Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1818-08-18

more to Russell street. which was also tak,n 81
the top OF the house, aDout I cwt aud H. ~
quarters; from this quantity lie carried 5s ~
weight TO the hoSse vi the defendants porn, "A
by the desire OF MIR. Mains, as Ike detend, "a
did not wish il TO come to, his house; itwa~t
paper parcels OF lib each.
Cross-examiDed by Ar. Jervis-Proctor,
a commissioner, or traveller he sold len =. 4
grocery on commission To different yroce,S \ y
town anal country. He employed witness 4 ;,
cause he was cut of work AT TIL time Win, "A
was 10y business porter. aud lived last in n 8
Capacity with MIR. Willard in Size Ian
merchant and packer. lie quilted his SEN; "a
Ia October, ieIG, and lad 10 gular empie +
nient from that time till employed by Procis
Occasionally did Odd jobs OF portering wli
ont Ot place aud had money from his btoil q
10 assist IN supporting HIS family a pau,J ~
atew shlliings at ii time. Dlu not emplo, biS
seii more tban three VI four daNs in getti,I
the leaves. He was iirst empio, ed by ptocIl
AZ NE latter end OF April, 1917 the iea,
were lien comi'fS out: lie was Oid ered 10 ~
as many leaves as he could * ed la, Il
ter 10 assist han. Was not told what 1,
leaves were for Till a month after: proct
told bin ia The month OF June. He wat saeI
The way 10 make The fabricated tea BY Mr. Joh
Mains aud MT. PROCTOR and was ordered,
assist IN the manufacture. Was engaged u
this way two months or ten weeks. They nadF
great many pounds IN MAY. IL WAS comma
Tor grocers ioSeii bags and paper; witness VA
not told by Mr.. Mans What the bags were io
winch he got from tn defendant. He had
conversation with him on the subject. H
cuuid MOI say how macy bags he got thtis
m'Sht be iity. Ii was IN May lie took The par
GELS o. tea To the defendants house, Tart III.
tore aud part after he got The bags On beirs
re-eXamined 10 this point, lie said il must NAV
been aiterho got the bags that he took ,h
parcels IL was mistake when he said pan
hefore and part after. When he carried IN.
parcels. he saw young man in the shop Dn,
not know his name: he might be- about n, ms
years OF age; he was middle sized, about live
feet higb. He saw Mr.. Palmer afterwards in
Northumberland Alley. He did not then t.u
him he had taken the parcels of imitation lea
TO his house, or have amy conversation viii
him. 1t was in August, or the latter end 81
july, he look the 56ibs. TO the person, whom
he described as the defendants porter. (He,e
the wit~ess referred TO a niemoi andum which
he had IN has hand, and which turned out IN
De list OF about twenty crocers, 10 whom he
had carried tie imitation tea.) HE made this
memorandum in September. The frs, memo
randnm was SOLIDS. 10 Mr.. Palmer. No O.
Ned Lion street, Whitechapel, i'm MAY aud Al
ghst paid me part."-1his did not contain
the 56lbs. delivered TO the porter. He had
SAID that lie was no, paid for The tea by Mr.. Pal
her thought the half pence vas part payment
hui was not certain. The porter lived in
Boundary court. James Mains told him he
WAS Mr.. Palmers porter, aud that he was To
TAKE me lea TO hun, as he did not wish 10 have
u brought directly 10 his house. He was a
fresh coiored country looking nan about torty
hve. Could not say whether he wore wiz or
not
John Bagster proved that lie had been en-
pioSe0 by Mains and Proctor, for two months
10 gather SlOe and white thorn leaves when
ne INST gathered them, they were taken ie
.,oness honse, and from thence 10 Mains COT.
iee-foaSting premises, i'll Northumberland al
ley. lie received twO-pence per pound for
gathering them. He, saw the nlanulacturing
aoing on, but did NOT know much aboutit lie
saw the leaves on sheets of copper, in Gold
stone street.
MIR. Bowling, from the excise Office, proved
the defendant TO be an catered tea dealer.
(ihiS 'cas The case jar .he cTorn.)
Mr. Jervis now addressed The Jury OH the
part OF the defendant, and confidently submit
ted that the evidence which had becl, produc.
ed to them, ia support OF this ihiorlaatioI WAS
not such as would justify them in finding a
verdict for a single far thing, or ia iinaing a
verdict tor the crown al all. HIS learned
friend, Mr. DaumceyJ wli0 knew as well as any
mdu livIu. how 10 conduct cases for the crown
had not failed, upon the present occasion. to
avail himself OF every topic which could int
rest the feelings OF The jury in the cause before
them and although II was very true that tme
penalties TO be recovered could only be guid-
ed by the case pIOsed yetihey all knew enough
OF human nature TO believe that such an adj
dress was calculated To make an i,npre, sion
which, II 1t did not enhance the damages, AT
least went to render The verdict more secure
BY this Ne did not mean TO insinuate that the
present jury would be biased i'm their Judy
ment by any thing which might fall from those
VINO might address them, beyond IyhaI The. case.
Itself, in its plain and naked form, demanded
nom their justice. Still he thought upom such
an occasion, where The consequences were 20
seTlOHS TO the defendant, that all matters teud-
my 10 excite tie personal fee,.rgs of a inv
onght to be avoided. II was stated, that not
only themselves, but their wives and children.
were exposed to the effects Of drinking be-
verage charged with dcieteriotiS ingredients
nc thought he was not going too far III sa Siu.
,pal the ohiect was TO interest them personally
~ the result OF the Cause. No man could more
strongly repro bate the use OF such abouinahle
stan, as had been described by his learned
trend, than he did aud lac only wished that
the parties discovered 20 have distributed it,
mishl, instead OF being sued Tor penalties n
thht court, be publicly prosecuted For to
sell any deIcterOus dug. mixed with the arti-
cIes OF human consumption, was an indictdble
offence. i4e did not stand thrIe to deny that
me TWO INFAMOUS witnesses, sro had been ex-
ahmed had been engaged IN u conspiracy to
fabticate the deeteTisus trash To- winch thew
had alluded, and afterwards 10 distribute il
among the grOCcrS of The mctrOnuIiS Thai
winch ne had TO submit was, that their sole Oh
Ject was tor personal gain TO obtain a verdict
against the defendant and he d, sired to state
III as his INN conviction, that they were NOT
witnesses who were to he believed upon their
oathS IN any case Whatever, whether IA sub
Ject eF the cfown were The prosecutor. lie
never witnessed more impudent attempt 10
Impose upon a British jury What was tile
Case "a sdsahoRd fellow, WHO nad been poi o.
ter ahd lett his master service so far back as
The 'noniiI ofOct0ber 1916, and who had adj
United that for eight months he scarce knew
how lived was he, unCODfrmed as lie was,
TO be credited? aud, upon his siuSl testimony
was an honest aud industrious man 70 oe edu, d.
ed almost to ruin ? WOn.d twet, c honest and
Intelligent men, III this land OF freedom and
sense, suiieT themselves To- be deluded i,y th,;
testimony OF such man ? lie was confident
they would not. lie read. in fact i'm thei,
couhtenances an accordance Ma, his feelings
Why, lie would ask, was not Mir. Proctor can.
co ny 'he Solicitor of the crown 10 confirm Tie
circumstances which had been stated. instead
| OF introducing matters which were not al alI
| cOgneci-d with lie Geo Nnt nur ~ m !