MONTGOMERY QUARTER SESSIONS. The October general quarter sessions of the peace -for-the countv of Montgomery were held at the Town Hall. Welshpool, on Thursday, before Captain D. J:L. Mytton (chairman), and Mc A. C. Humphreys-Owen 1 vice-chairman.) The latter presided over the crimi- nal business. There were also on tht, bench Capt. Johnes, Messrs T. Pryce,, S. Powell, Thomas Wat- kin, I". I'J. Hounsfield, Richard Lloyd, R. E.,Jones, Joseph Evans. H. D. 0. Beadnell. -j—— The grand jury was composed as follows: Messrs Wm. Farmer, Broad-street, Welshpool (foreman); Evan Watkin, Red House, Berriew; Richard Jones, Welsh Town; William Owen Pugu, Upper Luggy, Berriew; Abia Morgans, Llanfair; Edwin Lloyd Tudor, Trewern; William Dewy, burgedin, GuilA- field William Evans, Dyffr^n, Berriew; William Riddell. Trallwingollen, Welshpool; John Evans, Berriew; Richard Jones, Taoylian, Llanfair; John Edwards, Cloddia, Kerry Edward Evans, Kerry Charles Jones, Upper Pen war ran, Kerry; Howell Gittins, Berriew; Griffith Jones, ianyffridd; Richard Evans, Caebettin, Kerry Alexandra. Hugnes, Bank, Berriew; William Rogers, Glaslyn, Llantair; Morris Jonea, Tyddyn, Llaagyniew; and Thomas Ridge, Brynelen, Llanfair. The CHAIRMAN, in chargiDg the Grand Jury, said the calendar was unusually large, although none of the cases were of a serious nature. The first case was that of Charles Davies, who was charged with stealing a watch and chain from William Egerton, who had celebrated the royal weddicg with rather too much enthusiasm. On the 6tb July Egeiton was lying on the side of the road, and on awakening saw prisoner standing over him. with tne chain hanging from his hand. Other witnesses would depose to see- ing prisoner there, and the circumstances of the case were sufficiently suspicious to send him for trial be. fore the petty jury. The next case was that of William Pilot, who was indicted for stealing apples and rosebuds from the garden of Mr Palmer, of N ew. town. A constable saw prisoner in the garden, and saw him steal some apples and rosebuds. Prisoaer s brother was standing outside the garden gate, and when he saw him he ealled out Hei e s a bobby," and ran away. The prisoner Henry Charles Mat- thews was charged with having obtained under false pretences food and lodging from Mary Anwyl, of the Black Lion Hotel, Llaugurig. Matthews went to the hotel on a tricycle, representing his father as a clergyman living at Birmingham, and had bought an estate at Dolgeliey. lie also said he was a student at Oxford University. The charge against Elizabeth Jones was for stealing .£5, the money of her em- ployer, Roger Cwen, a draper, of Machynlleth, to whom she acted as housekeeper. She admitted the offence. The last case on the calendar was against Samuel Davies for stealing five eggs, and in conclu- aion he reminded them that twelve of them must be agreed before they could return a true bill. In discharging them the CHAIBMAN said there were no other cases for them to go into, and it was his pleasure to discharge them, with the thanks of the county for their services. MACHYNLLETH.—A MERCIFUL SENTENCE. Elizabeth Jones, 26, late of Machynlleth, was charged with stealing in the dwelling house of Roger Owen, draper, of Machynlleth, X5 in money, on or about the 15th of August.—Mr T. Morris appeared for the prosecution, prisoner being undefended.— Prisoner through the aid of au interpreter, pleaded guilty. In answer to the Chairman she said she had nothing to say. She simply took the money, for which act she expressed her sorrow. After the Chair- man had briefly consulted with the female warder, Mr Morris said he was instructed to IItate that they did not wieh to press the case, Tiie Chairman, I passing sentence, said taking into consideration tu. she bad been in prison for two months, and the C:ir less way in which pro ecutor had left his morey ab .ufc, throwing temptation in the way, she w.u. omy be sentenced to oue day's imprisonment, wh:. ■ woud mean her imme liafce reieaa?,—Prisoner \bauk-1 tha B.,nol1 in WelsQ, and left ,he dOJk. LLANGURIG.-MOBJS FREE FOOD AND LODGINGS. Henry Charl-s Matthews, engineer, was chivgvM with obtaining food and lodgings under lab p v temjes from Mis Anwyl, proprietress of t' e TT.a > Lion Hotel, LUngurig, on July 29th. — i'r son r pleaded guilty, and said he had nothing to say.—Sen- te ced to one month's imprisonment wnh ha labour. BERRIE W. STE,&LING EGGS. ALLEGATIONS AGAINST THE POLICE. Samuel Davies, groom, 53 years of age, was pluc u in the dock on a charge ot st ialin^ five hen's g, the property of Herbert HAnry OweD, on Oetoysi lltb, at Berriew.—Mr E lwards Jones pros-cutjj Prosecutor said he was a sa Idler, living at Bar iew On the day in question he saw prisoner going towards tp his barn. He letched a constable and together they visited the place. Prisoner was liOt then there, but he saw live hou9s eggs there. Toe next morning tut eggs were missing.—Mary Phiilip3, housekeeper o the Lion Hotel, Berriew, said on toe morning of the 11th October, prisoner called at the hotel. She hear him speak to the landlord about cooking some eggs. .P:C. Davies came to the inn afterwards, and cl-jiuie the eggs.-P.C. Daviei3, of Berriew, deposed to re- ceiving information of the theft. He arrested pris- oner, and tolcl him ho wa< suspected of stealing five eggs. In reply, prisoner said I know LOtil,n, &Dout them." Witness then wont into the inn, anu took possession of the eggs P. S. Humphreys said that when prisoner was at Weloh- pool police station, he said "I did sleep in the build- ing last nighr, and I got up this morning. I holllu not have bothered with the five eggs if I had not been drunk."—tMsouer alleged that the last witnesn did not caution him, neither was there a fire at the station, and tie was ju-t about starved.—Iu answer to the Chairman, the police sergeant said he did not ask him questions, and he would swear prisoner male the statement vo.untariiy.—Prisoner said that the facta were nothing of the sort. He (meaning the sergeant) was at him all the night, and told him hww foolish he was to b ther about five eggs. Hd knew that very weil. Addressing tne jury, prisoner said a week before the occurrence he was in prosecutor's service-uziiii *Vel,hpool show da.y. Prosecutor's horses did not win, and all went wrong. Mr Owen owed him 1(K Prisoner slept m the stable, covered over with n horse It was his custom to take all the eggs down lo prosecutor's hcuse, and he wa" doing the same that morning. Overnight he had had too much ber, aart he took them down that morniu- in the hope tnat he would be paid his ten shillings. He had no inteut-on whatever to steal tlicin.-ihe Foreman, after the jury bad deliberated, askt-d n prisoner had offered the eggs for sale at the inll.- The Chairman No, the evidetica given is to show that he intenoed to convert them to his own use — The jury then returned a verdict of not guilty, which announcement was received with slignt applause, but immediately dlpessed —The Chairman (to pris- oner) Before you -go, let me give you a warning You have b,-Pn behaving we 1 for a good loug time, and I hope you will not forfeit your character. NEWTOWN.—ALLEGED THEFT OF APPLES. THE JURY DISAGREE. William Pilot (m bail), ropemaker, of Newtown, was charged wi,4 steiling eight apples and six rose- buds, the property of Josepn Palmer, nursery gar- dener, at Newtown, on the 6th June. Prisoner pleaded not gouty.—Mr Edwards Jones prosecuted, and Mr Ellis Jones-Griffiths defended.—The foimer having opened his case, called Mr Evan Jones, mana- ger of the nursery, who i-aid that on Juue26td David Clayton showed film some rosebuds aiidtpplei, I which he had missed daring the day from Mr Palme-s gar- den.-Croi-e-c-x.,I,uaine,i They were a sptcial sort of apples, and wortia eighieenpence. He could identify the apples and 1 hree of the rosebuds, although it was 21 days after they WEre stolen. He kept no spr c.>ii account of the number of app-les or r"ae8 on thu Vit i- ons trees in the garden. People did go through the garden in order to iret to the railway station quicicy, but prisoner had never had permission to-do so.- Dd.vid Clayton, Parker's Lane, Newtown, said he went to Lewis's Garden, which was alongside pro-e- cutor's garden. In a water butt h3 saw eignt ajtpU.'s F and a bunch of roses. He showed them to the hat witness. and on the next day he accompanied three police officers to ths water butt.-P.C. Davies siid on the morning of tbe day in question he wtis neHr Palmer's nursery, when he saw prisoner between the rose trees plucking Home rosebud, aud afterwards got some apples. H" subsequently saw defendant's brother standing oatsids the garden near the eate, and heard him shout. Look out, here's a bobby," and then ran away. Witness cha=ed aad caught him, but found no property on him. His brother ha-i dís appeared from the garden on witness's coming b*ek. He saw the apples and rosebuds in the water butt, and he took possession of thetn.—Cross-examined He could not swear that the apples and rosebuds he found were the ones that he saw prisoner take. He saw him in the garden for five minutes, and watched him take tlp goods without calling out. Mr Ellis-Jones Griffiths opened the defence by re-1 viewinz the evidence ^oduottd. He reterred to the conduct of the constable in allowing prisoner to cotu- mit a theft, whilst it w is the usual duty of police-! men to repress crime. The question of identity had not been established, and the policeman instead of running after the man whom he 8aw stealing the a p. ples chafed a boy who was outside the garden. He suso-ested that the reason lor the constable's action waVthat he did not know who was in the garden, and rat, after the lad to endeavour to ascertain.—John .F.ilot, father of prisoner, said his sons, prisoner and > another b-other, got up with him at half-past four. I rb"y all went along Kerry road. Withing 20 yards of Garden Lane his boys got ahead of him. Prisoner went down the New lioad, and his son Herbert up the new gardens. They were racing, as boys would do, head of him. Witness followed behind prisoner. Against the Qceen's Head or near Clifton Terrace, he saw two boys jumping over the New Church all i with their hats in their hands, and run down New Church Street. After going down to his warehouse in Picton's yard and on returning witness saw the police-officer, prisoner having gone up to the railway -station about one minute before the constable. Pris- oner could not have got into the garden either on going to the warehouse or in returning from there to the railway station without witness seeing him.- Cross-examined: The boys getting over the wall were factory boys, and where they got over witness found some peas on the pavement. He could walk from his house to the warehouse comfortably in seven minates.-Herbert Pilot, prisoner's brother, said his father, brother and himself on the day in question all left home at the same time. When against the gar-, den gate he and his brother agreed to race, witness going down Garden Lane, and prisoner down Kerry and New Roads. While going along he heard a noise in Palmer's garden, and stopped to ascertain what it was, when the constable jumped out of the hedge. He frightened witness, and he went back in the di- rection of Kerry Road, because the man ran after him. He shouted after witness, and he stopped. Witness was taken back to Palmer's gate, and asked for his name, and who was with him in the garden. Witness replied that he did not know, and when asked if it were his brother, witness remarked that it was not, as prisoner had gone down New Road. His brother dfd not go in the garden that morning. Mr Jones-Griffiths reminded the jury that prisoner chose to be tried by this Court, rather than be dealt with summarily. The case bad altered materially since he last addressed them, and unless his learned friend said that the father's and brother's stories were invented, the jury must come to the conclusion that the constable's evidence was not to be trusted, His friend had endeavoured with great skill to shake the boy's story concerning his stoppage in the lane, I but hearing the noise the lad's curiosity got the bet- ter of his ambition to win the race, and he stopped to see what was going on in the garden (laughter.) The father had proved that prisoner did not enter the garden as had seen him walk in front of him, while he (the father) was walking solidly, and, judging from his appearances in the box, stolidly along the road (renewed laughter.) He did not suggest that the case had been trumped up by the constable, but was one in which he had made a genuine mistake. Mr Elwards Jones, in reply, said his friend had made a point of the policeman having looked at pris- oner for five minutes without making himself seen. That was rather against the prisoner, because, if after looking at prisoner for five minutes, he could not identify him, he never would be able to (loud laughter.) ■■ The Chairman, in summing up, saia the jury had to decide as to the credibility of the policeman or the evidence of the father and brother of the prisoner. There were doubts on both sides. The Foreman expressed a wish to retire, and the jury were absent for about an hour, when the Fore- man returned into court, immediately after the jury had found Charles Davies not guilty. The Clerk of the Court (Mr G. D. Harrison): Have you agreed upon your verdiot? The Foreman: No. The Chairman We will give you another quarter- of-an-hour. Mr Jones-Griffiths: It would be a very good thing to try it before this jury (meaning Charles Davies's jury) again (lcud laughter.) At the end of the quarter-of-an-bour the jurymen were brought into the court again, The Clerk of the Court: Have you now agree iinon vour verdicts The Foreman We cannot agree. The Chairman: As the old practice of starving juries has been abandoned, we n:u.t discharge you. The Foreman We aie all agreed except one The Chairman: It is very kind of you to have given 30 much thought, time, ani attention to he case It WolS theu agreed by mutual consent otCoanseltc have the case remitted to the Assizes. Prisoner WèF. allowed bail, bia father standing seourity for < £ -(), NEWTOWN.—CELEBRATING THE ROYAL WEDDING Charles Daviss, 25, fitter, was charged with steal- ing a watch and chain, the property of WiLiair. £ g«iton, at Lbullwchaiarn, on the O^h July.—Pri^ ner pleaded not guilty.—Mr Ellis Jon s-Gnffith- conducted the prosecution.— Prosecutor, a tailo iivina at the Canal, Newtowu, said about pix or saver o'clock ou the 6 h July he was in Barnes Lare, iyi, down, going to sleep. He opened his eyes and sa prisoner standing over him with his chain in hl- hand. Witness said That is my watch," and pris- oner r ui away. It was worth .£578 6d.—Tho Chair- man Were yon aober?-I was not. Hi w much bad you to drink?—I cannot say. You had drunk s much, so iarge a quantity, tint you are unable t, teil how much P-I could understand qu te we'l what I wa doing-You had hal some beer ?—Yes, sir Thomas E. Matthews, of Llanfair*roa.i, Newtown, pattern weiver, said he saw prisoner in the lane as he was pap-t-ing it. He also saw prosecutor. Pri soner was 40 or 50 yards from witness, wiio assisted Egerton to get up.-Prisoner: Was he drunk r.i sober? He was drunk.—The Chairman: Could he stand upright? Yes, sir.—Could he walk? H- walked ail right going down the lane—Do you know- prisoner well P I have seen him many times.—Mar y Harris, wife of John Harris, Bryn-street, N,,wto-ii, said she saw Egerton in the Barnes Lane, and he asked her if she had seen a man in the lane. She saw pri- soner just before.—P.S. Morgan said he was ir; Frankwell-street when he saw prisoner pass up thir street. He stopped him, and said he ihousrht he wanted him, and then searched him. Just as he was about to search prisoner, the latter said, "Y• n seem to knew all about it," and drew out cf his pocket the watch produced, and dropped the chain out of another pocket. Prosecutor identified the articles. At the time prisoner was committed for trial he said he picked up the watcb and chain in thi road, a little farther aloLg where he' found Egert UJ lying on the road drunk. He was covered with dust, and looked as if he had been rolling aboat ox. the road. He went up to Egerton, thinking the wateh and chain might be hie, to give it him, and when he touched him, Egerton said, it, let me alone." He tried to get up, but was too diunk.—The jury returned a verdict of not guilty, stating that the" thought there was a doubt.—The Chairman, in dis- charging prisoner, said they knew something abou' him, and he seemed to be entering upon a course which would certainly lead him into great trouble He strongly urged upon him to take warning. THE REV. EVA.N JENKINS AGAIN. Mr Jones-Griffiths made an application inregpec, to the appeal of the Rev Evan Jenkins, of Man&fon, at the last quarter sessions, against a conviction against him. The appeal was dismiss d, and tt^ rev. gentleman was ordered to pay 40 shilling? costs The costs had not been paid, although several appii cations had been made to the respondent's solicitors and his sureties, but they had received nothing. H; applied for the recognisances to be estreated for the purpose of the costs.-The Uhairmm said th--re was some question at the time the appeal was made as to its being out of date, but that objection was waived, and the ca?e was proceeded with. It appeared to him that they could not estreat tho recognisances without notice having been giveR to the sureties, iu older to afford them an opportunity of saying some- thing u;>on tha subject. Before making the order they must give notice to the sureties, and make the app.ication at the next sessions. CIVIL BUSINESS. Captain D H. Mytton presided over this business, which cvas purely formal. Messrs Thomas Watkin, Mathrafal, and Thomas Pryee, Pentreheilen, were added to the committee for the inspection of paux>er lnnatics. In place of Messrs Robert Mitchell Hawkes, IVlachynlleth, the name of Major Bor^ali ivlts substituted, and Captain Beadnell for that of the late Mr William Thomas, Llanidloes, on 'be cora- in ttee for the IDspecticn of houses licensed fo. the custody of lunat ics.-The county licensing commit- tee was re-appomted.
The E jrl end Countess of Powis will give a ball at Powis Castle on Tuesday evening, to their tenantry and the chief tradespeople of Weishpool. I The death of Mr Howel W. Lloyd, Rbggat, Montgomeryshire, and Abingdon Villas, London, ia his 76th year. is announced. Mr Lloyd was at one I tim'1 a clergyman in the Church of England, whtii he held a vain tble living before be 'verted to the Church of Rom*1. Ha was well versed in all the braaches of Welsh history, and was an expert in reading oi-i manuscripts. During the latter part of his ilif he spent a great deal of his time in translating Catholic hymns into Welsh. He also rendered srr-at assistance to the late Chevalier Lloyd, of Clochfaen, Llangurig, in connection with the history of Fadog. He used to contribute a great deal to By- gones." HARNESS'S ELECTROPATHIC BELT WILL CURE YOU Quickly ar d effec'ively of nervous and ->a:nfal affecti- ns, such as Paralysis, Hysteria, Neuralgia, Heanache, Epilopsy, Indigestion, Rheumatism, Gont, Lumbago, Weakness, Depression of Spirits aad wn.ub or Energy. Wear one and enjoy the p!ea*r.rea of life. Write describing your case to Mr C. B. Harnet-3, 52, Oxford street, London, who will send you advice I f-pa of charge, with pamphlet on any special corn- pMnt. i
THE BANKRUPTCY FRAUDS BY A SHREWSBURY AUCTIONEER. The Shrewsbury Borough Quarter Sessions were THE BANKRUPTCY FRAUDS BY A SHREWSBURY AUCTIONEER- The Shrewsbury Borough Quarter Sessions were opened on Monday at the Shirehall, Shrewsbury, I before Mr A. R. Jelf, Q.C., recorder. In commenting on the case of J. C. Jones the Recor- der said in old times,when a man became a bankrupt, he was the victim of a good deal of cruelty and harsh treatment, but now a more enlightened view pre. vailed in the country. This case came under the Debtors Act, 1869, and the charge against the defen- dant was one of felony, that of quitting England and carrying off with him property that ought to have been divided amongst his creditors. If a bankrupt to-day left his property to be fairly divided amongst his creditors, and gave all information to those who had the division of his estate then all would be done that was required. The statute was very explicit, and stated that any person who had been adjudged a bankrupt, quitted England and took with him or made preparation for taking with him property amounting to X20 or upwards that might have been divided amongst his creditors should suffer im- prisonment if the jury were of opinion there had been fraud. It appeared that whilst in London defendant obtained a credit note on the Bank of Australia, and afterwards left England with it. After proceedings had been instituted Jones was arrested under a warrant at Port Said and brought back to England. The offence, if proved, was a most serious one, which the law marked as a felony, and treated as theft. If a true bill was returned the defendant would have an opportunity of setting up any defence; if he liked, the defence that in what he did he had no intention to defraud. The grand jury returned a true bill. John Charle& Jones, auctioneer, formerly of Shrewsbury, was then formally indicted, having been adjudged a bankrupt, for unlawfully quitting Eng. land with a sum of £ 200 in his possession with intent to defraud his creditors. He pleaded not guilty and said he was unrepresented by counsel. Mr Spearman and Mr L. Jackson appeared for the Crown. Before the opening statement of counsel the accused asked that certain documents which were taken from him at Port Said should be restored to him. They had nothing whatever to do with his estate. One was a memorandum book, and there was also a bank book and a diary. After some discussion between the accused and the learned Recorder, some of the documents referred to were handed over to Jones, who was also allowed at his own request to have a table in the dock on which to lay his papers. The Court was crowded with Shrewsbury trades- men and others. I 1 Mr Spearman, in opening the case, described tne charge laid against the accused, and said that about nine years ago he left this country and went to New Zealand, where he set up a household and lived with his wife and children, and where he carried on business for something like seven years. Whether that business was successful or not they could not tell. He came back to Shrewsbury in 1891, soon after which be opened an account with the Birming- ham Bank at Uttoxeter, which he called his private account. In 1892 he opened an account with the Bir. mingham Bank at Shrewsbury, which he termed his business account, and about the same time he also set up as an auctioneer, and opened a business estab- lishment at the Welsh Bridge. His business seemed to consist of obtaining furniture and other articles from manufacturers for which he gave bills, and in transmitting goods to auctioneers in other towns who made him advances. The business was not successful and in April of this year the position was that his liabilities amounted to something over ^750, whilst the whole of his assets as realised iu bankruptcy amounted to about .£450, therefore as a mere matter of fact, he was hopelessly insolvent. He was in the position that he owed money to newspaper firms ix* Shrewsbury, and he gave a bill to a pers .n nuned Noakes who traded under the name of Swanborough, for piano to the amount of .£37 10s, He also had a bill for £ 30 18s at three months, which he gave t.) a man named Hands, and this was also falling due. For some reason beat known to Mr Jones, in the beginning of April be was desirous to put cff payiag the bills, and seemed-to be imbued with a desire to postpone payments. On April 5 he sent two cheques to a newspaper office in Shrewsbury, one for £ 4 13s post-dated April 17, and one for X5 which was also poat-da.ed. Shortly after the accused had a sale in Shrd7vsbuv> las'ei twc days, and thg am uLt red.li"eJ with the exception of about -66 wa3 X34 18; 9d, a.nd lie sold a piziio to a Mrs Bowen for X 1,5 10.5 about the same time. There was no necessi.ty for postponing payments, because he had in the bank in Shrewsbury .£150 odd, and a'so some money in the oank at Uttoietcr. Oq April 12 be wrote 10 the manager of the Uttoxeter bank, enclosing a cheque for £ 20, asking him to send him a banker's draft (IJO: 4il0j oa t1 e London agents, as he T, M4 going to !jo;:don, hoqaid, on the following day to purchase a arge quantity of wi:e, and that he would put the oalancj right when he returned. The cheque for £ 20 which he enclosed brought his account in the Uttoxeter bank to .£89. He added to his letter to ,tie manager of that bank, My partner brings in bid capital on May 1st." The cheque he sett to Uttoxeter was made on the Shrewsbury branch, and t also was post-dated. The Uttoxeter bank sent him a draft upon their London Agents, Messrs Barclay, Bevan and Co. On April 14 things were getting near a final point. and at four o'clock in tit, dternoon just as the Shrewsbury bank was about to close for the day Jones went there and drew out by cheque the sum of X120. Tilis was not sufficient for him, and seeing the manager, Mr Gill, had a conversation with him, and explained he wanted mere money than the sum mentioned, and asked to be allowed to over-draw his account. The maoager thereupon asked what security he had, and Mr Jones productd a bill of exchange for .£50, which he gave as security. This was accepted, and he was given a further sum of £ 20, his account therefore being overdrawn if that bill was not met when it came to maturity. He had drawn every farthing from the Uttoxeter Bank plus Y,20, by reason of his giving a post-dated cheque, he drew out every halfpenny out of the Shrewsbury Bank in addition to iJ20, on the faith of the bill for .£50. Altogether on April 14 he had in his possession about £ 270. The money, < £ 140, received from the Shrewsbury Bank, wail all in X5 notes. Why in the name of patience was Mr Jones collecting all this money together for ? He said he was going to London to buy wine. He never did. If a gentleman went up to London to buy wine would he take everything belonging to him from his lodg- ings, even his diity clothing? On April 15 he went to Messrs Barclay, Eevan and Co. with the draft for X89, and obtained it in X5 notes. On April 17 Jones telegraphed to his clerk at Shrewsbury to say he would be back that nis-ht. and this dav the inrv would bear in mind was the day on which several of the cheques would be presented. He wired to bis clerk, "Hold everything over until I come back." Mr Jones then went to a London solicitor, and gave him a power of attorney because he was going to be absent from Europe for a time. His clerk in Shrews- bury got a letter the next day, in which Jones said "I wired you this morning, and now I may say you'll never see me. again. You know I suffer from a very painful disease. I find no cure, I shall do away with myself. I am truly unhinged, and having no frieuds what have I to live for. I am better off ■ut ot the world than in it." He seemed absolutely to have vanished from the face of the earth until May 25, when he went to the offices of a shipping o mpu-ny in London and took a passage in ship -tarting for Now Zealand on June 2. He paid for his passage, and at the time remarked that he was carrying out his money out with him in a letter of -vh-:ch he exhibited to the clerk, and to whom Lie prolessed to be a person of some celebrity. He I said hrf was going out to Melbourne, and he wanted t) send £ 200 to meet him there and he was well known in Melbourne. A letter of credit was a direc- tion to the manager of a bank in Melbourne, or eise- where to credit a person, in this instance the accused, m a sum of money and to place the sum to the debit of the office which gave the letter of credit. The If-tter of credit in question, contained the words ■ Honour the gentleman who presents you with our letter of credit to the ex entof £ 200." This docu- ment was purchased with the bank notes which were sriv n him by Messrs Barclay, Bevan and Co. With this document in his possession on June 2, Mr Jones sailed, and at a subsequent date having reached Port Said, be was arrested and detained until the arrival of a.n officer from Shrewsbury, who took charge of dm and brought him back. The letter of credit had not been seen since it was shown to the shipping clerk; what had become of it probably only the accused knew. He bad an opportunity at Port Slid of posting it on to New Zealand, but < h thcr he did so or not he was unable to say. The question for the jury to settle wae whether they were satisfied that Mr Jones took money with him, which was divisible amongst his u creditors with the intention of defrauding them. He had given no explanation of the state of his affairs in the Bankruptcy Court on the ground that as ciitEioal proceedings were pending any statement miurht prejudice his position. Now the accused would have opportunity of giving an explanation. The jury would undoubtedly listen to it with great interest, and give it due weight, and on behalf of the Crown he might say he was equally anxious with the jury to hear the explanation. But the theory of the Crown was this, that Mr Jones knew his position from b'iginning to end, that he knew the rope had pretty well run, that; he knew what he owed, and also t.tui-1 he knew what his assets were, and that ho intended to leave the country and defraud his cred:- tcr.?. I was for tl'e jury to say whether they took this view of the matter or not. t'harlea Farmer produced the file of Mr Jonee's bankruptcy. Frank Cariss, daputy official receiver in bank- ruptcy, said the accused's liabilities were < £ 756, and his assets .£100 9a 6d. In cross-examination by the defendant, witness said the adjudication was made on May 13, on the petition of Reuben Cartwright, of Birmingham. Witness took his instructions from the Court and did not communicate with Mr Cartwright in any way. There was a meeting of creditors, but no quorum was formed, and no decision was come to. The Prisoner If the creditors saw no reason to in. terfere why did you have me arrested ?—Witness: The matter was discussed at the meeting, but as I say, BO quorum was formed. Prisoner Then it was not a properly constituted meeting ?—Witness: No. Then what made you send after me and have me arrested ?—Because I knew you had taken away your property. I formed my own opinion with regard to that. Prisoner spoke of the several authorities who ap- peared to be interested in the affair, and said he had to submit to three remands, after eight week's incar- ceration at Port Said. He then asked who found the money fcr the whole of these expensive prosecutions or persecutions ?-Witness: The Public Prosecutor. Then I take it that it does not come out of the I estate?—It is impossible for me to say wnat propor- tion will come out of the estate, and what proportion will be paid by the Treasury. The Recorder thought this was a matter of law. If the prosecution were properly instituted the costs would be paid as the Statute directed. Prisoner said he wanted to show what the creditors were likely to save by the transaction. The Recorder: No, you cannot go into that, here. Prisoner: You sent certain instructions out to briDg me back ? Who gave the instructions to Sergt. Lloyd r- Witness He received his instructions from the Solicitor to the Treasury, but they came from us originally; WBL(MJVO I believe those instructions were given in writing J -No; I should say not.) WeTe your instructions to Lloyd, after I had been imprisoned at Port Said, and after what I had suf- fered, to bring me back steerage, and the police- sergeant. to come back second-class? (laughter). The Recorder I must disallow that question. Prisoner: The police-sergeant who had me in cus- tody was separated from me. The Recorder I am afraid we cannot go into the question of first and second class (laughter). Confine yourself to the more serious question which you have to meet. Prisoner: A great deal has been said about a box with some articles addressed to my son. Mr Spearman I have not said a word about it. Prisoner: It was said before the magistrates, and my mouth was then Bhut. I had no means of denying it. (To witness) You know, Mr Cariss, when I was before the Registrar, that it was said I had caused a box to be packed with articles going to Captain C. C. Jonesr-Yes, it was mentioned. I desire to say there was nothing in it belonging to my creditors. Surely I have right to send my son articles of my own private wear ?—I have not seen the box. fcftiaorilc ;v iwiSMwa Will you take my word mac the goods it contains do not exceed .£2 in value ?—Yes. Cross-examination continued: So far as could be ascertained the liabilities were .£700, this sum includ- ing trade liabilities, .£49 2s lOd; goods purchased from wholesale houses, .£391 lis 8d; law costs, 21 15s 8d; sales unpaid, .£2316s.-Prisoner I may take it that the whole of my liabilities to rank against the estate will not be more than £ 350 P—Witness: I have accounted for over.2400 already.-Prisoner: I have advanced .£52 to a gentleman in Shrewsbury that has been paid, but it Biiil ranks against the estate.—Witness There is a balance of t20 due to the bank for the unpaid cheque. Without the bills the liabili iea would be about .£500.-Prisoner: What w.is tha amount realised by the sale at the Welsh Bridge?—Witness: .£ï3 14. 3d; that's the gross amount. —Prisoner: Talk about me giving tning* away I think the good:! were given away at that price. Should you be surprised to hear 'hat they werefuily wor- h £ 100 ?—Witness I should be sur- prised to hear it. Piisoner: I have an important question to ask, and I am iu o you will give me an answer correctly. Sup- posing you had found 30s in the X at my establish- ment over the We sh Bridge, would you l ave con- sidered it your duty to have done as yuu did P The Recorder: I really muet disallow that question because we have plenty to do in dealing with the facts. I am anxiou3 that you should have every latitude. Prisoner: Then I put this question. Sliou'djcu have arrested me uuder the circumitonces entirely as a matter of commercial morality?—Witness: I think so. You took possession of all my (offects-bank b,oks, ch quo books, and files, and you found everything in- Uc'? — Yes, everything, except the p oporty (Iaughte.). Did you find a single scrap interfered wLh or an erasu o? Was act everything honest and straight- forward?—I cannot say that. I found all your bjoks and papers. After what you found do you think I went away with the intention of defrauding my creditors ? Would these be the acts of a dishonest man ? The Recorder: You must not ask that. The wit- ness is here to tell us fact3. Prisoner When before the Registrar di 31 refuse to arm ,vcr a siogle question that the Registrar said I uught to answer?—Witness Yes, several questions. I do not recollect having complimented you on having answered the questions straightforwardly. Do you consider the present mode of conducting bankruptcy courts to be beneficial to creditors ? (laughter). The Recorder Rea-ly, Mr Jones, that's a matter to be discussed in Parliament (renewed laughter) In answer to a further question, witness said he could not put his finger upon a fraudulent erasure in the books and papers found. John Clay, reporter, Shrewsbury, proved his trans- cript of shorthand notes taken at defendant's public examination. Robert Watkics, of Messrs Watton and Son, and John Thomas Parsons, of Messrs Leake, proved re- ceiving from defendant post dated cheques for amounts owing to the respective firms.-In cross-examination the former witness said he had known defendant for upwards of forty years, and had never known him to do any dishonourable act. Arthur Frank Noakes, of London, said he carried on business under the name Swanborough and Co., and was a manufacturer of pianofortes. He had proved against the defendant's estate for .£55 13s, for piano- fortes supplied to him. Samuel Hands, of Birmingham, said defendant for- warded him £ 30 IBs by cheque, which was dis- honoured on Aoril 17. Evidence was also given by Charles Kynaston brewer, Wem, A. C. R. Williams, solicitor, London, who prepared the power of attorney, Thomas Dolbey, porter, Waverly Hotel, Cheapside, Miss Cranstoun, Waverly Hotel, who said defendant gave her X200 to keep for him for three days, Fred Skidmore, auction- eer, Wolverhampton, who said he advanced defend- ant .£30, Thomas Lee, aged 18, Shrewsbury, who was employed by defendant as clerk, and who in cross- examination by defendant, said he know defendant was generally much affected both before and after sales by auction Elizabeth Bowen, Hotspur-street, Shrewsbury, who gave evidence as to the purchase of a pianoforte from defendant, Arthur Gill, manager of the Shrewsbury Branch of the Birmingham and Midland Counties Bank, who described transactions between the bank and the defendant, and Mrs Evans, Mountfields, Shrewsbury, defendant's former land- lady. R. E. Clarke, solicitor, Shrewsbury, was called by the prosecution, but was not examined by counsel. Replying to the prisoner, witness said ha told prisoner he thought there was an opening for him in Shrewsbury as an auctioneer, but suggested he could not start unless he had the necessary means, and also some friends to assist him. Prisoner gave collateral security for something like £ 240, and an ad. vance of .£100 was made to him. Had known the pri- soner about 30 yeirs. There had been large transac- tions between the prisoner and the firm of Clarke and Sons in reference to a brewery company some years ago. Witness would not have taken the prisoner up and started him in business unless he believed he was a respectable man. The prisoner I thank you very much, Mr Clarke. The Recorder: Did you see the letter about the prisoner having committed suicide P Witness: Yes I did, and I said, It is all bosh; Jones is not the man to commit suicide, and I am confident ho has not left England at the present time." Mr Spearman You have given him an excellent character. Do you mean to say you are so well ac. quainted with his past life as to be able to speak to his character as a commercial person ?-I never saw a dishonest act on Jones's part in my life. That is not the question. Are you sufficiently acquainted with his past life to be able to give an opinion ? Do you know anything about his past life in Shrewsbury ?-I must have kuown something in 30 years. Did he leave Shrewsbury in general high credit or under circumstances of some suspicion.—To the best of my knowledge I should say he left as creditable as any man going to seek business in another coun- try. Do you really say so ?-I say so. Then there was nothing in your view to require reinstatement ?-Certainly not. vVhon he left this time was he owing you any money?—Not to my knowledge. If he did, I was secured to my own satisfaction. Did you take steps to bring him back?—I did in this way- Did you take any steps ?-I refused to take steps to bring him back. Did you give an indemnity to the Home Office?- Yes, on condition that I should not be put to any expense whatever. They were compelled to have some one who would give an indemnity, and the tele- gram was to the effect that it would be paid out of the assets of the bankrupt. Was there any understanding to this effect between you and the Home Office P—No, but there was be. tween me and the Assistant Official Receiver. Then the Home Office would not go to the expense unless they were indemnified against any cost P- Yes, on a frivilous charge. Then was the understanding with Mr Caries this If you paid anything, you should be repaid out of the estate as far as the assets wentP-Yes. But as between you and the Home Office you were bound to indemnify them against all costs?—It was all done by telegraph. That is quite sufficient for the purpose. At the time you gave the indemnity, Jones owed you money, and the security had not been met?—Yes, but it has now. Sal —i 1 —nr—*ir~irnr wmwi Charles Griffin Dean, cashier in the London branch of the Bank of Australia, spoke to the prisoner hand- ing in notes to the amount of E200, and receiving in exchange a letter of credit on the Melbourne branch. Prisoner said he was & brother of Sir Pryce Pryce- Jones, and witness endorsed these words on the re- quisition note. Mr Spearman now called upon the prisoner to pro- duce the letter of credit, noticed having been served upon him to do so. Prisoner said he had no means of going to the other end of the world to get the document. Mr Spearman said the letter had been traced into the possession of the prisoner. What had become of it was not part of his J a" The Recorder did not think he could admit a copy of the letter. He thought it had been given in evi- dence that the document had been sent on to pri- soner's wife. Mr Spearman That is assuming it is a document which can be endorsed. The Recorder; Have you the least doabt that somebody has obtained the money from the bank at Melbourne? Mr Spearman Certainly not; it is at Melbourne T-ht) Jieooraer aeciued tnat he could not admit the notice. Mr Dean's cross-examination was then continued. He said that a letter of credit was not a negotiable instrument neither was it transferable. Cross-examined: He certainly did converse with him (prisoner) at the bank. The requisition form was filled in by a junior clerk, and witness was stand- ing within two yards of him. Prisoner: I say you had nothing to do with me in any shape or form until the document was placed in your hands. Witness: I claim to know something about my business, and I say I should not have initialled the requisition note unless I had received the notes and entered them in a book. Prisoner I don't like to be offensive, especially at the present moment; but have you made an affirma- tion ? Witness > Why do you ask such a question Prisoner: \V nat are you in religion ? The Recorder That is not a proper line of cross- examination, Mr Jones. Witness: I decline to answer the question. Prisoner: I wish to test the truth, because I am fully convinced that Mr Dean has made a gross mis- take as to what passed that morning. The Chairman Making a mistake is one thing, and not telling the truth is another. Prisoner: You know the difficulty I am labouring nnder in not being a trained lawyer. (Te Witness): You say You wrote certain words upon the document? -Witness: Yes. Will you kindly write down these words, Said he was a brother of Sir Pryce Pryce-Jones?—Witness did so and handed the paper to prisoner, who said the writing showed that witness did not mark the document; as described. The Recorder, having examined the document, said he was not at all struck with the point, but prisoner could put it to the ju:y it he liked. Edwin Bulmer Hook, clerk to Messrs Anderson, shipping agents, said prisoner paid X20 for his pas- sage out. Prisoner told witness that he had a draft in his possession for X200 or £ 250, and he also said who his relations were. Cross-examined Prisoner told him that his posi- tion was not as good as it used to be, and he wanted a good berth for very little money. Witness saw nothing to lead him to believe that prisoner was ruu- nipg away with his country's money. Prisoner might have said he had dropped the word Charles in his name because he did not wish his friends to know tuat he was going tiiird class. Prisoner: Is it an unusual thing for passengers to go in another name?—Witness: They do go in another name. Prisoner 'Supposing a gentleman is running away with some one else's wife? (loud laughter). D, you think it right for the employees of a laree public conip my to act, as it were, the private detective ?-- I am not aware that they do. To whom dirl yuu gi ve mtormation about the draft ? Two gentlemen called upon me and I gave them what particulars I knew. May I take it they were neither medical men nor clergyman P—Yea. More likely detectives from the Home Office ? Yes. The Recorder: It seems I hat two gentlemen came from the Home Office and found out the truth (laughter). I don't think you are doing any good I)y this line of conduct. John Heaney, an army pensioner and clerk to Mr Jones in his business as an auctioneer, said when Mr Jones went away fiom Shrewsbury be said he was going to London for a week. A telegram was after. wards received to the effect th t he was coming back that night. The telegram also said, Hold over all matters until to-morrow." There were enquiries for him during his absence, but all matters were held over.—Replying to the prisoner, witness said to the beat of his belief the prisoner carried on his business honestly, and that to the be-t of his ability. While in Shrewsbury he discharged all his liabilities. Sergeant Lloyd deposed to receiving the prisoner into custody at Port Said. Witness said to prisoner. What about the £ 200 that you sent to Australia ?" and Jones replied, My boy, they cannot touch that." -Cross-exmined: You had plenty of opportunities for posting letters. I cautioned you before taking you into custody. My instructions for bringing you back were in writing.—Prisoner: Were yourinstruc- tions tc bring me back steerage and come yourself second class?—The Recorder: I cannot allow that question to be put.—Prisoner: I want to show tLat there is a good deal of persecution on the part of the authorities who are prosecuting me. Mr Spearman said at that late hour he would not address the court. The prisoner then made a speech, which occupied a long time in delivery. He said he must. ask the jury to bear with him, as he was hardly fit, mentally or physically, to address them upon an important matter like this; but circumstances had compelled him to conduct his own defence, and they weuld readily understand, if it was difficult under ordinary circum- stances for one man to defend another upon a very serious and trying charge like that, how it must be still more difficult to him when speaking of his own affairs instead of other people's. He had not the slightest ability or talent for such an undertaking, but if be failed in those attributes, he hoped his deficiencies would be made up by truthfulness, by candour, and by innocence of purpose. He would not deviate to the right or left, but was determined to place himself before them in a true, unsophisticated manner. He did not want sympathy; he did not crave sympathy; but what he had passed through during the past five months had completely altered his state of health and rendered him unfit for the trial he was undergoing. He would endeavour, how- ever, to put his case before them in the simplest manner possible. He would divide it into six small parts and try to make them form one link and if he succeeded in completing the link he should have done something towards asking the jury for their verdict. But he really did not know what the exact charge was that he had to meet. LThe Recorder here fx- plained the section of the Act under which the pro- ceedings were taken.] Proceeding, Jones said his defence was simple enough. It was this When he went to London he went for a specific purpose—for the purpose of purchasing a quantity of wines. He went to the brokers and offered a certain price for a large parcel, but they did not accept his offer; hence it was he did not purchase. It had been acknowledged that when he went to London he was suffering so very much indeed in health that he hardly knew what he wa3 doing. He wrote the letter to his clerk when he was thoroughly un- hinged from his complaint, and certainly in his cooler moments he never intended carrying out the threat contained in it. He found that the business ia which he was engaged was not suitable to his health, and, perhaps being more impulsive than most people, he made up his mind that he would go away and bring back his son to take up the running, as it were, of the business. If his son had come, he knew the business would have been a success. They had it from several witnesses, including Mr Clarke, that this was no new idea sprung forward at the last moment. With re-1 gard to the money, it was not denied for one moment that he brought £100 in hard cash from New Zealand, j He placed the money in the bank for the purpose of assisting his family; it had nothing whatever to do, with bis business in Shrewsbury, and he looked upon this Uttoxeter account as one entirely belonging to Mra .loni:S and her son. If he had done anything, it was that he had committed an act of indiscretion, but he hoped that was not a criminal matter. No doubt he was indiacrect in not communicating with his creditors before he took the step he did of start- ing for New Zealand, but what did he do? Surely he was not acting as a dishonest man when he consulted J a London solicitor and asked him to draw np a pcWW of attorney in favour of Mr Clarke, who at ti-at time had X120 in his hands, which he (prisoner) bA4 2M& drawn ardX240 as collateral security In bis looms there were goods worth X150 at the lowest ef.j11lato —ample for all parties until he came back, as be la* tended to do. If he.had been allowed to fetch his MO, the creditors would have been in a different position to what they were now. He looked upon the xacBey which he drew from the bank as money not beiocging to the estate, not belonging to him, but belonging to those who ought to have received it loug ago. He defied the prosecution to say that he had for- warded a single penny to his family in New Zealand. He was held up to be a clisbobest man, but was it the act of a dishonest man to leave everything behind him ? Why be bad actually provided food for the prosecution to make up* their case, He might have destroyed the whole of the books and so have prevented their finding oUt, how the estate stood; but he had no more of going to Australia when he went up to London than the man in the moon. He had been amongst theIa for 43 years, had conducted a very large businew, AIA always paid 20s in the pound. That day an immense power had been brought against him, which he was hardly in a position to fight. The other side pressed for a conviction because they had everything to gain and nothing to lose. These gentlemen seemed deter- mined to fight to the end, but had a single creditor expressed a desire to do so? No; and had these gentlemen proceeded under a different clause of tbfr Act they might have saved a good deal. If be had not been arrested at Port Said he should have been back by now with every penny of the money owing to his creditors, and he would have mbt them in an honourable manner as he always had dome. What- ever might be the verdict of the jury, it wonM not alter his couise in the future. He was prepared to meet his creditors in an honourable way, aadwaw determined, let the verdict be what it may, to relkict into the hands of Caesar the things which were Caesar's, and to God the things which were God's. He hoped the jury would carefully weigh these matters and deal with him as Englishmen, remembering that they had privileges as well as responsibilities. He reminded them that he had been in custody for five mcmtboolma no one knew but himself what he had passed through. He could assure them that the trial was such that he hoped his greatest enemy would never have to go through it. Let them remember that the prayerof fourteen sons and daughters and a mother were going up asking them to consider seriously as to his futnre,, to release him to them with a clear character, with his integrity unsullied, and Lot to brand him with tile broad arrow of the criminal code of England. If he done anything wrong, it was purely a matter of indis- cretion and, so far as the X200 was concerned, the prosecution had never asked him one word abollt it- Any reparation he was willing to make, but no OWN- tures had been made to him in any shape or fbfJUj-*r At the conclusion of the prisoner's address there wae some slight applause in Court. The Recorder, summing up the case, said twenty-six witnesses had been called, and the jury had listened to the whole of their evidence with great attention. The prisoner had not had the advantage of counsel, but he had been described during the prosr"ee of the case as a shrewd business man, and bad shown it in the conduct of his own case that day. He (tho Recorder) would not trouble the jury at that late hour of night (11-30) by going through the great tnasfi of evidence, but would very briefly point out esaefcljr what the prosecution had undertaken to prove, and what was the onus that rested upon the pi teener* There was iu the first place no doubt that prisoner was a bankrupt oa May 13th. Did he quit JSuglaod? Not Shrewsbury or Shropshire, tor that waa not an offence, but England ? lc was not disputed that on June 2nd he lid leave Engiai d and started for Melbourne. Did he quit tho country with money to the amount of £ 20 a,d mor ? Ho did, ther" ws DO question. Waa that moue\, money that shoald have oeen left for his creditors ? Tne prisoner nowgh* to make it out that he had a private account, but all his property waa his own property in the bankruptcy » there could be no suca thing as a distinction b;VW«en a business ati-I a private account. In his ba.i>nj nptcy examination tin prisoner had admitted thus. he took with him £ 200, and t, ar, he took out the letter of credit Tha document be took away with bim: SO that it wa" not available for ii:s ceditoris hwre In E gland, but it would have been avai abio to binwelf abroad. Could they have any doubt of thia? No reason whatever had been given why that money should not have been divided amongst th3 —there was no evidence that it belonged to the wife or the sou. Tu,, prisoner had previously boen dealing with large sulli, of moiiey, and had put questions to the witne.-ses or some oi them to prove his boueaty. There was no doubt tiiat he was a businrss mau, and had he had more capital he mi lit have been able to make good use of his abilities. If the prisoner wae as hcmesr, as he wou d have them belitve, however, what was he doing a whole month in London and giving n) account 01 himseli ? There was a prima facie cast; thi-i the prisoner had iobbed his creditors. The onus reste upon him to get out 01 it. Had he done so? Was there any iiitoi.t to defratt ■ ? That Was the real question. The prisoner h d referred to his wife and tourteeu children who were still abroad, bur. the jury must not let that iuflutnee tiiwna in any way. The Jury retired at midn'ght to consider their verdict, and after a few minutes abs. nÐ returned with a verdict of guilty with a recommendation to mercy.—The Recorder reserved his decision. The court resumed the following m .ruing, and Mr Spearman, replying to a question, said the .£200 was still in the bank at Me.oourne, a id the dejtunent referring to it was not transferable, so thaS the prisoner was said by the bank to be the only person who coul i receive the money. The Official B. ceiver had m;¡d( a, claim for it on behaif of tne estate, but the bank womd not recognise it, and at present they did not know whether they would get the money or not. The prosecution had no wish to press hawhly upon tae prisoner but they felt bound to call attention to the fact that this was not a C«*se of sudden temptation, [I,d he could not endorse the view of the juvy a3 to the recommendation to mercy. The Recorder, in sentencing the prisoner, said after a very long and patient trial he had baen found guilty by twelve ct his feilow-towrsmeu of this very serious felony. No one who had followed wilb any intelligence the evidence given by a number of highly respectable witnesses, corroborated by documents showing his conduc:, during- the mouth of April, when he was obtaining all the money he cculd, and at the same time postponing all his litbbilities, taen going np to London and telling his clerk that he was going to commit suicide, then remaining perfectly unknown to anybody for a whole month, and then leaving for Melbourne with a document for X200 in his posses- sion; no one, he said, who had listened to this evi- dence couid have the slightest doubt not obly that he committed the offence with which he was charged, but that he committed it with very great deliberation. The law said, and he (Mr Jell) as the representative of the law, said, tbt the offence was tantamount to stealing £ 200, If a poor mau stole X200 he was looked upon as a thief; and was punished secor- dingly. He could see no moral difference between the two cases, except, if anything that the fact of the prisoner being a man of education and superior intel- ligence, rendered the machinations he pursued i» order to carry out this fraud a still greater offence than it otherwise would be, but for the reccfllinfen- dation of mercy and other circumstances, it was a oase in which nothing short of twelve months' im- prisonment would have satisfied the ends of jnsticef but considering this recommendation, and remeta- bering also that his personal liberty had been more or less curtailed since June 17, he should only pa1! seiw- tence of six months' imprisonment with hard labour. A local paper says: The protracted trial of John Charles Jones, at toe Shrewsbury Quarter Sessions on Monday, resulted in a sentence which no one will characterise as in the least excessive. The prisoner, who is well connected, highly educated, and ex- tremely olever when not engaged in legitimate pur- suits, two years ago carried on business as an atio* tioneer at the Welsh Bridge, but was formerly a brewer's agent, and a maker of pickles in New Zèa- m land. His mode of conducting business in Shrews- bury was to obtain goods from manufacturers giving bills in payment, selling most of the goods and for.- warding the remainder to other auctioneers for cash. In some instances the bills were withdrawn, and he sent in their place post-dated cheque3, which foll due after he had collected as much money as possible by drawing everything out from his banking accounts. He then went to Loudon for the ostensible purpose of purchasing a parcel of wind." (Man of this kidney always prefer wine). But it ultimately turned out to be for the purpose of quitting England. He also gave post-dated cheques to local tradesmen, and these, when presented, of course, were dishonoured. His liabilities, when he became bankrupt, were £ 700, or R600 more than his assets. While bankruptcy proceedings were pending, he levanted, but, thanks to the elecric telegraph, he was stopped at Port Said and shipped bfJilk to England. His desire was to reach Melbourne, whither he had sent his ill. gotten gains. Honest men will be glad to know that instead of being allowed to transfer himself to the Antipodes, there to continue his nefarious practices, Jones is now under lock and key, where, for half-a. year, he will indulge in the he jfthy, but in his caae, novel, experience ot hard labour. It is weil for the community when it is purged of enterprising "gentle- men" of this description. The trial was in some re- spects remarkable, apar", from toe social position of tae prisoner. The case laste i from 2 p.m. on Monday until 12.15 on the following day, and the accused, de. fending fums if, had a most aide advocate. He showej himelf as an adep". at talking, for which he was comp imented by Mr JelE, tha Recorder. This trait in tUlJ man's character •loubtiesa explains hpw such an a ra it 'itiave eme to be trusted by lTftd99* men of int u'igejco and experience. -4