The Notorious Melbourne Card-Sharpers. — Isaac Coleman, alias Samuel Thomas, and Martin Fitzgerald, alias James Mitchell, were charged with having, on the 3rd of September last, at Melbourne, combined and conspired and obtained by cheating the sum of L185, the moneys of one Charles Barr. The Commissioner of Police said that the prisoners had arrived here from Melbourne by the Rob Roy, having smuggled themselves on board, and having concealed themselves until the vessel was out at sea. When here they had attempted to change Victorian notes for large amounts. He read from the Victorian Police Gazette the particulars of the charge against them, and their descriptions. When arrested, Fitzgerald, who was blind of one eye, wore goggles. A collar found in the possession of Coleman, alas Thomas, was marked with the initials ST, which still further fixed his identity. In the possession of the prisoners had been found a sharper's pack of cards. They were peculiarly made, all the low cards being longer than the rest. These were used for "cutting." He asked that a remand for a short time might be allowed. Mr Wilson, who appeared for the prisoners, gave no objection, and they were remanded until Thursday next. -Otago Daily Times, 2/12/1868.
RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.
Tuesday, 22nd December.
(Before A. Chetham-Strode, Esq., R.M.) The Card-sharping Case. — Martin Fitzgerald and Isaac Coleman were again placed in the dock, charged on suspicion of having obtained L185 from Charles Barr, in Melbourne, by cheating at cards. — Mr Wilson appeared for the prisoners — Mr Branigan said the case had been remanded on a previous occasion in order to allow him to call an officer belonging to the Rob Roy, who would state that it was not known that the prisoners were on board that vessel till she was clear of the Port of Melbourne. He would also prove that two Melbourne notes, one for L20 and one for Ll0, had been found secreted in the waistband of one of the prisoners' trousers, and that in a conversation, one of them had stated that the notes could, be identified in Melbourne. He would call the following evidence: —
David Wilson, purser of the Rob Roy, deposed that, on the 7th of November, it was part of his duty to collect the passage money from passengers. When he was collecting the tickets on the vessel's leaving Melbourne, he did not see the prisoners. He went to all parts of the ship where the passengers ought to be. Before the steamer got outside the Heads, went round again, and then, for the first time, saw the prisoners. Asked them for their tickets, they had none; and on demand, they paid him the amount of their passages. Was present when the immigration officer called out the names of the passengers. Prisoners did not answer. When witness asked them why they did not muster with the rest of the passengers, they said they had done it, although he (witness) had not seen them.
To Mr Wilson : The Rob Roy left the Queen's Wharf. The immigration officer came on board at Williamstown. No one else came with him, and no one else came on board from the time the steamer left the Queen's Wharf till she arrived in New Zealand waters.
Hugh Ferguson, sergeant of police, stated that on the 4th inst. he searched the clothes of the prisoners. They asked him for a change, and witness let them go to their trunk and pick out what they desired. In the trousers Coleman selected, witness found in the waistband one Ll0 and one L20 note on the Oriental Bank, Melbourne. Prisoners were present when he took out the notes.
Samuel Duncan, a warder in the gaol, recollected the prisoners being locked up in a cell together on the 4th inst. Overheard one of them say, "They could be identified in Melbourne." This was after the notes had been found.
To Mr Wilson: On going into the cell, Fitzgerald asked witness how much money had been found. That was why he supposed that the remark with regard to the identification referred to the notes.
Sergeant Ferguson, recalled, deposed that after finding the money he remained in charge of them for some time, and then handed them over to Warder Duncan.
Mr Wilson said that the mere fact of money having been found on the property of the prisoners, unless it was identified, was no proof of their guilt of the crime of which they were charged.
Mr Strode regarded the evidence as material. The money was stealthily concealed, and he would remand the prisoners to the time asked. -Otago Witness, 26/12/1868.
RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.
Saturday, 9th January. (Before A. Chetham-Strode, Esq.,, E.M.)
Isaac Coleman's Case. — The Commissioner of Police was sued by Isaac Coleman, who was recently liberated on a charge of having in Victoria conspired to defraud R. Barr of L185, for L30, which latter sum Mr Branigan said was considered to be the proceeds of property stolen, and had therefore been detained.
Mr Wilson, who appeared for the plaintiff, explained that five or six weeks ago the plaintiff and another man Fitzgerald were apprehended on a charge of having conspired to defraud a person in Melbourne. Subsequently there were found in the possession of the plaintiff, a L20 and a L10 Victorian bank note. The money was said to have been placed in the waistband of his trousers. The matter, however, had now merged into a case of money had and received. That sought to be recovered was at one time in the hands of the Governor of the Gaol, and that gentleman improperly, as he considered, ultimately handed it over to Mr Branigan; although it ought to have been returned to the plaintiff when he left the gaol.
The plaintiff was then examined by the Commissioner of Police as follows: —
Mr Branigan: You are an engineer?
Plaintiff: I came here in the Rob Roy.
Mr Branigan: Did you come here for the purpose of following your profession?
Plaintiff: To follow my own business; I have plenty of property to keep me here.
Mr Branigan: In your plaint it is stated that you are an engineer. Did you come here to follow your profession?
Plaintiff here stated to what district it had been his intention to go on arriving in the colony; but his words were only very indifferently heard.
Mr Branigan: When did you propose to go?
Plaintiff: When I had leisure.
Mr Branigan: Are you going to remain here?
Plaintiff: I am going back to Melbourne.
Mr Branigan: When?
Plaintiff: When the boat goes.
Mr Branigan: Do you know Sergeant Ferguson?
Plaintiff: Yes.
Mr Branigan: Did he search a pair of trousers which you claim?
Plaintiff: Yes.
Mr Branigan: Did you say that he had no need to search them, as there was nothing in them?
Plaintiff: I said nothing of the sort. I told him that there were a L20 and Ll0 note in them.
Mr Wilson: You have been asked about your intention to remain in town. I presume you would not remain in town if you got your money?
Plaintiff: No.
Mr Wilson: Is any portion, of that L20 or Ll0 the proceeds of a felony.
Plaintiff: Not at all.
Mr Branigan, addressing the Bench, remarked that when on a previous occasion the plaintiff was brought before the Magistrate as a prisoner, he (the Magistrate) considered himself justified by the evidence advanced in granting a remand. The period allowed, however, had expired. The testimony adduced showed that the plaintiff and the man charged with him came into the colony in a somewhat stealthy manner, and that the circumstances connected with the money now sought to be recovered were of a suspicious nature. He had communicated with the police authorities in Victoria, and had received a reply from the proper officer, who intimated that a member of the detective force had received orders to proceed to Dunedin. It was expected that the officer would be here by the next steamer, and he thought it very probable that he would arrive by the Tararua, which vessel was daily expected. Fitzgerald had already left the Province, and he (Mr Branigan) would like the matter to be postponed until the Tararua arrived, or, at least, till Monday or Tuesday.
The Magistrate said he could not regard the case before him other than as one of money had and received. What Mr Wilson had stated was quite correct. At that moment it could not be proved that the money was the proceeds of crime.
Mr Branigan said he did not contend that it was.
The Magistrate continued that, until satisfactory evidence was given that the plaintiff had come by the money in an illegal manner, he was certainly entitled to it. Of course, a person might form his own opinion as regarded the manner in which it was obtained. But until the evidence was submitted that it had been acquired in an illegal manner, the law provided that it could not be detained from the plaintiff. Mr Branigan, in what he had done, acted for the good of the public. He would give a verdict for the plaintiff for the full amount claimed, although he must say that, from the information already gleaned, he had no moral doubt as to the manner in which the money sought to be obtained had been acquired in the first instance.
Mr Branigan said he was quite satisfied with the decision his Worship had given. He could, under the circumstances, expect nothing else.
The Magistrate repeated that Mr Branigan had only done his duty. The Court then adjourned. -Otago Witness, 16/1/1869.
A Simpleton. — The following is from a Dunedin paper: — The story of the man Barr, fleeced by the scoundrels known in Dunedin as Isaac Coleman and Martin Fitzgerald, reads very like a romance. He arrived in Melbourne from Dunedin on the 2nd September, commissioned to buy plant for a mining firm with which he was connected. On his arrival in town he went to the public baths, and when coming out was greeted by a man named Samuel Thomas. Conversation ensued, and they went into the Robert Burns Hotel, in Lonsdale-street. Here they were joined by the inevitable stranger, the man who had just come down from the country, and who was the unexpected and immediate heir to thousands of pounds. This man's name was Mitchell. He proposed to play a game, by which Thomas said he would in a very short time be irretrievably ruined. The three then strolled through the city till they came to the Central City Hotel, where, in a back room, they are joined by another influential squatter named Wilson. Here they commence operations, and Mitchell, in a very short time, wins £25 from each of them. The party then breaks up, agreeing to meet next morning. They meet accordingly, and then adjourn to an obscure hotel in Collingwood, where Barr is despoiled of £185. With a magnanimity unexampled, the rogues give their victim a £10 note, leaving him to reflection, which leads him to discover in due time that he bas been duped. -NZ Herald, 28/1/1869.
AUSTRALIAN NEWS.
One of those cases which turn up occasionally for the express purpose, apparently of showing how great a fool a man can make of himself, came before the City Court on Saturday. One John Wilson, alias Yorkey, described by the police as a "magsman," was charged with having defrauded one Charles Barr of £189 by means of an unlawful game. Prosecutor's own statement was that just as he landed in Melbourne, from the New Zealand goldfields, he met a man in the street who got him into a conversation about mining, and while that was going on a second person joined them. These two showed him a new Californian game, played with eight pieces of paper, which he did not then join, but which they made so attractive to him that he appointed to meet them and play it next day. He did meet them, with £25 in his pocket, and left them without a penny. They promised, however, to meet him next day, and give him an opportunity of winning back his money. On this occasion he had drawn about £75 from the bank, and he lost it all, save a few pounds, to the same person who won from him the day before. Prisoner had dropped in "by accident" during the first day's play, and took sides with prosecutor, apparently losing as much money and paying with notes ("flash") as he lost. After winning about £200 in three days' play from Barr, the generous victor presented each of his unfortunate opponents with £10 and left the room to order wine, but failed to return. Prisoner condoled very heartily with Barr, but shook him off as soon as possible, and then disappeared from the Colony with his confederates. This "new Californian game" is so transparent a swindle that it is surprising that any man of ordinary intelligence should fail to discover it. Eight pieces of paper are spread upon a table, and divided between the players. The active member of the confederacy sits on one side alone, and makes the game seem more or less favorable as occasion requires. At one end of the room, or at such a distance from the table as to make it impossible for him to see distinctly, a second confederate stands, with his back half turned from the players, but in full view of the third confederate, who sits by the side of the victim nearest the man in the distance. Then the process commences. Sharper No. 1 takes the pieces of paper, and divides them. "You see, sir," he says to the idiot who plays against him, "I give you nearly two chances to my one. I take five pieces of paper and give you only three. Now, I am going to toss up this shilling, and that gentleman over there is going to call to me; every time he guessed right take one of my pieces of paper; every time he guesses wrong, I take one of yours. Now, I'll bet yon £5 that I get rid of mine before you — it's all right, you see; he can't see all that distance off." Down goes the coin, "heart" is the cry, and the guess is right, swindler No. 3 having put his hand to his head just before the answer. And so on — a slight scratch of the head, or a fall of the hand upon the knee, gives the call, and the sharpers win. -West Coast Times, 23/4/1869.
A Remarkable Tip — One of the most remarkable tips we ever heard of (says the Ballarat Star) was given on the 6th instant by Mr Isaac Coleman, a well-known bookmaker in Melbourne, to an equally well-known surgeon living in Collins street. While these gentlemen were coming to the Flemington course in the train, Coleman said, “Now, Doctor, I will give you the tip for to-day’s events. Lend me your pocket-book, and I will write them in it.” The Doctor lent his pocket-book, and the six horses were written down. Our informant could only remember five of them, but the names were given to us on the course long before the races were run, and the whole of these five were the winners! Surely this is a very remarkable “tip,” especially in such open races as some of them in Tasmania. -Lyttelton Times, 11/12/1873.
Ike Coleman, an old bookmaker, who lately kept a sporting hostelrie in Bourke street, has just died. He was by no means the worst of the fraternity. -Otago Daily Times, 15/4/1876.
No comments:
Post a Comment