Welsh Newspapers
Search 15 million Welsh newspaper articles
22 articles on this Page
Advertising
PINK EDITION! Evening Express Office, 7 p.m. m STOP PRESS. THIS SPACE IS 'RESERVED FOR IMPOHTANV NEWS ItECEfVFH) A vrEn Jl".b.' HAVE GOXE TO I>J:ES<. THEATRICAL DIVORCE. T In thf Divorce Division oil Friday Mrs. Lilian Column, fonnerly an actress residing in London, obtained a decree nisi because of her husband's cruelty and misconduct. The suit was unde- fended The parties were married in 1884. Mr. Edward William Colman, the :utsbai|(l, was in the theatrical profession, and the misconduct took placs with Dor-#Ili,v Campbell, a member of th) same company, who played with him at the Princess's Theatre. Prior to leaving liis wife respondent had fre(lueritly given her black eyes. I THE BALUCHISTAN1 DISASTER. The Press Assica-tion 6aysThe India, Office tc-diy received the following telegram from the Viceroy, dated yesterday'A report has been roeeived cf an outbreak in Makran. A survey narty under charge of Captain Burn. RE -.vas attacked at Kej en January 19th and some native subcrdinaes were killed and ■wounded. Captain Burn escaped to Cmara.
THE ENGINEERS' DISPUTE.
THE ENGINEERS' DISPUTE. Reported Settlement. i LONDON EMPLOYEES ABAN DON THE HOURS' SCHEME. WITHDRAWAL OF NOTICES IMMINENT. THE NEWS CONTRADICTED SPECIALLY SET FOR THE EVENING EXPRESS. The Press Association Manchester correspon- dent learns, on the best authority, that ti.e demand for a 48 hours week by the engineers in London has been withdrawn. It is expected, adds the correspondent, that the employers in London, on hearing of this withdrawal, will "withdraw the lock-out notices and that work will be resumed. THE GOOD NEWS COLaOBORATED. The Central News Glasgow correspondent tele- graphs -The Amalgamated Society of Engineers and allied trades have taken a plunge at last, and have finally decided to abandon the struggle with the Federated Engineering Em- ployers. On Thursday night a communica- tion to this effect was addressed to the federation secretaries. It states for- mally that the London demand for 48 hours' work and strike notices connected there- with are now withdrawn. It is presumed the employers at a meeting being held at Man- chester to-day will,*in view of this development, agree to allow the lock-out notices to lapse. REPORT GAINS BELIEF. The Central News representative, on calling at the offices of the Amalgamated Society of Engineers, could obtain neither a confirmation nor a contradiction of the reported withdrawal of the demand for a 48 hours' week. Mr. Barnes himself refused to see reporters, but sent messages that he would say nothing. The general belief, however, is that the report is perfectly accurate. SAID TO BE A CANARD. The Press Association states that on receipt of the message respecting- the alleged with- drawal of the 48 hours' demand in London, Mr. Gecrge Barnes, general secretary (f the Amal- gamated Society; was seen at headquarters, Stamford-street, Blackfriars, and stated em- phatically he knew nothing of it. Mr. David Brown, secretary to the joint committee, was a'so culled upon at the Lord Nelson, and he declared the news to be a canard. LATEST STATE OF AFFAIRS. The Press Association, telegraphing later, slates that the actual position regarding the engineers' dispute appears this afternoon, in view of contradictory reports, to be in considerable doubt. The Glasgow correspondent of the Press Association seems to be in possession of inior- oiation similar to that received from Manchester, tor he wires soon after two o'clock as follows: — "Clyde engineering employers have been notified at noon to-day that tlie London men have with- drawn their demand for 48 hours. The notices will, therefore, be withdrawn, as both sides are agreed to the terms of the management of the shops." Subsequently to this the Press Associa- tion Manchester correspondent telegraphs. — "We believe the report, and do not believe 'he contradiction. It is confirmed from Glasgow." LATEST PARTICULARS. THE CASE AS VIEWED FROM BOTH SIDES. The Press Association Manchester correspon- dent telegraphs later on Friday afternoon as follows —A very important decision has been come to by the committee of the allied Trade Unions which may, probably, bring the strike to an end. or, at any rate, cannot fail to hasten the of the struggle. This impor- tant decision has, it is understood, been taken on the initiative of the Amalgamated Society of Engineers, acquiesed in by the representa- tives of the allied Trade Unions involved in the present dispute. The step which has been decided upon, and the announcement of which we are enabled to make on official aulitority, is that the representatives of the allied Trade Unions have decided to withdraw the 48 hours' Week made upon the London engineering firms, Which demand was the immediate cause of the lock-out and strike. The workmen's officials now consider that, as they are taking the above course, the Employers' Federation should with- draw the lock-out, which would bring the dis- pute to an end. A step of such importance as this was not expected in Trade Union circles in Manchester, and the announcement has been received with considerabl e surprise. Mr. J. Whittaker, an organising delegate of The Aamalgamated Society of Engineers, in an interview with the Press Association's Manchester corres]X)ndentv said that the 48 ljours demand had been withdrawn, the workmen were willing to resume work ori the same conditions as when they came out. In the provinces they had asked for nothing, and, as the 48 hours demand in London was the immediate cause of the lock- out, employers could now very well afford to withdraw the lockout and re-start operations with a clean sheet. It was to'be hoped that a restart would be made. and hat a more tolerant and ? dmg between both sides would prevail m future. I he 48 hours question had bfcen removed, and it was open for the employers to allow the men to resume work without askin0, for other conditions. Employers alleged that they did not want to introduce any new conditions or reduce the wazes of skilled workmen. If the masters distinctly said this to the Unions there was nothing to prevent a resumption of work. The men had demanded nothing m Manchester, or anv other district, except London. Speaking of Manchester, there was nothing to stop the men from returning to their work. It wou.d simply mean that the status quo was restored, and that was all that men wanted. As the result of .-a visit to -the offices of the Employers' Federa- tion at Manchester, the correspondent of the Press Association adds that it would seem more than doubtful whether the withdrawal of the 48 hours' in London would be considered a suffi- cient reason for the federated employers to with- draw their lock-out notices. It seems probable that before the masters again open their shops to Trades Union members they will require an official acceptance bv the Trades Unions of the conference terms of settlement, which are regarded as a matter altogether outside the demand for shorter hours.
RELIED ON REPUTATION,
RELIED ON REPUTATION, SPECIALLY SET FO? THE EVENING EXPRESS Sarah Grand's latest work, "The-Beth Book," has been refused a place in Northampton Free Library. The "Evening Telegiaph" of that town reports that the chairman of the library com- mittee (Alderman Wetherell), who led the oppo- sition. confess d that ho had not read a line of the book he objected to. J
BANK OF WALES. .
BANK OF WALES. TRIAL AT THE OLD BAILEY. ♦ Directors and Manager! Charged with Fraud. SIX COUNTS ON THE INDICTMENT, HOWELL AND CORY PLEAD "GUILTY" TO FIRSTCOUNT. COLLINS "NOT GUILTY" TO ALL VERDICT OF GUILTY ON THE FIRST AND SECOND COUNTS AGAINST COLLINS. Sentence Postponed. SPECIALLY SET FOR THE EVENING EXPRESS. At the Old Bailey, London, on Friday (before the Recorder, Sir Charles Hall) Frederick Robert Howell and Thomas Cory, directors; and Henry Ellis Collins, general manager, of the National Bank of Wales, were indicted on six counts for "that Howell and Cory being direc- tors and Collins a member of a certain public company did fraudulently apply the sum of £30,000 to their own use and benefit, and for uses and purposes other than those of the said company; that Howell and Cory being direc- tors and Collins manager of the said public com- pany, d el as such receive a sum of £30,000 other- wise than in payment of a just debt or demand, and did, with intent to detraud. omit to make or cause to be made a full and u-m entry thereof in the books and accounts of the said company; aid that they concurred in making, or causing to be made, false entries in the books of the company." Mr. Robson, Q.C., and Mr. Bodkin appeared for the defendant Howell; Mr. Law30u Wal- ton, Q.C., and Mr. C. F. Gill for Thomas Cory; and Lord Coleridge, Q.C., and Mr. Hugh Eraser for Collins HOWELL AND CORY PLEAD "GUILTY" TO THE FIRST COUNT. On the defendants being placed in the dock the various counts in the indictment were read over by the clerk of the court, who then asked the derendant Howell whether he was guilty or not. Mr. Howell replied: I am advised by my counsel to plead guilty to the first count. The Cleric of tne Court (to the defendant Cory): Do you plead guilty or not gunty ? Mr. Thomas Cory: 1 am advisea to piead guilty to the first and second counts, but not to the others. COLLINS SAYS "NOT GUILTY," The Clerk of the Court: Collins, are you guilty or not guilty? Collins: Not guilty. Mr. Lawson Walton (to his lordship): We feel it is impossible to justify the conduct for which Mr. Cory is responsible, and, inasmuch as Collins has pleaded "Not guilty," it will not be for me at this stage to address your lord- ship m regard to the facts of the case. But after the case has been decided in regard to Collins I hope your lordship will give us an opportunity of saying something before sentence is passed. H4s Lordship: Certainly, it is desirable that anything that has to be said should be said afterwards. Mr. Robson: I propose, with your lordship's permission, to follow the same course. THE CASE AGAINST COLLINS. Mr. C. Matthews, who, with Mr. Horace Avory, appeared to prosecute on behalf of the Treasury, then opened the case against Collins. He said the indictment was framed under Sec- tions 81, 82, and 83 of the Larceny Act. Section 81 made it a criminal offence for anyone, being a member of a body corporate, or public com- pany, to fraudulently take and apply for his own use and benefit or for any use or purposes other than the purposes of the company the moneys of the company of which he was a mem- ber. Section 82 made it a criminal offence for any manager of a body corporate or public com- pany as such to receive and possess himself of any property of the public company otherwise than in payment of a just debt or demand, and with intent to defraud omitted to make or caused cr directed to be made a full and true entry thereof in the books and accounts of the company. Section 83 made it a criminal offcnce in any manager of a body corporate or public company who, with intent to defraud, destroyed, altered, mutilat?d, or falsified any book, or made or concurred in the making of any false entry, or omitted or concurred in the omission of any material particular in any book of account or other document of the public com- pany or body corporate. A LONG TIME AGO. The charge to which Mr. Collins had pleaded not guilty related to a criminal offence alleged to have been committed by him as far back ts December of 1890, a period of over seven years ago, and the jury had heard from the two de- fendants who were beside Collins, and whose names were Mr. Thomas Cory and Mr. Frede- rick Robert Howell, the confession so far as concerned the charge of fraudulently applying to their own uses and purposes the moneys of the public company of which they were direc- tors, and the application of it to uses and pur- poses other than the purposes and uses of the company. The jury had heard their confession that they were guilty of the offence. ACCOUNTING FDR THE DELAY. The delay in the taking of these proceedings had in no way been occasioned by any action on the part of tne Director of the Public Prosecu- tions. It had been occasioned by means, first, of the secrecy which was applied to this transac- tion by tne defendants 'themselves, and then *>y the action of the liquidator of the bank, of which the defendants were respectively directors and general manager. In process of time the bank was voluntarily wound-up, and in the course of that voluntary liquidation, of that bank the pri- vate liquidator, Mr. Dovey, judged it to be his duty to interest himself on behalf of the share- holders of the bank. He interested himself on behalf of those shareholders only, and ile deemed it no portion of his duty to bring or make any criminal charge as against these three defendants. It was only right to say, so far as Mr. IJovey was concerned, that thi:, matter had in some of itr complications been before the then Mr. Justice Vaughan Williams and the now Lord Justice Vaughan Williams, and It") did not seem to have expressed any dis- satisfaction with the course pursued by Mr. Dovey. SQ followed this long delay, and it wa.s not until the latter part of last year that the facts of the case were first brought to the atten- tion of the Director of Public Prosecutions. IN THE HANDS OF THE PUBLIC PROSE- CUTOR. When these facts were so brought to his attention the director, in accordance with his duty to institute a prosecution where there had been a failura of a person to proceed with a prosecution, at ones took criminal action in the matter, and tne apprehension of the defendants iinmecV'atelv followed. He should now have to take the jury back to the year 1890, in order that they might, follow the facts as they would be proved in the evidence. They would be told that in December, 1890, Mr. Cory was chairman of the directors of the National Bank of Wales, and Mr. Howell, who was a colonel of Volunteers, was acting m the capacity of solicitor of the bank, and Collins, who chal- lenged this inquiry, as he had a perfect right to do, was acting m the position of general manager, and was also a shareholder of the bank, and, therefore, a member of th's body corporate. Collins had been m this position of general manager ever since the bank had been incorporated. He wa.s general manager as from 1879 down to December, 1890, and had a salary of £1,500 a year. THE BEDROOM MEETING. All these three defendants, acting in these capacities, were apparently in London at about the middle of December, 1890, and at that time Collins was staying at the Savoy Hotel. There they were joined, on the invitation of Collins, by another director, Mr. Crawshay, who would be a witness in this case. It was only right to mention that at that time these three directors and this general manager had in existence—and in existence to their knowledge—very consider- 8 ""secured overdrafts on the National Bank of Wales. That was not unimpor- ^m! Jitter, he ventured to think. The object wjth w.<-h fhese two directors and the general manage^ were in London, in December, was to negotiate purchase for the Tsatianal Bank of W ^es of another bank business, known as that of Pueh Jones, and Co., of North Wales. A, MELANCHOLY FEATURE. ID was a melancholy feature of the case that the business of Pugh, Jones, -and Co. was, [ in fact, a failinsr business. and was not com- metcially scund. But, notwithstanding that, the negotiations were proceeded with, and resulted •n the taking over of this business by the defen- dants on behalf of the National Bank of Wales. THE £30,000 COMMISSION. The agreement bore date 20th of December, 1890. A meeting had been held at the Savoy Hotel in the bed sitting-room occupied by Collins, of these directors and another, a Mr. Crawshay, at which- it was resolved, not only to take over this business of Pugh, Jones, and Co., but to take and divide between the three defendants the sum of £30,000 of the money of the National Bank of Wales. This, the prosecution said, was a fraudulent transaction. A notice of meeting of the boarti had been issued for the 19th of December at Cardiff, but the go-bye had been given to that notice, and Mr. Crawshay was hastily summoned on the 1/th of December for this meeting on the 18th in London. Mr. Crawshay would give the court his account of that meeting. which was extraordinary in its character and very peculiar in its circumstances. Coionel Hare, who was one of the directors, received no notice of this meeting. When Mr. Crawshay asked what the £30,000 was paid for, the answer he got was that no question was to be asked about it. Mr. Crawshay, a large debtor by reason of a very considerable overdraft, seemed not to have pursued the matter. Mr. Crawshay said he was positive that no book of any kind was produced at this meeting, and in no docu- ment was there recorded any resolution arrived at. That was a most extraordinary circumstance in regard to a meeting at which this large sum of money was taken by these directors and their general manager for division. This fact made more strange some documents which first saw the light in January, 1894. THE PRIVATE MINUTE-BOOK. At that time a private minute book plus some draft minutes were produced by Collins vouching for what had occurred at the meeting. The private minute-book then produced con- tained no other entry. It recorded that at this meeting at the Savoy Hotel the particulars in regard to" th^ taking over of the business of Messrs. Pugh, Jones, and Co. were fully dis- cussed, and it was resolved that the said busi- ness be taken over. It was further resolved, the minute said, that the sum of £ 30,000 be paid to Mr. Collins in the way of commission, and also that the sum of £5,000 be re-funded to Mr. Crawshay on account of the amount jpa d by him on bank shares allowed to be forfeited by the bank After the negotiations were concluded an application was made to Margin's Bank, the London agent of the National Bank of Wales, fa: £30,000 in notes to pay for the assets of Pugh, Jones, and Co. The only entries in the books of the National Bank of Wales of this sum were, first, an entry in the bank cash-book of the 29th of December, 1890, "Martin and Co., pu'vate'reserve book, £ 30,000." representing a payment by them secondly, on the succeeding folio of that same cash-book an entry debiting the private reserve of jE30,000, and, thirdly, an entry in the gencml ledger, under date the 29th of December, by which £30,000 was transferred to the bad debt account. COLLINS DRAWS THE MONEY. Under the same date, the 29th of December, Mr. Goldsworthy, acting under the instructions of Collins, wrote a JEtter to Messrs. Martin ill London to the effect, "Please pay to the order of Mr. H. S. Collins the sum of £ 30,000." On the morning of the oUth of December Collins presented himself at Martin's Bank, in London, and received the sum of JE30,000 in Bank of England notes. According to the entries in the books of the bank, it appeared that that money was paid to the private reserve and bad debt account, but Collins possessed himself of Uie money. and forthwith proceeded to divide it between himself and the other, two defendants in equal divisions of £lD,OOO each. He thought there was no doubt that the money did not go to the credit of overdrawn accounts. OTHBR DIRECTORS IGNORANT. Counsel then went on to diow that the private meeting of the defendants in London in Decem- ber, 1890* when the money was voted, was not known to the other directors, and that at sub- sequent meetings everything was dorse by the defendants to keep the tianraction from their knowledge. That would be sworn to by Colonel Hare. A cheque for £5,OGû on the National Hank of Wales was drawn in Mr. Ciawshay's name, and signed) by the defendants, Cory and Howell, but it did not seem to have been credited to Mr. Craw- shay until May, 1894, some years after. Mr. Crawshay explained that in 1883 the National Bank of Wales was in need of financial help, and that he voluntarily gave over 2,600 shares which he held. He was voted £5,000 for giving that assistance, but it was unfortunate-very unfor- tunate—that, payment having been deferred so long, it should be made at that extraordinary meeting in December. In the early part of 1891 a report of the bank's business was prepared. That referred to the acquisition of Pugh, Jones, and Co.'s business upon such tenns that did not require the directors to ask for more capital. In this way the matter was kept quiet and confined to the knowledge of the three defen- dants. THE WINDING UP. Then came the scheme which was ultimately carried out for voluntarily winding up the National Bank of Wales with a view to its amalgamation with thn Metropolitan Bank. Without going too much into detail he would say that Mr. < ory and Mr. Charles Henry Dovey wera appointed on the ICth of June. 1893, as liquidators to carry out the voluntary winding ,Ip. That date was an important one. What was the monetary position of the defendants at that date? Lord Coleridge objected to that point being gone into, as it. was not material to the charge. Of course, he agreed that the monetary position of the defendants in 1890 was material. His Lordship asked Mr. Matthews how he made it material. Mr. Matthews said the overdrafts made in 1890 had been growing and growing. The accountants employed to carry out the liquida- tion had to give their attention to these over- drs.fs. His Lordship did not see how that could make th> matter material. Mr. Matthews said, so far as the application of this money was concerned, none of it went to reduce the overdrafts. On the contrary, those overdrafts went on increasing. His Lordship said Mr. Matthews was entitled to say that no part of the money went to reduce the overdrafts, but, not to go further. There seemed to be very little doubt that this £30,000 was paid to and divided by the three defendants. He had no doubt Mr. Matthews would address himself to that important fact. On that point it would be his duty to direct the jury in one. way only. Mr. Matthews want on to speak of the way in which the money had been concealed, when I.< rd Coleridge said he did not, of course, dis- pute the receipt of the money. It was .the way in which the money was said to have been concealed. The Judge said the money having beer re- ceived it must be accounted for in an honest way. ACCOUNTS IN DIFFERENT NAMES. Mr. Matthews then went on to say that it was discovered that Collins had largely over- chawn his account, and that he had accounts in different names, and that they were unsecured ovei drafts. Lord Coleridge suggested that his learned friend was travelling beyond the limits allowed by the judge. The Judge said the prosecution was entitled to show that there were overdrafts, and that there were such as to cause inquiry to be mude. Lord Coleridge said his learned friend might take it for granted that there were overdrafts, but he should not go into the question of dif- ferent accounts. Mr. Matthews proceeded to ray that at all events inquiry was made, and the jury would not be surprised that t he bold entries in the books caught the, attention of the accountants, who demanded an explanation. ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION. Referring next to the articles of association of the National Bank of Wales, the learned counsel contended that no words could be read into them to justify this transaction. On the contrary, the articles expressly forbade any director or officer from participating in any pro- fits for work done for the company. Lord Coleridge: Not "officer." Mr. Matthews said it was provided that no director should participate in any profit, and Article 98 provided that no advance should be made to any person who within three months had been a director. That article was framed with the idea of preventing a director, in his position as director, from borrowing from the company, under Section 115 of the Companies' Act. The private examination of the defendant Collins was required by the liquidator on the 8th of December, 1893, and an order was made that the examination should take place on the 15th of January, 1894. Collins attended for examination on the 24th of January, 1894, and the subject of his examination was this £ 30,000. He refused to give evidence in regard to it, whereupon, on the same day, Mr. Justice Wr;o-ht being applied to, ordered Collins to attend and be examined upon the 26th of January, 1894. On that date judgment was consented to by Collins for £10,000, and interest in respect to his share of the £30,000. It was in the course of these proceedings—he believed, on the 24th or 25th of January, 1894—that for the first time there was produced, either by Collins or his soli- citor, the private minutes and cheque of the 31at of December. 1890. COLLINS'S BANKRUPTCY. These were produced for the first time, and judgment was consented to, and with it judgment for other sums. These judgments remained un- settled, and the liquidator, Mr. Dovey, took pro- ceedings in bankruptcy against Mr. Collins. These proceedings, taken in 1895 or 1896, went on until 1897, in the sense that by the May of 1897 Mr. Collins had not obtained his discharge. In May, 1897, he iqade application to the Court of Bankruptcy for his discharge. In the ordi- nary course of things that application had to go before the county-court judge at Cardiff, and to him it went, accompanied by a report from the Official Receiver. JUDGE OWEN'S REMARKS. In June, 1897, the learned county-court judge was to have heard that application, but a better discretion aooar^ntly prevailed, and, in the pre- sence of the county-court judge the I application was withdrawn. But the learned county-court judge on that occasion made some very strong remarks, and these remarks being reported in the news- papers general publicity was, for the hrst time, given to this matter. Afterwards ihe Board of Trade sent a communication to the director of public prosecutions. The date of the com- munication was the 29tli of September, 1897. Once the matter was placed before the director of public prosecutions criminal proceedings were forthwith commenced as against these three defendants. As a result these three defen- dants had been committed for trial. Cory and Howell had confessed that these proceedings were rightly instituted in ihat .they were guilty of an offence under Section 81. Collins denied that they were rightly instituted, and, therefore, it was for the jury to say whether or not tÎ1et:e proceedings had been rightly instituted against the three defendants. THE EVIDENCE. A clerk in the office of the Registrar of Public Companies, Somerset House, produced the official documents relating to the National Bank of Wales. There was, he said, no document on the file showing that the business of Pugh, Jones, and Co. had been taken over by ihe National Bank. Collins was represented as the holder of 125 £20 shares. Cross-examined, witness said that there were records of Collins having increased his holding between 1890 and 1891 from 75 to 125 shares. There would be no record of the taking over of Pugh, Jones, and Co. until after a resolution of the shareholders. ABOUT PUGH, JONES, AND CO. William Thomas, bank manager, said in 1890 he was a partner in the bank of Pugh, Jones, and Co., but up till the time of its being taken over by the National Bank of Wales ne had received no profits at all. After March, 1890, the books of the bank were placed in the hands of Messrs. Saffery, accountants, to investigate because of some heavy losses. The result of their report, received in November, wa,- that, after consultation with his partner, he came to London to try and get rid of the business. lie renewed a suggestion about the National Bank of Wales taking it over, and he returned to Cardiff, where he saw, first, Mr. John Cory, and next Mr. Thomas Cory. He next discussed the matter with the general manager, Collins, who said his directors would b? entirely guided by him. Collins entertained the proposition cf purchase favour ibly. He told Collins that the recent losses of Pugh, Jones, and Co. had been considerable. He saw Collins again on the 17th and 18th of December at the SJ.voy Hotel, in London. He thought 1 he mentioned to Collins the sum of jB84,000 as the amount of the losses. Following upon that he attended a meeting on the 20th of December, when an agreement was come to, and signed. for taking over the business of Pugh, Jones and Co. by the National Bank of Wales. Cross-examined, the witness said Pugh, Jones, and Co. had fifteen branches, scattered over three counties in North Wales. By the amalgamation the National Bank tapped all Wales, except Mid-Wales. The proposal for the amalgamation came from his side entirely. He was instructed to submit six points for discussion. They were: "Deposits under £ 500,000" "earning power, about £8,000 a year," "fifteen branches,' "no large advances," "considerable losses to be covered by private property of partners," and "£40,000 for the goodwill." Replying to the judge, the witness said it was intended that the sum for goodwill should go to make up any losses. Cross-examination continued, the witness said the negotiations threatened at one time to break through, but they were resumed on a guarantee by the executor of the principal partner to make up more assets. The sum ultimately received for goodwill was £10,000. Then Collins bargained you out of £ 30,000? Yes, I suppose so. The Judge: Was it so?—Yes. Re-examined Collins said he had seen ^afferv s report. That report showed a deficiency of £119,000, and it was to make up that sum that the partners were propclsing to transfer their private estates. No si was actually specified in the agreement for goodwill. AN ACCOUNTANT IN THE BOX. Mr. F. J. Saffery, of the firm of Safiery, Sons, and Co., chartered accountants, said that he had exa'nined the books of Pugh, Evans, and Co., in 1890, and made a report. He produced that report and balance-sheet. That balance- sheet showed, as at the 30th of June, 1890, a deficit of £119,000. Ho made this investigation by an order of the Court of Chancery to find out the estate of a deceased partner. Collins was more than once at his office during the investigation, and copies were given to him of the balance-sheet and report. His first virt was on the 9th of December with Sir Hugh Owen, next (n the 12th, and pgriin on the 16th. Witness was present on the 20tli of December, wlrjn the agreement was discussed. All three defendants were pre- ] sent, and his report and balance-sheet were discussed in their presence. The meeting was suspended upon the question of what should be paid for goodwill. It was objected that nothing should be ,paid, and when it was resumed he did not return. In answer to the Judge, the witness said he reckoned the profits of the bank as £6,500 a year. The deficiency was due to recent specu- lations. Cross-examined: The question of goodwill was discussed on the basis of the earnings being between jE6,000 and £8,000. It was only after they had discussed how far the private estates oc the partners should be called in to make up the deficiency—and they had made up the defi- ciency to within a few thousand pounds—that the question of goodwill came on for discussion. He was sure that it was on this question of good- will that the meeting broke up for a time. AN INCREASING DEFICIENCY. Mr. Charles Henry Vanderpump, managing clerk to Messrs. Ince and Co., solicitors, Fen- cliurch-street, London, said his firm in 1890 were agents for Messrs. Ingledew, solicitors, of Cardiff, solicitors for the National Bank of Wales., Oil the 20th of December, 1800, he went to the office of Messrs. Ingledew, Thread- needle-street. He there saw the three defen- dants, and there was a long discussion about taking over the business. It was stated that the liabilities were £100,000 more than the assets. Later in the discussion the deficiency was stated to be larger. There was an unex- pected increase of from jB7,000 to £10,000. The agreement produced was ultimately signed by which the business of Pugh, Jones, and Co. was transferred to the National Bank of Wales. transferred to the National Bank of Wales. It was also provided that the terms of the agreement should be embodied in a deed, but he could r.ot say whether that was done. Cross-examined by Lord Coleridge: He was present during the whole discussion. Mr. Saffery was also present. He did not recollect a dis- cussion raised by Sir Hugh Owen as to the private assets ot .ne partners being more than sufficient to make up the deficiency. Mr. Crawshay, the first chairman of the National Bank of Wales, said he was a director in the summer of 890. He first heard of the proposed amalgamation on the 18th of December. 1890. He received a telegram on the 17th of i December, 1890,. from .Collins, in consequence of which he came from Swansea to London. He met Cory and Collins at the Savoy Hotel. A discussion took place on the business of Pugh, Jones, and Co. The business was spoken of as an advantageous one to take over. He could not say who said that they were told that the business made a profit of from jE6,000 to £8,000 a vear. He tohught they all arranged that the business was worth taking over. No formal resolutions were moved. Then came the ques- tion of the £30,000. He did not know who said £,,0,000 had to be paid. He believed it was Collins. Mr. Matthews Who was to receive the money? !-it was to be paid by Collins. The Judge: By whom?—By the National Bank °fMraMatthews: What for?—He did not say W^Did^vou ask ?~I did. I was told not to make mTheiejudge: Who said that?—Mr. Cory. I said I though it was my business to make inquiries I could pet nothing definite. Mr Matthews: Did you pursue it, or did you leave'it there?-! left it there. You did not pursue the inquiry with regard to it?—No. Was not a sum of money discussed before the JE3,000 ?—A sum of £5,000 was discussed. To whom was it to be paid ?—To me. Who mentioned it?—I cannot remember who mentioned it. Cannot you remember whether it was men- tioned before or after the £ 30,000?—I cannot. I am inclined to think it was before. Five thousand pounds was to be paid to you. Tell us what was said why was it to be paid to you? It was represented to me that the business being in a flourishing condition, the time had now a rrived- His Lordship dnterrupting): Whose business? Witness: Our busines, the National Bank of Wll'o. His Lordship: Well? Witness: The time had arrived when I might receive the sum of money I had paid up before. Mr. Matthews: When was it you paid it?— Early in 1883. I refunded the bank 2,664 shares. I gave them up for the bt-hefit, of the bank. His "Lordship: Because the bank was in a position that required help. Mr. Matthews: You used the word "re- funded." Would it not be more correct to say surrendered ?—Yes. I think it is fair to you to elicit this fact that at this date, July, 1883, these shares were of considerable value. The market value was something like £ 20,000?—I cannot say what" they were at the time. They were of consida- rable value. The surrender of yours to the bank at that date was for the purpose of helping, then?—It was. I had done it before then. Before 1883?—Yes. His Lordship: Did you buy these shares at par p They were allotted me at the allotment. But what did you pay for them? Mr. Matthews: They were JC20 shares. Witness: I think it was £2 10s. a share that they were allotted at. Mr. Matthews: Having done that, how were they to repay you?—When the bank was in a position to do so. That matter remained in abeyance until the date of this meeting?—Yes, until December, 1890. Then vou Though this sum of JE5,000 was 1;he sum which the bank, being m a flourishing con- dition, could pay you with regard to that sur- render of shares?—Yes. I fisk you once more. Tax vour memory Was not the £5,000 discused before the £ 30,000? —I really cannot tax my memory. His Lordship: Were you rather surprised at having .his srrung upon you? You got a tele- gram. Came up to a meeting. Came into a bedroom. Found two directors there, and they say. "We are going to give you £5,OUO. Were you not astonished?—If it ]iafi been put m that way I diould have been. His Lordship: How was it put? Who said t?—I do not know whether Mr. Cory or Mr. Collins said it. One of them said the bank being in a flourishing condition. I might receive a sum ot money back. You were rather astonished, were you not?-— X", I had mentioned it often. You had never been paid any?—-N"°> never. The court then adjourned for luncheon. After luncheon, the witness .being further examined, said he had o\erdrawn his account by £20,ûOa or £25,000. He was not present on the 20th of December, when the business taken over. The minute book now shown him was not produced at the meeting of the 18th of December. No comment whatever, as far as he could remember, was produced then. On the 5th of January following he attended a board meeting at Cardiff, at" which the three defendants were present. No reference was mad at it to the special meeting in London, or to the existence of a private minute book. He could not remember of any resolution con- firming what was done at the meeting on December 18. Another meeting of the board was held on the ltli of January. No reference was made at \it to the meeting in London, or to what was resolved upon there. The cheque for £5,000 was either handed to him by Mr. Collins or sent in a letter. His memory was a blank as to how he received it. The cheque was signed by Howell and Cory. We should be glad • know if you have any further particulars to furnish respecting this cheque?—I have no further particulars to give. It had no number, and the secretary's name was wanting?—I have not noticed. What did you do with it?—Paid it into my account. When? I do not remember. Is it not a fact that it was not paid in until the succeeding May?—I cannot remember. Nor the reason for it ? No.. Your overdraft was increasing between De- cember, 1890, and liquidation? (Shown cheque for £3,000\. Tell us something in regard to it?—I can only tell you that I signed the cheque and nothing else. By the Judge: You can tel lus nothing about those large cheques You did not sign cheques for such amounts every day?—I did frequently. What, for £ 30,000?—I frequently "igned larga cheques. By Mr. Matthews: You observe that this cheque had no number, and that the place where the secretary's name should appsar is blanks- Yes. W Was it :J usual for the secretary to countersign a cheque?j—Yes.I think it was/ I hope you do not sugest that I took any part in this. The Jud^e You are asked why you signed the cheque. The jury want to know. The Witness: It was simply laid on the table for signature. Who by ?—Collins. What did you^lo with it after you had signed it ?—I left it on the table. Did you ever take the trouble to inquire to whom it was to be paid before you signed it ?— No. Cross-examined by Lord Coleridge: Is your memory bad ?—Yes." What I have gone through has very considerably affected my memory. Did you know prior to the meeting of Decem- b2r 18 that there had been negotiations pending for the amalgamation? No. Did you say before the magistrates that the first time you knew where the £ 30,500 had gone to was in 1893 ?—Yes. Had you forgotten signing this cheque?—No. I knew I had signed theVheque. Did you say that you knew nothing about the persons to whom the money was to be paid until after the commencement of the liquidation? —That was the first time I learnt that Messrs. Cory, Howell, and Collins had divided it between them. The Judge: The cheque for £30,000 does not appear to have been endorsed or honoured. M". Matthews: That is so. Witness said he knew the 18th of December. 1890, that negotiations with reference to-this amalgamation were going on. That was after he got the telegram "to come to London. He swore he did not know what the business was that was taking him to London until he got there. He denied that he knew at the beginning of December that the negotiations had reached an advanced stage. ° Lord Coieridge: Had a meeting of directors been held in'places other than Cardiff ?—Yes. The Judge: Do vo, Lord Coleridge, suggest that any number of meetings would justify the taking of this £ 30,000? Lord Coleridge The question raised is that, this money was taken fraudulently, and in sup- port of that it is suggested that meetings were held in a hole-and-corner manner. The Judge: Unless you can show me some- thing to the contrary, it will be my duty to tell the jury that if there had been a hundred meetings nothing could justify the defendants in taking any part of this £3("000. Lord Coleridge was about to speak, when the Judge said they had listened to a great many details connected with the transfer of this bank and soon he would have to tell the jury that even after all they had heard, nothing could justify the defendants in taking one farthing of this £30,000. Lord Coleridge said he did not wish to unduly prolong the case under the circumstances. The Judge (interposing) said he had listened to every question put to see if there was a loophole, but there was none. Lord Coleridge: Of course, it was not a ques- tion of facts. The Judge: The facts aie beyond dispute. Lord Coleridge, before resuming his seat, pointed out that Collins stood on a different footing to the other defendants, as he was not a director. THE JUDGE STOPS THE CASE. The Judge said he was aware of that fact, and, turning to the jury, said he thought it was his duty to bring the case to an end, so as to save time, and he repeated that nothing could justify the defendants in taking the money. His Lordship then asked if it was the inten- tion to go into the question of books, and he added that, unless the evidence could be fhaken, he should have to tell the jury that there had been omissions, and wilful omissions, with regard to the entries. Mr. C. E. Dovey, chartered accountant, of Cardiff, said on the 12th of June, 1893, he was appointed joint liquidator with Mr. Thomas Cory, of the National Bank of Wales. The day before he was appointed he was told that £ 30,000 had been abstracted from the coffers of the bank, and he investigated the books and documents for the purpose of tracing what had bacome of that £30,000. On turning to the cash-book, he found the only entry relating to that £30,000 was an entry, under 'date Decem- ber- 29, in the cash book as £30,000, put to private reserve. His Lordship: I think you may put this ques- tion. Was there either a full or true entry of this transaction in the company's books? Lord Coleridge: I cannot be understood to admit that there was any fraudulent entrv in the books? His Lordship: I put the question in the words of the section—whether there was "full or true entry ? Lord Coler.dge That involves investigation. Mr. Horace Avory: Does it appear by the cash-book and ledger, but that £30000 has' been carried to rfrivate reserve?—Yes. Which is an account for bad debts?—Yes, and has nothing to do with the payment of commission. It appears both in the cash-book and the ledger in that form. His Lordship (to Mr. Mathews): Do you think it necessary to go on. Mr. Mat-hews: We will bow to your lordship's suggestion. His Tjordsliip: I think you have got sufficient in the case. t Mr. Mathews: If your lordship pleases. If we have done everything) to satisfy you for the ends of justice. ADDRESS TO THE JURY. His Lordship then addressed the jury. He said —I have pointed out to the learned counsel that, although there has been a minute and care- ful inquiry into the various matters connected with this transaction nothing can justify the con- duct of the defendants in taking this £30.000. That being the case, he is very properly not prepared to go on. That is my direction upon the facts of the case. You will find your ver- dict on the first and second counts. VERDICT. After a short consultation the jury came to an agreement without leaving the box. The Clerk of the Court (to the jury): Do you find the defendant guilty or not guilty on the first and second counts. The Foreman of the Jury: "Guilty" on the first and second counts. Mr. Matthews said there were some matters in the case to which he should call his lordship's attention. It was necessary that his lordship should know what was the condition of the accounts of the defendants at the date of the liquidation, and inasmuch as he had to announce to his lordship the re-payment by Mr. Cory and by Mr. Howell of sums of £,10,000 apicce, Ins lordship should be in possession of the faots; under which these re-pavments were ..)ade as to the over drawn banking accounts of the^liree defendants at the date of the liquidation. In 1893 Mr. Cory, yuite apart from the £10,000 which was the subject of this investigation, and his partrer, were indebted to the bank in the sum of £13.000. Of that vum £10,000 was paid off by Mr. Cory's partner, and, aj to the balance, Mr. Cory was subsequently proceeded against in Loi don, and £2,600 of the balance remained undischarged. Mr. Matthews went en to show that consider- able pressure had to be put upon the defendant Cory for the re-payment ft his £10,000 before the money was got out of him in 1894. In re- spect to the defendant Howell there had to be added to the £10.000 an overdraft of £47.000. There was a norder of attachment against him bfeore anything was forthcoming, and then it was not from Howell himself, but from his rela- tives. who paid £10.000 to discharge his whole indebtedness to the- bank. As to Collings. apart from the £10.000. he was owing a sum of £34.800 upon unsecured overdrafts. He had never paid anything in relation to it. All the. luxuries which a man of wealth might justi- fiably have, Mr. Collins had, and all he had tj depend upon for the purpose of providing for them was his salary as manager. Mr. Matthews said there was a loss on the acquisition of this business o\ er and above the £30,000 or £32.000. Mr. Matthews: Over valuation cf assets. Mr. Robson, Q.C.. said there was nothing that pointed to an unfair valuation. He then asked whether he should address the court or call his witnesses as to character first. The Judge I will listen to all your witnesses, bui I must say 'hat 'he defendants would not have been directors unless they were men of apparent respectability in their own business. WITNESSES TO CHARACTER. Witnesses as to character were then called on behalf of Howell. Dr. William Piobert, of the Manor House. St. David s. Pembrokeshire, said he had known Colonel Howell for 45 years, '1'11ey were neigh- bours for many years, and. from'witnesses know- ledge, and from what he heard. Colonel Howell bore the character of an absolutely honourable man. Canon Lewis, who had known Colonel Howell for 50 years, Mr. Reginald Mortimer, barrister, and Mr. Rees Williams, solicitor, Aberdare. gave similar testimony. Mr. licbinson said hi could call other wit- nesses, but he "-ould ro. do so, and he then pro- ceeded to address his lordship for Howell. He said that neither Howell nor Cory ever con- sidered that they were doing anything criminal and in support of that he would say that the defendants did not attempt to conceal anything, nor did they even look upon the transfer as a dishonest transfer. He was not there to deny that they were wrong, but he urged that what he had said showed the state of their mind, and that they did not appreciate that their conduct was wrong. The Judge: How could they have concealed th:> transaction after it was discovered? Mr Robson said what he desired to show was that when a question arose as to the value of th? assets Mr. Cory said, "You wiil find £30.000 pa d as commission, as we thought we had got a business for nothing. It turns out that the assets of the bank were not as good as we thought, and the transaction was a bad one for tho National Bank. Then we ought never to have taken that £30,000. That was the posi- tionY It was most material when we come 1 to cansider what he might call the degree of criminality all the circumstances relating to this transaction han come into publicity by the action of these very defendants themselves." First of all they initiated and carried forward negotiations fOi: amalgamation wiLhout which nothing would have been discovered. If these defendants had been criminally liable they would never have allowed the proceedings which took place in 1893. and which eventuated in this dis- covery.. His Lordship: Could they have stopped it? Mr. Robson: They could have let the amalga- mation pass by way of transfer only, or they could have stopped the amalgamation altogether. On the contrary, the amalgamaion and conse- quent examination of the accounts was sup- ported by each of these directors. It was not suggested in this -case that in 1893. when the amalgamation of these accounts was imminent. that either of the directors ever said, "We must not have this examination, at all events." was enitled to put it to his lordship that in 1893 these men took no steps to prevent that expo- sure. SENTENCE POSTPONED. Sentence was postponed till next session. The next sessions commence on the 7th of February.
THE UNITED STATES AND HAWAII.
THE UNITED STATES AND HAWAII. A Central New. telegram from New York on Friday says :—Honolulu advices state 'hat Presi- dent Dole will shortly visit fhe United States to "rge on the Government the annexation of Hawaii. —B—■WW————————————
THE INDIAN CAMPAIGN.
THE INDIAN CAMPAIGN. MOVEMENTS OF THE BRITISH FORCES. The Press Association states thai the follow- ing telegrams from the Viceroy have been re- ceived at the India Office: — Calcutta, Thursday.—Bindon Blood reports arrival at Kingargali on the 11th of January with the headquarters staff, and proceeds to Kursak with naif of the Royal West Kent Regi- ment (1st Battalion) and two Mountain Bat- teries on the 12th of January, where he will be joined by Meiklejohn from Yowrar. Fur- ther operations from Tursak, which will pro- bably be temporary. Secondary base not yet decided. The troops and transport are in exceptionally good condition. Jeffreys, with the ICth Field Battery Royal Arti'lery, East Kent Regiment (1st Battalion), and 21st Bengal Infantry marched to Rustan on the 18th of January. A good road, fit for country carts, has been made via Sikra Baba. As the road over the Tanga Pass cannot be made fit for camels in a reasonable time. Blood prepeses to equip the 1st brigade of two Bditisli and two native battalions, tmo batteries, two squadrons, and one company of Sa^jjgrs and Miners, with mules entirely, carrying seven days' supplies, for operations inside the passes. He considers Lhis force strong enough for the requirements. A second brigade of one British and two native battalions, with field battery and three squadrons, with camel transport, are to move to Turkhabi to cpen the British end of the Ambeyla Pass. One and a half native batta- lions, and one squadron, with camel transport, are to keep >J!of:n communications with Mardan. Blood expects to move into the Chamba country and so on to Mardan. via the Ambeyla Pass, 1 where Jeffreys will join him.
DURHAM ELECTION.
DURHAM ELECTION. Joseph Richardson, the Liberal candidate for South-east Durham, issued his address on Fridav. He says he heartily sympathises with the Liberal party on the questions of Home Rule, tempe- rance legislation, electoral reform, and much- needed measures.
ILLNESS OF M.P.'S.
ILLNESS OF M.P.'S. The Press Association Birmingham correspon- dent telegraphs —Friday morning's report as to the condition of Mr. Dixon, M.P. for the Edgbaston Division of Birmingham, is that he had a better night, but that there was still no improvement in his health. He remains very weak and prostrate.w At noon on Friday Mr. Villiers's condition was critical.
FIRE IN BERKELEY SQUARE.
FIRE IN BERKELEY SQUARE. Just before midnight on Thursday a fire was discovered at 36, Berkeley-square, occupied by Mr. A. C. Harmsworth. Apparently a defective flue in the Earl of Rosebery's house next door had ignited the oakliKing and skirting board in the io;a)-y of No. 36. The firemen had to cut away some wood and brickwork before they, could put the fire out. Theloccupants of both houses were alarmed, but the nre was soon extinguished.
THE MISSING CABDIFF BOY.
THE MISSING CABDIFF BOY. BODY FOUND IN THE TAFF. SPECIALLY SET FOR THE EVENING EXRRESS. The body of a lad, supposed to be Freedy James, of 23, Llandaff-road, who has been mis- sing from his home for some weeks past, was found in the River Taff, at the Sophia Gardens Field, Cardiff, on Friday afternoon. THE BODY IDENTIFIED. The body of the child has been identified by Mr. Oliver James, of 23, Llandaff-road, Car- diff, as that of his son Freddy, aged five, who has been missing from his home for nearly a month past.
THE PRICE OF A COW,
THE PRICE OF A COW, SPECIALLY SET FOR THE EVENING EXPRESS. At Cardiff County-court on Friday a Mr. Hutton, a greengrocer, sued a Mr. lantliam, a butcher, for the sum of £6, the value of goods sold.—Plaintiff's case was that on November 25 he sold_ a cow to the defendant for the agreed price of £ 6. Defendant, however, denied this, saying that he did not agree to purchase, but that he simply took the cow to do the best he could with it for the plaintiff. He sold half the cow for £1 10s., and the other half for 3s.—In reply to questions, the defendant said that the meat was put in the market, and the judge asked if the inspector had passed it. It seemed to him only tit for cat's meat, and the hide appeared to be the most valuable part of the whole animal.—The Judge said one could not expect to get a cow under £6, and gave judgment for the ulaintiff for the amount claimed.
Sykes's Signatures. .
Sykes's Signatures. REMARKABLE WAYS OF A REMARKABLE PAIR. DISHONOURED PROMISSORY NOTES ALLEHEH FOkGFRIKS. SPECIALLY SET FOR THE EVENING EXPRESS. In the Queen's Bench Division of the High Court of Jusiice on Friday the hearing of 'he action brought by Mr. Daniel Jay, a Loiwon bill discounter, to recover from bir Taiton Sykes, of Sledmere, Yorkshire, and Gro&vencr- street. London, £15,800 odd on dishonoured pro- uiissory notes was resumed (before the Lord Chief Justice and a special jury). The court was again crowded. Lady Sykes, j as on previous mornings, was in court accom- panied by her brother, Mr. (ieo"ge Cavendish .rfeuiiiick, and her solicitor, Mr. Hastie. Sir Tatton Sykes was not 111 court, but it appealed from some preliminary remaiKs that Sir Tat- ton was in Sir Edward Clarke's room within the precincts of the court, and upon the sugges- tion of the Lord Chief Just.ca Sir Edward Clarke undertooK that Sir iatton should make two copies or a document (produced) in the case—one copy with a fine pen and one with a broad-nibbed pen. Sir Edward Clarke then handed up the cheques to show that there had been paid to Lady Sykes up to 1890 a sum of £ 12,013, and from 1890 to tHe end of 1896 £17 .28-1- for her personal ex- penses and, further, there had been paid to lie- from April, 1890, to the end of 1896 £21,321 for Household expenses, showing fo: household expenses an average of £ 3,045 per I annum. His Lordship: What is the avaiage of the whole of the payments? Sir E. Ci trkc I think it works out, my lord, at about £5,580. Mr. Lawson Walton: This payment. I pre- srme, includes both the London and the country houses. There is no distinction made between? Sir Edward Clarke I believe there are some expenses at Sledmere which are not included. THE CASE FOR THE DEFENCE. Sir Edward Clarke then proceeded to open the case for the defence. He said the question at issue was a very simple one, though a serious one. it was, bneriy, whether Sir iatton byltes signed these promissory notes and letters of authority, or whether they are forger es by Lady Sykes. for, if forgeiies at all, the forgery must have been by Lady Sykes, as there was no suggestion that the signatures had been written by anybody else. The issue was, therefore, as painful a one as any English gentleman could na^e before him, or thaL he could even well imagine, ihc-y would, however, m the course of the case, see the great reluctance with which Sir Tatton Sykes was driven to bring this issue into court. "He found himself, however, at length compelled to come into court in defence of himself and his property, and not only m his own interest, but in the interests of tnose to which the property would ultimately pass. lie was compelled to refuse to pay claims founded upon forgery. Sir Tatton Sykes was a Yorkshire o-entleman of considerable property, and of j position and influence in the county. His net] income was about £ 16.000 a year, and, of course, his gross income was very much larger, and if he were in want ot money lie cjuici obtain it on very easy terms from almost any financier in the country, or from liis L wn baiikets. But in the face of this fact they were asked to b-.veve the extraordinary iiory that he was employing Lady Sykes to negotiate loans from a money-lender at 60 per Ctnt interest.. Really, the storv was a most amazing one. Sir 1 auon Svkes would tell them that he knew nothing whatever of any transactions between Lady Sykes and anv money-lender, or that she was borrowing money at all. He never saw the notes or the letters of authority, and never signed them. It was not, in fact, till the 19th of May, 1897 that Sir Tatton Sykes ever heard the name of the plaintiff Jay. The learned counsel then proceeded to criticise the evidence as to the handwriting, which, he thought, would not im- press the jury. It was clear, he submitted, that by 1890 Lady Sykes had got into diffi- culties through gambling and extravagance, and he examined the correspondence m the case with the view of showing that Sir Tatton Sykes was not at the places where he was alleged he signed the documents, especially as to a document alleged to have been signed on the 2nd of January. 1897 at G.-osvenor-street It would be shown that Sir Tetton was actually at teled- mere on that date. having left London by the the mid-day train on the 1st of January witn his valet. There was, he said in conclusion, an overwhelming improbability that Sir Tatton Sykes should have signed any of these docu- ments, SIR TATTON SYKES IN THE BOX. Sir Tatton Svkes then went into the witness- box He is a tall, slight gentleman, with grey hair and walked feebly into the witness-bix. He was examined by Sir Edward Clarke. He sa d he knew nothing of Mr. Jay till May. 1897. when he went to Sir. Jay's office to inspect certain documents. He had never seen the documents before. Look at these documents, and say if they are signed by you. Having examined the documenis, he said, "They are not in my handv/riting." Look at the letter of the 2nd of January, 1897 ?—Is that supposed to be my handwriting Yes. Did vou write it?—Oh, no, no. Had you an overdraft at your bank?—Yes, oh, Yes. Could you have had any amount of overdraft vou chose?—Oh. yes, yes. They had security. Witness continued his answers in this style, repeating his answers over and over again. He said he was not in want of money in Sep- tember, 1896. He did not know of Lady Sykes going to Newburgli Priory. Did Lady Sykes ccme from London to Sled- mede and bring you any of these papers to sign?—Oh, no, no. 110.. Witness, continuing, said aboit the middle of October he went abroad, and was away about three weeks, returning to London quite at the end of October. At the end of November and beginning of December, 1896, he was in com- munication with Mr. Gardiner and Mr. Wills, his solicitors, with regard to Lady Sykes s liabilities, and lie aarreed to give a cheque for £15.0ÜO. What- for?—To avoid scandal. Avoid scandal. Avoid scandal. (Laughter.) Witness, continuing, said he had not heard of Jay at that time. On the day of the ball at Sledmere he wenj down with his vatet. Simp- son and Ladv Svkes was not with him. She did not, he thought, come down in two or three days, but he could not remember exactly. This was on the 1st of January, 1897. He uever re- ceived a letter from Mr. Gay about this matter, or from any of the others, and as soon as he became aware of .the claim he instructed lus solicitors to resist it Cross-examined by Mr. Lawson Walton, wit- ness said the signatures to the documents were not his. Are they like your writing?—No, no: oh. no. Have you no recollect on whatever of the Jay transactions?—None, no, none. Asked as to the transaction at Monte Carlo in November, 1895, in reference to which Mr. Unwin, a Monte Carlo Hanker, swore that Sir Tatton had signed two cheques in his presence for £1.000 each, witness having examined the cheques, said they were not in his writing. He knew they were not, because he said he only drew one cheque on that occasion, and that vaster £100. Were you in court when Mr. Unwin swore that you signed these cheques in his presence P- Oh, no, but I heard of it. I heard of it. (Laughter.) Have you been in court any part of this trial ? No. Not though the case involves the moral charac- ter of your wife?—Well, I have been confined to my house for several weeks, and I am by no means well now. Asked further as to cheques signed in the presence of Mr. Unwin. witness said he did not think he saw Mr. Unwiu at all. He admitted, however, on further pressure, that Mr. Unwin dined with him and Ladv Sykes at their hotel. Asked to look at another signature on a docu- ment, witness began to unfold it- Mr. Lawson Walton: No. no: you must not unfold it. Look at the signature. Sir Tatton (cunningly): Ah, but I may be caught. (Laughter.) The Lord Chief Justice: It is not a question of being caught at all. Look at the signature, and sav if it is vour writing Sir Tatton Sykes (examining the signature). Well, it may be. or it may nol. Ireally cannot say, but I don't think it is. The document was then opened and read, and proved to bf a request to 'an insurance society manager to hand over a policy to Lady Sykes. BURSTS ÕF LAUGHTER. In consequence of some bursts of laughter nt the peculiar way ir. which Sir Tatton answered questions and his reiterations, which had a very curious effect. His Lordship said that it was not a case for merriment, and later on, upon further bursts of laughter, he threatened upon a repetition to have the offending parties turned out of court. Asked when first he had reason to think that Lady Sykes had forged his name, Sir Tatton said it was many years ago, and, pressed as to the time, he said it might be a dozen years ago. It was about a matter of £lG,OOO, but he could not tell whether it was bills or what. After some further pressure he admitted that! he considered the signature for the lease of the house in Grosvenor-street was forged by Lady Sykes. That was done at Jerusalem soon after their marriage. They were anxious to get the house, but he was asked too much for it, and he should not have signed the contract himself, and did not do so. Aoked how often Lady Sykes had forged his name, Sir Tatton said it was impossible for him to say. It might be 50 or 100 times, or five or ten. It was not reasonable to ask him. He could not give a single instance, but referred counsel to Mr. Gardiner. Mr. Walton: But I want to hear what you have to say. Sir Tatton Sykes: Wall Mx. Gardiner gave me to understand that I should only be asked about the Jay affair. I have not got anything else up. (Laughter. I Did you regard the proceedings of Lady Sykes as wicked and criminal?—Oh, yes: certainly yes. And vet you took her with you to the West Indies *—I did not take her: she came. She did as she liked. She was only with me a month. Laughter.) Did you not beg her to go with you ?—^h. no. But j'ou were on friendly terms?—Yes, oh yes. Asked as to Lady Svkes meeting him on ;iis> return from America. Sir Tatton admitted that he changed his idea cf araing straight to Sledmere and came to London instead to please his wife, but he denied absolutely that anv con- versation took place between himself ana Lady Svkes on their way up in the presence ot their son Mark about discharging 'he lady's liabilities. He also denied that he said when leaving her in London, that he was going to Beckett's Bank to "settle her enormous lia- bilities." or that he related the statement to his son on the way to the station. He lrad been told that Mark had said that those con- versations took place, hut he had never asekc' Mark anything about it. They were on very anectiona e t "mi?, and he mentioned such mat- to's as httle as possible. Witness was next examined as to his alleged !!oit¡g from London to Gl,?cblere un t he 2nd 0f January. 1897. m company of Lady Sykes nd her maid Sir Tatton said he was positive that it was noc so. and that he went to Sled- mere oil the 1st of January with bis man Simp- son. A this point the court adjourned for lun-, che >11. On resuming after lunch. Sir Tatton Sykes did not put in an appearance, and the Lord Chief Justice ordered that he should be at once sent for, and soon afterwards he entered the box. The first question by Mr. Lawson Walton was about the visit of Lady Sykes to him at Paris in October last. They lunched together, and were on friendly terms. She said nothing about settling up matters, and they went together into an adjoining room, but he did not say to her. It s all fault of the lawyers. He could not remember what he said. He was in a hurry to get away to ;ee the palace ut Versailles, and the aays were then short. Is vour mind altogether a blank about what took place -<o recently?—Well, I was in such a hit TV. Cannot yru say. either in words or in sub- stance, what she said to you, or you said to her?—Well, what I would have said was, "I have paid so much for you I can pay no mGre," hut I could not give a single sentence oi what she r?.id. His Lordship: Would it not be veil to ask it Sir Tatton was with Lady Sykes in any Stock Ecl.an^e transactions* Mr. Lawron asked if Sir Tatton kuew the difference between speculative transactions, to which witness replied that buying South Afri- cans was speculative, but he did not think Alaska Goldfields were speculative, although they paid him 8 per cent. Sir Tatton then enumerated shares which he held in several concerns, which he admitted some were speculative. The Monte Carlo Shares were speculative, but he was getting rid of them. Re-examined by Sir E. Clarke with regard to the cheques for £1..000 each, the signatures to which Sir Taiton said were not his, he explained the fact that they were written upon his own fcvvnke'-s" chequenforms. by saying that he found his bag one day in the sitting-room open, and the cheque forms must have been ab- stracted. On this point Sir E. Clarke said there ap- peared to be a space in the cheque-book imme- diately before the admitted £1.000 cheque-forms, which the cheque-forms might have been torn The case was adjourned till next Monday.
A Man of Many Promises .
A Man of Many Promises LONDONER FINDS A VICTIM IN CARDIFF. Tells Big Stories and Takes in a Young Woman. who Parts with her Money ana Goods. SPECIALLY SET FOR THE EVENING EXPRESS. An extraordinary case was heard on Friday afternoon at Cardiff Police-court (before Alder- man Jacobs and Mr. John Jenkins). Edward Collins, (T Colliuson, 37, was charged on a war- rant that he, between the 24th of October and the 20th of November last, stole a silver watch and two boxes containing bedding, three table- cloths, three pairs of curtains, three towels, wearing apparel, and other articles, value £10, tlie property of Emily Tucker. Prosecutrix was a good-rooming young woman, nicely dressed. Mr. Forsdike, for the prosecution, said pri- st ner wtnt to the girl's house, and represented himself as a chief engineer, to whom a lot of money was coming. He made various state- ments, one of which was that be had sold pro- perty at Barry, and that the money was wait- ing for him at the Royal Hotel. Uptn the stringth of his statements prosecutrix lent hiw money (in all, about £18), and allowed him to lemain m the house as a lodger. After some time he told her that his late owners had asked him to "join the yacht" in London, and he asked her to marry loii and accompany him as stewardess on the yacht. She packed up her boxes with the object of leaving, and pnsoner -ook them away and pawned the contents. He was arrested in London. Detective Stephens weut to his house in Whitecliapel, and received from a woman, named Mitten, certain pawn- 'tickets relating tc articles the prisoner was charged with stealing. Detective Stephens having given evidence. Emily Tucker said prisoner came to her house, 17, Pembroke-road, on the 24tn of October, and represented himself to be a chief engineer, whose ship wa.s at London being re- pa nted, he having just returned from a two years' voyage. Believing him to be a man of means, she advanced him sums of money, accepted liim as a lodger, and k.'pt him for nothing, having always in view the amplj reward prospectively held out. Pri- soner was a man with many promises, and he cost her £18 atogethcr. lie invited her to go to Londou as a stewardess on a boat, and the reply she gave to the invitation was that "she didn t nÙld." the arrangement being that they were first to be married in London. She was to serve as stewardess on a yacht belonging to a gentleman friend of his in London. Some time afterwards prisoner appeared to be grow- ing impatient at her delav in not packing ap her belongings, and remarked that they were "no forrarder" now than who; he first asked her to leave. He induced her to j ick up two boxes of clothing, and said a gentleman friend of his would take them to London to save expense. He explained that she would want the clothing on the voyage. The boxes contained, besdes wearing apparel, bedding, a pair of fans, album, knifes and forks, and other household requisites. One day she missed the watch from the bed- room occupied by the prisoner, and soon after- wards a mackintosh was taken from the passage. One Saturday in November he went away, and she had not seen him since, nor the furniture he had disposed of. Pr:soner closely questioned the witness. whom he said he met in Queen-street. They were strangers, but struck up. an acquaintance, which, according to the prisoner, ripened into reciprocal affection. Accused appeared to be a man with religious proclivities. Anyhow, he queried. "D»dn't we walk out together, and didn't we go to chapel, and Miss Tucker sweetly simpered. "Yes." Prisoner: When I saw you first didn't you offer to take me home?—No. You didn't take me as a lodger?—Yes. I did. You said I might stay as long as I liked?—I said nothing of the sort. Didn't I give you a watch?—Yes, but not that one. You said you owned the Black Swan at Nowpori, and was about to sell it, as you had no further use for the place. Look here. You have shown me up. It is ray turn to show you up. Didn't you sell the tilings to go to London?—No. Evidence was then given by various pawn- brokers as to the disjtosition of the goods by prisoner and a Mrs. Mitten, in whose house he lived at Whitechapel. The mackintosh was r>awned at the shop of Mr. Louis Barnett in B ite-street on the 20th of November. The watch and chain found their way to Mr. Follick's, in Bridge-street. Mr. Henry Lawrence, 191, Commercial- road. London, proved that the woman Mitten pawned wi t h him curtains, table covers, and a counterpane, while prisoner pledged a bag and its contents, and Miss Tucker's family album. Prisoner pleaded guilty, and had no explana- tion to offer and no witnesses to call. Alderman Jacobs waxed warm in pronouncing sentence. Addressing the prisoner, he said, "Your conduct is abominable and atrocious. You are a base, dirty scoundrel. You will be sen- tenced to hard labour for six months. Such as you should be made an example of. Prisoner went below laughing. The girl, too, was seemingly much tickled, and left the court chatting with her friends. She lost sight of the gravity of the situation in the conscious pride of being the heroine of the piece.
JMISAPPROPRIATION OF MONET.
MISAPPROPRIATION OF MONET. WELSH SOLICITOR STRUex OFF THE ROLLS. SPECIAlLf SET FOR THE EVENING EXPRESS. On Friday afternoon Justices Wright and Darling ordered David Thomas Philips, solicitor, who was convicted at Cardiff Assizes of forgery, and Richard Tucker the younger, solicitor at Bridport. who had misappropriated £2,000, to ) be struck off the rolls.
TO-DAYjJJACINfi
TO-DAYjJJACINfi .SPECIALLY SET FOR THE EVENING EXPRESS. PLUMPTON MEETING. Mr J Sheldon, Judge and Clerk of the Scales: Mr R r Aneon, Starter and Handtcapper; Mr H A Stephens, Auctioneer; Mr E IS Brown. (Jierk 01 the O-ur.-e aiul stakeholder: Air J Sheldon. CHib and General Manager. 1 i —The RINGMER MAIDEN STEEPLE- JL • V CHASL of 40 sovs, for four year oids and upwards; weight tor age; A-!nner» extra. Two mites. Old Round Course. Mr i.iurks Hurley, aged. I2st D Reed 1 Air aterer's Sir Excess, ageu, list 71b Mr (j Roller 2 Mr Swan's St Asaph. 4yrs, lOst 21b W Williams i Mr Parker's Vice Chancellor, 5\T", list 61b Capt Aspinall 0 V, inner trained by Batbo, Betting—5 to 4 on Hurley, 5 to 1 agst St Asaph. 5 to 1 agst bir Kxcess. and 100 to 8 agst Yice- Ohancelior. v\"on by fifteen lengths; a very baa tli'rd. Vice Chancellor refused the first open ditch. Ulace started at l.li. Ulace started at 1.1). | > —The NEW VEAK'S STEEPLECHASE J of 40 sovs: winners extra. Three miles iNew Course. the greater part of YLich is over a fair natural country. Mr Soli's Poye's Eye. 5yrs. list 71b Acres 1 Airs L-hai leiis s Queen Lee, aged, list Taylor 2 Capt Kirk's Haddington, aged. list 51b GalJl Asuinall 0 Winner trained by Acres. Betting—Evens cn Pope s Eye. 11 to 10 asjst Queen Bee, and 10 to agst Haddington. on by ten lengths. Haddington refused. (Race started at 1.30i. Queen Bee, and 10 to agst Haddington. en by ten lengths. Haddington refused. (Race started at 1.30i. ,) | -The WORTHING SELLING tmt» vJ STEEPLECHASE of 40 sovs, for four year olds and upwards; weight for age; winners extra. Two miles. Old Round Course. Mr Stone's Ormiston, oyrs. list 101b .Hogan 1 Mr Long s Iberis. 6yrs, list 121b H Brown 2 Mr M Widger's Blue Boy. aged, 12st 31b Morgan 3 Mr Cox's Bridesmaid, aged. 12st 31b Hewitt 0 ivlr Gore's Guardsman II., aged, list 101b Clements 0 Mr Thirlwell's Watergate. 6yrs. list 101b Acres 0 Mr Buckworth's Brown Princess, 5yrs. list 5Ib Birch 0 Winner trained by Widger. betting-j to 1 agst Iberis, 7 to 2 agst Blue Boy. 4 to 1 agst Ormiston. 5 to 1 agst Brides- maid, 6 to 1 agst Guardsman II.. and 10 to 1 agst Watergate. Won by three parts of a length; half a length divided the second and third. Bridesmaid ran cut. iRace started at 2.0). .) Of 1 -The BOSTEL MAIDEN HUSDLE mi • RACE ol 50 sovs, lor four year o.ds and upwards; weight for age, winners extra. Two miles. Mr Marsh s Deep Level, 4yrs. lOst 21b A Nightingall 1 Mr Ha-lliek's Miss Mary, 4yrs, lOSt 2JI.J J Bowls 2 Mr R Gore's Dabehick. 4yrs. lOst 21b Acres -j Lord Cowley's Kellaways, 4yrs, lOst 211) Mr Gordon 0 Winner trained by Mumford. Bettmg--9 to 4 on Deep Level, 3 to 1 agst Dab- chick, and 100 to 8 agst Miss Mary and Kella- ways. v\ on by eight lengths; six lengths between the second and third Pace started at 2.34;. Q f\ -The PADDOCK SELLING HURDLE Oi U RACE of 40 sovs, for four year olds and upwards; weight for age; winner to be sold for 50 sovs. 'JVo miles. Mr Agar » Chulingwortn, ^yrs. lust llb Mr H Woodland 1 Mr Usher's Prymira, 4yrs. lOst 71b Fitton 2 Mr Spaldins's M Alpine, 5yrs, list 31b A Nightingall Mr Long's Scotland Yard, 4yrs. lOst 71d Hogan ( Mr Gold's Luminous, aged, list 71b Mr tjuy Marsh t Mr S J Woodland's Aberdeen, 6yrs, list 7HJ Mr E Woodland 0 Mr J Widger's Pomade Divine, aged, list 71b Morgan 0 Mr R Thirlwell's Petras. 5yrs, list 31b F Parrin 0 Mr G Hampton, jun's Starting Price, 4yrs. lOst 71b Mr Hampton 0 Mr Bhodes's Castasegna. 4yrs, lOst 71b .Birch 0 Winner trained by Prince. Betting—Evens on M Alpine. 6 to 1 agst Chil. lingwcrth, 8 to 1 each agst Prymira. Scotland Yard, and Starting Price, and 100 to 8 agst any other. Won by a neck; two lengths between the second and third. Race started at 3.31. 8QA -The PLUMPTON JANUARY ,OU HURDLE HANDICAP of 50 sovs; winners extra. Two miles. Mr Swan's Koyal Chatter H., aged, list 71b Acres 1 Mr Buckworth's Ben Roe, 4yrs, list 71b Birch 2 Mr Johnson's Bob Black, 4yrs, list 71b Williamson 3 Mr Atkinson's Clonawee, aged, list 6Jb Owner 0 Mr Goddard's Wag Eldridge. 4yrs, list 41b Young 0 Mr Marske's Virginian Rose, 4yrs. lOst 131b Speck 0 Mr R S Fry's Monseignear, aged, 12st lib T Fitton 0 Miss F E Norris's Len. 4yrs. list 91b Morgan 0 Winner trained by Acres. Betting—2 to 1 agst Ben Roe, 9 to 4 agst Mon. seigneur, 8 to I each agst Bob Black, Clonawee, and Virginian Rose. and 100 to 8 agst any other. The winner was objected to on the ground of crossing, but it was over-ruled. Won by half a length; two lengths between the second and third. (Race started at 3.31).
"SPORTSMAN" AND "SPORTING…
"SPORTSMAN" AND "SPORTING LIFE' AUTHENTIC PRICES. (The "EVENING EXPRESS' is the only paper in Cardiff which publishes the "Sportsman" Official Starting Prices). PLUMPTON MEETING. Horse. Jockey. Sportsman. Life. j RINGMER MAIDEN (4). i Hurley (D Read) 6 to 4 on 6 to 4 on NEW YEAR'S STEEPLECHASE (3). Pope's Eye (Acres) Evens Evens WORTHING SELLING (7). Ormiston (Hogan) 4 to 1 ag 4 to 1 a& BOSTEL MAIDEN HURDLE <4i. Dp Level (A Nightngl) 9 to 4 on 9 to 4 oi PADDOCK SELLING (10). Chilngwth (MrWdlnd) 6 to 1 ag 6 to 1 af JANUARY HURDLE (8). Royal Charter (Acres) 100 to 8 ag 100 to 8 ag The above prices are identical with those pub- lished in the "Racing Calendar."
OLD SAMS OVERNIGHT FINALS
OLD SAMS OVERNIGHT FINALS SOLENT BELLE, CARRINGTON (nap), and SERVIUS.
SALE OF HAWFINCH.
SALE OF HAWFINCH. The Sportsman has authority for stating that Mr Horatio Bottoinley has purchased Haw finch from John Porter. The price paid is 5,000 guineas, with a contingency in the event of the colt winning the Derby.
LOCAL BREACH OF PROMISE CASE.
LOCAL BREACH OF PROMISE CASE. DAMAGES, JE75. SPECIALLY SET FOR THE EVENING EXPRESS* At the Sheriff's Court, London, on Friday (.before Under-sheriff Burchell and a jury, the case of Powell v. Davies, an action for breach. of promise of marriage, came on for the assess- ment of damages. The plaintiff. Miss Constance Powell, aged nineteen, a music-hall artiste and pantomime performer, at present living in London, sued the defendant, John Lloyd Davies. a draper's assistant, of Commerce House. Aberdare. Mr. Jacobs was counsel for plaintiff. Defendant was not legally represented, and did not appear in person. Counsel, opening the case. said defendant had; offered plaintiff marriage, but for some un- accountable reason the engagement was broken off after the banns had been published and the date of the marriage fixed-in fact. the bridal party actually attended St. Peter s Church for the wedding, but defendant failed to present, himself, and had since ignored the whole pro. ceeding. The Under-Sheriff commented strongly on the cond fk't of defendant, and the jury asseeaed damages at £75. Judgment accordingly, with costs.
DEATH-AT THE PLAY.
DEATH-AT THE PLAY. SPECIALLY SE7 FOR IHE EVENING EXPRESS. Great sensation was caused on Thursday night in the Opera House, Blackpool, during the per- formance of "Madame Sans-Gene." A man, named John Bostock, a well-known shoemaker and Congregationalist of Bury, who was visiting Blackpool, was among the audience, and during the first act his head dropped back, and death ensued shortly afterwards. He leaves a widow and two sons.
ON THE STOCK EXCHANGE
ON THE STOCK EXCHANGE 1.30 p.m. Call Money in quiet demand at 1 to li. and and Three Month. Hills steady at li to 1 7-16. Bombay and Calcutta Exchange 16d.; Rio 6 15-16d. Business on the Stock Exchange is quiet, but a fairlv good tone prevails aJI round. Consols are steady and 1-16 higher for the Account. Aiftng Home Rails the Scotch Stocks a-re firm, British showing a rise of e and Coras 11. Berthas are also J better on the dividend rumours. Americans are firm. Lake Shore showing an advance of 3. New York Central 2i, North Pacific Preference, Union Pacific, and Louis- ville g, Canadian Pacific i, and others mostly § to 1. Trunks are also i to g higher. Mexican Rails are unchanged. Among Foreign Stocks Inter-Bourse Securities are easier, but Argentine Issues are supported. Mining Shares are easier, except De Beers, which are 5-16 higher.
Advertising
JgLAIBERG S.—19s. Wedding Ring. I B LAIPERG S.-i;d-band Shirt, 2s. 6d. J^LAIBERG'S.—Anaonia Alarm, 4s B LAI-BERG,r,NVelsh Drawers, 2s. 3d. LA1BERGtS^ £ 7 lBet. Diamond H lf-hclop. BLAIBERG'S.— £ 1<VLadies' Chain. 18ct7 •1061*14