the prisoners.
The case in itself was of an ordinary character, except
from what transpired in the course of it, in reference to the
conduct of a man named Tolhurst, one of the constables
of the D division, who appeared to have acted
in a most unjustifiable and improper manner
in the transaction. The prisoner Drake lodged
with the prosecutor, and she took an opportunity to open
her box and remove the property mentioned in the in-
dictment. The other prisoners were alone charged with
receiving a watch, and the only evidence against them
was admissions alleged to have beer/made by them to the
officer, Tolhurst. Upon his being closely cross-examined
by Mr. Phillips, he was, after some demur, compelled to
admit that when Gowland and Berry were locked up, he
went to their lodgings and took away a great quantity
of valuable property that had nothing to do with the
charge made against them, and that with respect to any
great portion.of that property he made no mention of it
to his Inspector, or in any other manner, and that it was
still in his possession.
The RECORDER, in addressing the Jury, commented
with some severity upon the conduct of the policeman,
and left it for them to say how far they could rely upon
his evidence, as affecting the prisoner, charged with re-
ceiving the property.
The Jury convicted the prisoner Drake, and acquitted
both the alleged receivers.
The RECORDER then directed that no expenses should
be paid to the witness, Tolhurst; and he added, that in
his opinion his conduct ought to be made the subject of
inquiry by his superiors. He thought he was not en-
titled to oto the pr isoners'
lodgings, and take a quan-
tity of valuable property, which had nothing to do with
the charge against them ; and it looked still more sus-
picious when it appeared that he had given no list of the
property taken to his Inspector, or any other person. lie
could only speak of the case as it appeared before him, and
he did not wish to prejudice the constable's conduct, but
could not help expressing his opinion that it was a pro-
ceeding which ought to be inquired into.
The Inspector on duty at the Court said, he would take
care that the matter was reported to the Commissioners.
The RECORDER said, if that were done, he had no
doubt a proper investigation would take place. The pre-
sent conduct of the police was most praiseworthy ; arid
it was necessary, for the sake of their character as a
bcdy, that where individual cases of misconduct were
discovered, that they should be rigidly investigated.
The policeman intimated that lie could explain his
conduct.
The RECORDER said, lie should not enter into the
inquiry, but when it took place he would remind him,
that it would be important for him to show that, having
taken a quantity of valuable property from a prisoner's
apartments, he mentioned the circumstance, and gave a
list of the articles he had taken to his Inspector, to show
that they would be forthcoming.
Francis Cornet', aged 26, was indicted for stabbing.
and wounding Mary Anne Jones, with intent to do her
some grievous bodily harm.
The occurrence took place in a public-house, where
both parties were drinking. A quarrel took place, and
the prisoner was struck by the prosecutor with a poker,
and upon this he struck her with a knife.
He was found guilty of an aggravated assault, and the
Recorder sentenced him to be imprisoned, and kept to
hard labour for twelve calendar months.
. _

• Samuel Lewis, 29, was convicted of a similar offence,
and he vas also sentenced to twelve. months'. imprisow-
wont.

John Summons alias Gillingham, who was convicted at
a former session of obtaining money by falsely pretend-
ing that he had some ReLding sauce to dispose of, the
article being, in fact, a spurious composition, was brought
up for judgment, and after some consultation with the
Counsel for the prosecution and the prisoner, the Re-
corder ordered the defendant to pay a fine of 20s.
The business of the session terminated shortly after-
wards.

POLICE IN TELLIGENCE.
MANSION HOUSE.
George Paris, the driver of one of the East-end om-
nibusses, was brought or rather attended before the
Lord Mayor on account of the death of a child under the
following circumstances :
Mr. Malthen stated that he was sitting on the omnibus
driven by the defendant at seven o'clock on Sunday
evening, when he saw two children run into the road.
The defendant called out to them, buy they were be-
tween :the horses' legs before he could stop the horses.
Witness immediately afterwards saw the hind wheel on
the breast of one of the children. The omnibus was going
at the time, according to the best of his judgment, at the
rate of about five miles and a half an hour, and the de-
fendant did his best to stop the horses. The child died
in about fifteen minutes.
Mr. John Lannway saw the accident, and was con-
vinced that the omnibus was not going at greater speed
than four miles an hour.
Mr. F. Lucas, one of the Society of Friends, who
also sat on the omnibus, stated that not a particle of
blame attached to the driver, who did all he possibly
could to avoid the accident.
Corporal John Shirley, of the Ist Battalion of
Grenadier Guards, saw the occurrence from the street.
He was standing on the pavement opposite to the place
where the children were, and saw the defendant slacken
his pace when the people called out to let the children
get out of the way. Both children were knocked down.
Over the body of one of them, a girl about two years
and a half old, he saw one of the fore-wheels pass, and
the hand which rested upon her chest. The omnibus
backed off the body.
The defendant declared that he did all he could to
prevent the occurrence, and that he greatly lamented it.
The LORD MAYOR said although he entertained not
the slightest doubt that the death of the child was occa-
sioned by an unavoidable accident, yet the defendant
must be detained until Cie result of the Coroner's inquest
should be ascertained.
A man named John Smith, who has been marked as a
contraband dealer, was charged with having had in his
possession a quantity of tobacco, upon which duty bad
not been paid.
The defendant was seen coming from the Belfast
foreign steamer, by an excise office, who suspected that
he had upon his person some smuggled goods. The
defendant denied that ho had any, but a handkerchief
containing several pounds, was found concealed about
him. He, however, contrived to fling it into the Thames.
Convicted, and fined forty shillings.
BOW-STREET.
Yesterday two young men, named Henry Wilson and
Charles Wagon, brothers, were brought before Mr. JAR-
DINE for final examination, charged with defrauding
several tradesmen of property to a considerable amount.
The prisoners contrived to evade the vigilance of the po-
lice since January last ; and since they were apprehended
and examined at this court on Monday week, 39 cases
have been made out against them. The court was
crowded with persons who have been swindled by them ;
and not less than 28 pawnbrokers were in attendance,
with other witnesses, to give evidence.
Mr. Pile, a solicitor, appeared for the prisoners.
The first charge brought against them was for swin-
dling Mr. Sharwood, a jeweller, of No. 94, St. John•
street-road, of property amounting to 28/. 15s.
Thomas Lucking, shopman to the prosecutor, stated,
that on the evening of the 12th of January last, the pri-
soner Charles came to the shop, and desired to see the
gold watch produced, which was shown to him. He said
he was Mr. Marsden, lodging at No. 15, Chadwell-
street, and requested the watch with others would be
sent there for the approval of his lady. Witness ob-
served that some gold chains might also be required, and
the prisoner desired he would send them. He then went
away, and shortly after witness called, according to the
directions he had received, with three gold chains, value
11/. ss. 3d., together with three gold watches, for
171. 10s. On going to the house in Chadwell-street
witness was admitted by a servant, and shortly after the
prisoner invited him to step into the drawing-room. The
articles were then exhibited, and on the prisoner re-
questing to be allowed to take them to another apart-
ment, where his lady was sitting, witness immediately
complied. After waiting about half an hour, during
which mo person appeared, his suspicions were excited,
and having rang the bell, he was informed that the pri-
soner had left the house, taking the entire of the property
with him. Witness here identified two gold watches and
two gold chains as the property of his employer.
Mrs. Mary Johnson, a widow lady, residing at 15,
Chadwell-street, said that on the 11th of January the
prisoner came to her house to inquire after apartments,
and on the following day, having called again for the
same purpose, he went away and called again shortly
before six o'clock in the evening. In a few minutes the
witness arrived, and being shown up stairs the pri-
sOner shortly left the house, and, on the last witness
ringing the bell, it was discovered he had absconded with
the property.
James Steward, assistant to Mr. Kirkman, a pawn-
broker, residing at 388, Strand, proved that on the 12th
of January, about eight o'clock in the evening, a person
resembling the prisoner Henry pledged a gold watch and
gold chain for 81. He gave the name of William Bell,
address, 8, Belvoir-terrace, Walworth.
The prisoners were next charged with obtaining from
Mr. Waylett, 226, Oxford-street, eleven watches, value
451., under similar circumstances.
The prisoners were again charged with obtaining,
under similar circumstances, two pieces of Irish linen
and a quantity of black silk, value 30/. and upwards, from
Messrs. Ransom and Gardiner, silkmercers and drapers,
of Brunswick-terrace, Islington.
In this case it was proved by Thomas Mountain, the
shopman, the prisoner Charles ordered, on the 15th
March, the property to be Sent to 55, Cloudesley-terrace,
Islington, for inspection. When he got to the house the
prisoner took the articles into another room, and he
never saw him again until he was in custody. The
linen produced, and the blocks on which the silk was
rolled, were the prosecutors' property.
An assistant of Mr. Thompson, pawnbroker, Gros-
:venot-Tetw, Pimlico, produced the linen, which was
pledged by the prisoner Henry, on the 16th March, for 21.
The blocks and duplicates relating to the linen were
found in the prisoners' lodging at Chelsea.
The prisoners were committed for trial.
The constable said he had several other charges to
prefer, the most important of which was respecting a
quantity of silks and velvets, about 501. in value.
Mr. JARDINE said it would be well to select such a
case, although there was sufficient to send for trial, and
upon each of which the evidence was complete.
In this case it was proved that the prisoner Charles
called at the shop of Mr. Howell, 19, Park-place, Ken-
nington-cross, and ordered the property to be taken to
22, Chester-place. Kennington-cross, where the other
prisoner was sitting, and, under pretence of showing it
to a lady in another apartment, they escaped from the
house with it.
The property was subsequently found, at different
pawnbrokers, where it had been pledged on the 12th of
April, by both the prisoners.
The several witnesses being bound over, Mr. JAR-
DINE ordered the prisoners to be brought up again, as a
portion of the property. was not forthcoming, an several
pawnbrokers were not in attendance.