Old Bailey, Monday, July ...
The Times, 1824-07-20T00:00:00

Before Mr. JItShie GASELTE. This morning thig young gentleman was agpin put to the bar. charged with stealinrg on the 3d of June, two razors, value I8s., the property of Henry Clifton, il the parish ofk St. Anne, Westminster. There was no counsel for the prosecution. Elizabeth Olifton.-I am the wYife orf Henry Clifton, who lives at No. 45, Wardotir-street, Soho. I know the prisoner; he came tos my husband's shop on the 3d of June, at about half-past eight o'clock in the evening. He Wvished to see qome razors; 1 showed hirm some. Not being satisfied with these, I sbowed him some other-s ant be chobe two with ivory;handies and ,ked the price; I told him 18s. He then took the razors, antd to my, <reat surprise walked out of the shop with thent without paving; I i *as confound. ed at first but -I ran out and cried " Stop -thief !" He, however, -gotefi'. i never saw him before that evening. e remained *n the shop but a very short time after he' got the razors. He remaicned in the shop altogether for about ten minutes. He was' dressed in a blue coat, striped waistceat, and lighteloured trousers; I am quite certain the prisoner is theprson whto came iw my shop. I could not be mnistaken. There were three candles lighted in the shop. - Cross-examined by lr. AxD1tEvW Thecundles. were lightect at half-past eight. the prisoner had a black.bat on. I nsever saw him again till some weeks after, at Marlborough-street office. I did not expect to see the prisoner when I got to Marlborough-street. Myl reason forgoing there was in consequence 0.Gooch, the officer, coming to me, and asking me to describe the persan w ho robbed my husband. He did not describe the'persen in custody i I badgiven a description of the person who had robbed nmy husband. E muay in the course of my life have made a mistake as to the identity of per- sons. I did not immediately go to ltlarlborough-street. It WsIL a day or two after I saw Gooch. WNhen I got to -the police-office, I saw the prisoner in an elevated place, and I knew on that account he was in custody. He exactly answered the description I had given to Gooch. William Biles, shopman to -Chaffer and ifflls, pawnbrokers, sworn.-I know the prisoner at the bar from seeirg him in court and at MaIrlborough-street; I produced some razors at that ofFice; I stopped them from a young nan who presented tscm tome to pledge in the beginning-of June, very much resembling the prisoner; I had seen that yoang mall twice before he brought them; it was mn intention to have stopped himi, but he ran out of the shop, and escaped; he had brought two albams before, abont a week previous; I should have known that young man again; I did not buy the al- bums, becaise he asked too much for them; I did not sake in the razors, because I suspected the young man. About a fortnight be- fore he brought the albumls he was in the shop, but can't eay for wihat pualpose-I think to pledgesomething, whiCl I did not tsake in The person was extremely fashionably dressed; he had on a dark coat, and rery dark trousers, nearly or quite black; I asked the person she valnc of the razors; he said they had eost-24s.; and he bought tsem in Great Russell-street. l amu positive the prisoner is not the man. The young man gaYe me his address, Great Russell- street Cress-examined by Sr. BRoDEntrcX-lnt a quarter of an hour after the yousg man had offered tbe albums Cooke, the officer, came in with a hand-biU stating two ailbi.ts had been stolen. The young man very much resembled the prlst?2cri but I am certain he isnot the l an. i have seen one or two persons ike him. The rea- son I did not seize him when lie came with tlse raZors was, that he ran awvay as soon as I lifted up the flap, of the counter. The prisoner, on being called on for his defence, said, that the Jury would perc.ive this ca se rested on the evidence of identity, alti whe was qtite satisfied that be could prove a conplete alibi. -Alallough, the shopman to MLr. laison, lhatter and glover ins the Strand, exainined by D1 r. AxnDstxws for thle defence:-Apersort came into my master's shop about nine weeks ago, anti asked tolook at some silk handkerchiefs; he had some pot betore hibl, which he did not approve of; others were shown te -him, with whichJxe ran away out o. the thop. I pursuced him, but co--ld not overtake 1im. I have never seen him since. He very much 'resembled the prisoner, but I aml sure he is not the man. Mrs. Martha Turner sworn.-T am aunt to the prisoner; I have had a yourg lady staving vith nie by the nanie of Coates,, I live at. Acton-green, and the prisoner canib down repeatedlvto Aee thsa young lady. I know he was there on the 3d of Aliy, beemuse I went to Air. Gould's atTurnham-green, and on my return I walked with him to the coach, it was eight o'clock when he took the coach ; upon the solemn oath I have taken I am certain of the day. The prisoner has always borne a most exemplary character. Bvthe CounT.-The reason my atterition was so particularly called to the 3d of Alay is that I went to Manchester about a month since, and returned last lionday. The prisoner wrote to me at Mianchester, and that led me to the circumstance of the 3d of May. The prisoner has always borne a good character. I keep a journal of persons who COtDe to my house, and of places where I go. Mallough again came into the witness-box, and said his master was robbed after the prisoner was in custody. le s8W the examinationr of Robinson in the public priits before the robbery. Ihis Lordship said that'the only way to reconcile this Vas, that the witness must have seen the advertisement, describing the person of the thief, because the dates would not otherwise agi&ee The prisoner was taken into custody on the 8th of June, and Mallough stated that his master was robbed nine weeks since- Mliss Juiia Coates examined by AMr- BnoDERnICY-I remember the 3d of Mlay, and the prisoner being at his aunt'eson that lay. He often came down there. By she COURTr.-I rememnber the 31d of May, because I sent a note by the prisnenr to town on that evening. rs. Turner walked with him to the stage at about eight o'clock in the evening. MbIr. George Fred. Abrahom.-Tha prisoner is articled clerk to me. He came to ma in 1822- 1 made him a vward of the Court of Chancery. He is allowed 9D1. per annuns from the Coutm Ele might always have resorted to me for money successfully, but he never did. His conduct has always been most regular. A number of witnesses were ther exatmined as to the character oi the prisoner, who proved it to hare been up to this tlime inest ex- cellent. When his Lordship was about to sumn up the Foreman of the jury addressed himn, and said, that unless tihere was any point of Ila in the case, thejury would not trouble him to sum up. The learned Judge said it was a mere point of fact, as to the ide.n tity of the prisoner. If the jury thought lim innocent of the chatez, there was no occasion for him to snm up. lfthey thought the pri- then it ws his dut to sUm tup. dthey did not believe bin guilty, and their foremran accordingly returned a verdict of_ ll'ot 'GrdUy.- The prisoner was again put so the bar, charFl with stealing, on the 8th of June, a seal and brooch, value 40 shllings, the property of Mtichael Mderchant. Elizabeth Merchant stated, that in the aft5enoon of the day named In the indictment, prisoner came into her hibsabnd's skop, at No. 350, Oxford-street. He asked to see serne seals: she showed him some. He evaminedseveralI, anddidnotappear to like any of them. After examLining themn, he said -they vere not of the kind that he wanted. Hic then welised out of the shop. Soornsflter he wvas gone, witness missed the seal and brooch. She was positive they were in the parcel sbe showed the prisoner. In abtute weakafter ths, the prisoner was apprehended. Witness went so see hm,ad as posi- tive that he was the person who cameintohershop. Meworeot the day she saw him in her shop, a brozcoloured frock coa; Wit- ne,s added-that her shop was near that of an eaein-house. This was the case for the prosecution. The prisoner, when called on, fdr his defence, said, " Gentlemen of the inry-, I appeal to you, whether it is nst an extremely diffi- cult tas'k or a man to.account forevery day of'-his life, I am inno- ceRt of this charge, and shall only mnake onie o'bservation reepectinj it-which is, -to call your.attention to the colour of the coat which the witness -has described. I seall prove to you that I nevtr wo;- such a coat in my life." MNrs Jones was then called. She said that she keeps an cating_ house within two doors of that of the prosecutor. The prisoner was in the habit of eoring to dine there very frequently; so frequently, that they used to be surprised if be did not come. He vras at her house on the 8th of June, at three o'clock, and -'emained til four. le did not come after-that day. Hewore a bluecoat: she was cer- tain that she never saw him inabronze-coloaredfrockcoat in herlite. Mr. Frazer, who ha-d been fellow-clerk to the prisoner, sted that he never saw him with such a coloured coat asthat described by the first witness. .- Mlr. Somers Clark never saw such a coat on the prisoner, though he hadRbeen in the daily habit of seeing him.. Mri; Hudson, who had also dairy opportunities of seeing the pri- soner, never sav a bronze.coloured coat on lim. There witnesses, and several of the others who had 'been exa- mined in the last case, gaye a imulDar testimony, nas to their ]mow- ledge of the prisoner's character and circumstances- Tiey -77 con- curred in the asserti6n, that they never saw tte prisoner wit afroa-t coat of the colour described by the first witness.' He had liorn a black frock-coat a cnesiderable time- bark, when in mourning for his mother; butsince then he bad 'neenin the practice of weauing a blue bodv-coat, and not a frockecoat. - The Jury noW zdaressda the Cnurt by their foreia-n, and said. that they were not satisficd: thl t4here*w_safficlentevidence of iden_ tity so biring honne any giLt to she prisonAer. The:Tunsa said heconcurred in this obscrvation. There must have teen sOme nistake', isato sons, ad it was quite clear there wass-a mistake 'with respec tO - -'s. T he Ju uw then retu rned a verdict of N2oiG ndty. Thle nrironerbowed and retired.from thsu:. It tistfhen un_ derst!oU that'the sther cases whicl stood ainst- hi would not be pressed, And anuoter'prisoner'was about tobe given in charge, whea ihir. Vcc, who lrad' prefcrre*- a bill.t' of-indictnent against olir. Robinson for stealing some boois,'atood.iup in the witnes-box, anst addresse^ll e Cogrt. '" I'understaad,ny-'o" saidAhe, ll thn;t the prisoner is pbne frot the dock, and' that it-is not intended bh;t 5he oth~c>&sesagaist5 hiro shDottd be proceeded with 21 cm Lord, you will allow mv ce to comeon, for I shall be ableto prove hit innocence with ntore certainty, or pat his gullt of that with wltict 1 charge him beyond all. dnubt.s The J.uriG- (addressirg himself to the prisoner's counsel)-I ap- prehMnd that the prosecator has a right to proceed if he pleases. 1l&r. A.2;DREws said he had no objection to proceed, provided his witnessem had r.ot left the Court. He believel they had been senl a'ay, in the expectatlon that tbeother charges would not be pressed On inquiry it was found that the witnesses had not gonc, and The prisone. was once more placed at the bar. The indictment on wbich he was given in charge charged hita with stealing four books, value 14s., the property of'Thomas Veck; Veck, before he began his statement, begged that the priso=s ,might be ordered to put on his hat. the Judge satd that such a request could only he made for tbn rsrspose of establishing more certainly the itlentity of the prisoner I 'but that the proper moment had not yet arrived for that. Witness theln stated, I am a bookseler living in Tavistack.P'ow Covent-garden. I know the prisoner. He came to my shop or Thursday, the 29th of April, ancd asked for the four books which in said he had previously ordered from the b-y. Ile said if they wero not ready he would cill again in the course of the evening. I casuc into the shop, being called by the boy. Ile then ar7ked mne for thi four-books. I said I had not the bookrs in the shop. but I wouk *end for them to anflotlier hop. I then gave tle lad Os. ant sent him for them. After an absence of about 10 minutes, the bo) caine back for more money. I gave it to him, and he went again. an l was absent about the seine length of time. During those inter. -'als I conversed with -he prisoner. He said he thought there wers hut three numbers of the work, and asked me the price. I said l4s, Hie replied it waS no matter. He then asked for the tragedy ot Cato, and on telling him that I had not got it in the house, he asked for the play of Hamlet. I told him that I had not gRo that. He then painted out some book in the window, whicl lhe said he wanted. I put aside the glass rase, anid whilst I we doing so, 1 saw him very deliberately walking out of the shop. I was astonished, as from his appearance I haed no suspicion of him. I immediately missed the four books. I ran out inuo Covent-gar. den-market, but did not see him. I went to several places in search of him, but without effecr. When in my sbop, he was dressed in a 4ark olive, or pucc-coloured frock coat, and lighit trousers- I think wvoollen cloth. The JUDGE 4crc observed, that this was the time when it might be proper for the prisoner to put on his hat. The hat was accordingly geist for, and prisoner put it on. WYitness (looking at the prisoner.)-I ain still positive tiat the prisoner is the man who came into mv shop-bitt QLS hair appears somewhat darker, as if it had been oiled since. Cross.examined by Mr. A-nD.E8we.-I said at Marlborough- street, that the person who came to mny shop, appeared to have an nrtificiAl colour Inhis cleeks. I believe that was the only mistake I made irt the husness. I said at Marlborougb.street, that it might liave been the 25th of Aprfl. The next time I saw him was on the l6th of June; 1 then tried the experiment of putting on the hat. Mr. AxDnaews.-Then, Sir, why did you think it necessary to po through the parade of doing so agin lale? Was it for ffect? W5'itnes.-.No, Sir, it was not for paradc but to bemore sate. Mr. Airnrswas_You had done so oucS before, and there was no 0 -ce~sity of going! tiln'ugh the farce again. Croiss-examination continued.-I never said I should still believe the prlsoner to be the man thougb 50 juries should acquit him. I siaid, if 50 p-ersons should swear to his iiilocen5ce, I shbould ittill have mv onm impression. I never said if 50,000 persons were to swear to his innecence, T would not believe thero. I never said so to Mr. Clarke. Mr. Clarke as here confronted wit'h the witness, and stated, that li r. Alderman hi AmP nATT here asked wvhether the little boy who was in prosecatort' shapcould notbeproduced? 'Vr. lVeck gaid, if time was allowed he would produce the boy. An officer was then dispatched to bring the boy to Court. Whilst lie was gone, the prisoner was asked what he had to s ay to this charge l He replied, that lie had nothing farther than to protest chi S innocence, whliicihch did in the strongest nmanner. He -would, he said, again beg eave to call the attention of the jury, to the circumstance of the dhesa which the prosecutor swore he wore. The same witnesses who had been examined in the defence on the former trials were again re.called, and all concurred in their fobrer statements as to the eccellent character of the prisoner, and his never having worn a coat sulich as that which the prosecuior described. One of them (Mr. S. Clsrke) said, that about six weeks ago he met a young man so much like the prisoner, that Ile was qaite surprised at the resemblance Another witness (AMrs. Kinnou), who had known the prisoner, stated, ihat some timne back she mnet a voung man in the street, went up to hin, and addressed him as Mr. Robinson; and it was DOt until thegentleman told her that his name nwas not r Robinson" that sho perceived the difference between him aInd the prisoner. T'he prosecutor's shopboy, for whom theofflcerhad been sent, was nowr brought into Court, anld was examined IJY thc JU(Ige who, after ! 'iscovering that he was not suficiently acquainted with the nature i of an oath (though he was eleven years old), refused to allow him go be sworn. The Jury now stated that they bhd made up their minds, and re- turned a verdict of 2Vot GliU' . 3fr. Justice GAsELEa.-Gentletnen, I entirely concur in your verdict, but I must observe that if there were no otner circumrtances In the case, the difference of dress in which he was said to have ap. peered, would not be stufficient groundforbis acquittal; because it would not be at all improbable, that a person going about to rob, as it is clear some person has done in the case stated here, would pro. vide himsrelf with a variety of dresses to avoid detection. But there are other and stronger circumstances in those cases in the prisoner's Iavour. It is certain that some person has been going about the town comimitting robberies and that he is so like the pnsoner as that one mav be mistaken ?or the other. Anotler indictment now remainetd against the prisoner for steal. ing a watch, value 50s., and the prosecutor (Mr. Hedworti) appear. 2h in thewitness-box. The JUDGE observed that, under all the circumstances, lie did not tlhink lie ought to allow the cases to go farther. The prosecutor was asked whether lie wished to press the case ? He repLied that he was satisfied withl the decisions already come to, saftould not press his case. The prisoner, after receiving the congratulations of several of bis friends, bowed, and retired from the dock. During the whole of the proceedings his manner was perfectly easy .and unembarrassed. The Court was crowded throughout dle tri4l. The case of. Win. Itansden Robinson has excited no small degree of attention on account of the contrariety of opinion as to the iden. tiry of his person. All the witnesses at the trials expressed their firm conviction that he was the person who comnmitted the thefts vith which they charged him: on the other hand wiuteses of uts. 4ucstionable reputatiaon proved a cousplete alibi. it inust be within Nhe-recollection of our readers, th3t a few months buck a yourg man of a respectable family at Bury St. Edmunds, was detained several days on the testimony of divers witnessesa who charged him witli uttering forged 51. notes, whereaa it turned out, that u person very like him, of the nante of Charles Clift, was the acttal utterer and was afterwards sentenced to die for the offence, having pleaded " guilty" to the several chargea against him. A more memorable in. stance occurred in the same court in which Robinson was tried, about sixteen months ago. A respectable young man was tried for high. way robbery, coTmitted at Bethnal-green, In whieh nieighbeurhood bith he and the prosecutor rcsided. The latter swore positively that the person at the bar was the man who robbed him of his watch, and abould declare go if they were the last words he had to utter. The coutnsel for the prisoner called a genteel young woman, to whom he paid his zddresses, who gave evidence which proved a complete alibi. The prosecutor was then ordered out of Court, anid in the interval another young man of the name of Greenwood. who awaited his trial oni a capital chargec of felonv, was introduced and placed bLi,the slde of the accused. This done, the prosecutor was again put into the witness-box, and addressed thus :_." Remnember, Sir, the life of this young man de- pends upon your reply to the question I am? about to put--W: ill you ewear again tbat tihe yourng tnmn at the bar is rhe person who assault-. ed and robbed you ?" The witness turned his head towards the dock, when beholding tw'o men so nearlv alike, lie became pe- trified with astonishment, dropped his bat, and became speechlessfc ra ime, but at length declined swearing to either. Theyoungmran was af couree acquitted inmmediately. Grenwood was tried for another of ensc, and executed; and afewcoulra beforehisdeath,our informant seard him acknowlcdge that he commxitted the robbery with whicb the - ,.. aE'~ -N> OLD BAILEY. I.MONDAY. JULY 19. TrTAT. AO -P T--TtT.-hV