SWINDLING ACCORDING TO ACT OF PARLIAMENT.
I think that the merchants and traders of England, Scotland, andIreland, or the Chambers of Commerce of the United Kingdom, might layout a fair sum of money in a worse mode than by retaining me toillustrate, through my experience, some defective acts of Parliament,under which, as I have seen, frequent palpable and sometimes giganticvillany is perpetrated. Whether this notion of my usefulness to themercantile community and the State is justified or not by any thing Ican show, the reader may judge from the following, which is one sampleof a stock in my recollections.
An honest, struggling, and not rich, but moderately successful, traderin the City of London, not long ago, was told that a certain "firm"(Messrs. Voleur and Enlever), who had offices, or a warehouse, not manyhundreds of yards from the Mansion House, and somewhat nearer to thecold abode of Gog and Magog, and who had an establishment in Paris,might do business with him in a certain class of goods. The trader, Mr.Brown, although not able to bear losses, and therefore somewhatcautious, was, at the same time, naturally anxious to do business. Heinquired the standing of this firm. His friend could not tell him, butsaid that other friends of his--Messrs. Downey and Grabble--weretraders with these enterprising Parisians; that Downey was the verymodel of scrupulousness; and that Mr. Brown might go and ask him to sayconfidentially what he knew about or thought of the Frenchmen. "Downeyand Grabble are first-class people, I can assure you. If they say'right,' all is right; and if they say 'don't,' then I say don't trustVoleur and Enlever, that's all." Brown thanked his friend.
Next day, as a matter of course, Brown called at the London office orwarehouse of Voleur and Enlever, which, for geographical definiteness, Imay also explain was not far from the High Court of Relief, inBasinghall Street. He had samples of his goods in his pocket. The agentand buyer of the French firm was in his proper place behind the counter.
Firstly a formal explanation and inquiry or two passed between thesegentlemen.
"What class of goods do you say you can offer us?"
"Alpacas."
"They will do for the Paris market just now, but we must have themcheap. We don't want long credit."
"They are a job lot. I can offer them low for cash or short credit."
"Our terms are cash at thirty days; but let us see your samples."
The samples were laid on the counter, critically examined by theintended buyer, and approved. Mr. Brown was also content (subject toreferences) with the thirty days' credit.
"Well," he said, continuing the dialogue, "I am quite satisfied as tothe terms of credit; but as this is my first transaction with yourhouse, I should like a reference, which, if quite satisfactory, as Ihave no doubt it will be, I'll send in the goods at once."
"Oh, that's quite right. Let me see, who shall I give you? Do you knowDowney and Grabble?"
"Yes; I know them very well. That reference is quite satisfactory tome."
"Ask _them_, then, what they think of Voleur and Enlever."
Mr. Brown went direct to the counting-house of Downey and Grabble. Bothmembers of the firm were out. He called again, and saw the two membersof this very respectable house.
The visitor went direct to the business on which he had called.
"I am told you are dealing with Voleur and Enlever."
"Yes."
"They are good, then?"
"We suppose so," said Downey, in silken tones, "or we should havenothing to do with them;" and as he spoke he turned his eyes upon hispartner.
Grabble added, "Perhaps it would be more satisfactory to this gentlemanif we showed him our account with the house he inquires about. Here,Clark, let me have the ledger."
The ledger was brought. It showed a large amount as due from Voleur andCo. to Downey and Co.
"I see," said Brown, "that you have confidence in them. You'll,however, excuse my being a little particular. I am a poorer man than youare, and although I am anxious to do business, I must be careful not tomake bad debts."
"What goods are they you have to sell?" inquired Grabble.
"Alpacas," said Brown.
"Ah, yes; they are wanted in Paris just now. Voleur's might sell animmense lot of those, I should think. It's a good opening for you."
"What credit do they want?" asked Downey.
"Thirty days," said Brown.
"It's as safe as the Bank. You are sure to get your money at the end ofthe month. I know both Voleur and Enlever. They are young men belongingto first-class families, and as sound as Copestakes or Morleys."
Brown thanked Downey and Grabble, and went on his way to his own littlewarehouse, rejoicing in the confident belief that he had done a goodday's work--that he had netted a ten-pound note that morning.
The goods were sent in with all convenient speed by Brown to Voleur andEnlever. By their agent the alpacas were not forwarded toParis,--perhaps because they were needed in the home market. The Parishouse had, as Downey and Grabble well knew, a means of disposing of allsorts of textile, or even fictile products, much nearer to the Citybranch of their operations than the French capital. There was, in theneighbourhood of the London Rialto, "a house" kept by two kind-heartedmembers of one of the tribes of Israel, in which any conceivablequantity of goods that any other firm or house could buy on credit mightbe taken care of; and these benevolent Hebrews would at all times notonly warehouse the aforesaid goods, but they would also oblige tradingGentiles by advances (of course for a consideration, under the name ofinterest) up to a certain proportion of the value of these goods. Now,reader, don't call this process by an ugly name. If you have read theformer stories in my volume, you will be aware that this mode ofdisposing of goods is not called pawning. That is an obnoxiousword--never breathed among City men, or allowed to taint the air betweenTemple Bar and Aldgate. This mode of raising cash, and getting offcommodities, is called hypothecating. Is it not a nice phrase? Theprocess is undoubtedly sanctified by the title.
Now it so happened that a man who traded in the City of London, and haddone business with the firm of Voleur and Enlever, and whose goods hadbeen hypothecated with the Hebrew benefactors, did not admire theprocess. He had seen his goods, supplied to the enterprising Frenchmenon the strength of one of Downey and Grabble's oral testimonials, safelyhoused by the Israelites; and he determined that he would exert hisutmost power and influence to prevent other men's wares, intended forParis, from a like diversion of their route. This man, by watching andinquiry, found out that the goods lately belonging to Brown, and now thelawful property of Voleur and Enlever, to do as they liked with, hadbeen sent to the hypothecators. He called upon Brown, who he saw hadbeen made a victim of, and gave explanations which reflected upon thecharacter of the houses of both Voleur and their reference. Brown was alittle alarmed, but philosophically remarked that the mischief had beendone, and there was no help for it. In fact he yet hoped, on thestrength of Downey's testimonial, that the money faithfully promised inthirty days would be paid in due course.
Before the day when Mr. Brown's money became due, the English branch ofthe house of Voleur and Enlever was shut up; letters addressed to thechief establishment in Paris were returned through the Dead LetterOffice. The firm had become dissolved, the house had run away, and noman could discover its whereabouts.
Mr. Brown saw that his money was lost, unless he could make thoserascals Downey and Grabble pay. To this point all his thoughts weredirected. He felt quite convinced that these "respectable" traders knewall about their Continental friends, and that it only needed a searchinginvestigation to prove the complicity of the houses through whom he hadbeen defrauded.
At this state of the affair I was employed.
My inquiries soon unravelled the whole plot. It turned upon a simplefact; but the surrounding incidents of the narrative were remarkablyunique, and interesting to the mercantile community.
In fact Downey and Grabble were in the first place taken in, and nearlydone for; to a large amount, by Voleur and Enlever. The persuasion ofthe Frenchmen had been
more than a match for the craft of thoseEnglishmen, who originally hailed from the county of York.
One day--about a fortnight before Mr. Brown's visit to the Londonwarehouse of the Frenchmen--M. Voleur and a fair countrywoman, who wasnot Madame Voleur, were proceeding along one of the quiet streets of theCity, in the afternoon, not many hours before the departure of the tidaltrain, by which they intended to quit the British metropolis, when thatelegant gentleman was tapped on the shoulder in the politest manner by aman who turned out, on further acquaintanceship, to be an officer of theSheriff of London. The Frenchman was conveyed to the sponging-house overwhich this officer presided, despite his protests and the lady's tears.
The creditors, Messrs. Downey and Grabble, had made an affidavit thatthe debtor, M. Voleur, was about to leave the country with the view ofhindering and delaying the recovery by them of the money to which theywere entitled; and, upon the strength of this oath, one of the learnedjudges had authorised the detention of the Frenchman until he paid thedemand, gave bail for its payment, or liquidated the obligation inbankruptcy.
Messrs. Voleur and Co.'s agent rushed to the office of a skilfulattorney, who was instructed to do his best for the prisoner. Thisgentleman met Mr. Downey and his lawyer in the reluctant lodgings of M.Voleur, that unlucky man being present. A quarrel was cut short, ornearly prevented, by considerations of prudence.
M. Voleur's attorney led the discussion into a practical current bysaying to his opponents,
"I tell you plainly, that my client can't put in bail, and he won't liein prison. If you don't voluntarily release him, I'll file his petitionin bankruptcy. It was foolish on your part to lock him up. He can't getthe money to pay you while he is here; but if he had his liberty, hemight do so. He's a clever fellow, and will not stop yet awhile, unlessyou are silly enough to stop him. If you let him alone, taking care notto trust him any more yourselves, but not thwarting him or destroyinghis credit, you may easily float out in the course of a month or two."
Mr. Downey and his attorney were struck by the ingenuity, if not force,of the argument, but not quite persuaded to release the debtor.
"Can you offer us any security?" Mr. Downey's adviser asked.
"No," was the terse rejoinder.
"Then I don't see the advantage of liberating your client," added thecreditor's attorney.
The negotiation would have broken off at this point, but for theFrenchman's ready wit. He had a resource. He had a small contingentproperty in France. It was valuable enough to cover the debt of Downeyand Grabble, although not to be easily realised in this country. He didnot like to part with this, his only fortune, to a stranger.
A Frenchman is literally and absolutely nothing, if not alwayssentimental, and occasionally lachrymose.
M. Voleur shed tears when he agreed to part with this little contingentestate to his inexorable creditor; then, having exhausted his naturalemotions, he returned to business, and the negotiation was renewed.
It was ultimately settled, on Downey's giving his assurance, upon thehonour of a gentleman, that he would afterwards do what he could to propup the house of Voleur and Enlever--that is, by giving favourablereferences as to them--he and his partner should have an assignment madeto them of this contingent estate. The sentimental Frenchman furtherstipulated, that when he paid the amount due to Downey and Grabble, ashe expected to do very soon, the creditors should re-transfer theestate.
The compact was ratified by solemn pledges of honour.
To save appearances, it was arranged that one of the firm of Downey andGrabble should go to France, pretend to make inquiries about therespectability of Voleur and Enlever, and telegraph back "all right," asan excuse fur the liberation of M. Voleur. The reader will see thenecessity for this. Downey and Co. could not venture to speak favourablyof the man they had arrested unless some excuse could be found for analtered opinion. Downey and Co. would not, of course, tell any body ofthe arrest of Voleur, but that ugly fact might withal leak out. How toreconcile the contents of the affidavit, which led the judge to orderthe Frenchman's arrest, with the subsequent eulogiums, was the moraldifficulty to be surmounted.
It is needless to say that the argument of the Frenchman's attorney mustnot be repeated, and the security they had obtained must not bementioned. The possession of that document was a palpable sign of a wantof that confidence upon which ordinary credit rests. An inquiry on thespot into the respectability of the French house seemed to all partiesthe most effective way of getting up a show of justification for a goodcharacter to be lavished on the swindlers.
Downey started by the next train and boat to Paris. He had for hiscompanion M. Voleur's madame. This little circumstance was not, Ibelieve, mentioned to Mrs. Downey, because she had a jealousdisposition.
Within an incredibly short space of time Mr. Downey made all theinquiries he deemed requisite, and was enabled to despatch the welcomemessage, "all right," by the harnessed lightning, as he promised.
Next day Voleur met Downey in the French capital, and the next and thenext were spent in the same place. During this time Voleur and Enleverintroduced the English merchant to theatres, cafes, casinos, and morerecondite places, by way of further evidence of their respectability,prudence, and commercial trustworthiness.
Downey had gone through all this circle of inquiry, and returned home toLondon, before Brown called upon him to ask his opinion of theFrenchmen. It is a pity that the respectable British merchants, whenthey gave Mr. Brown the testimonial by which he lost his goods or hismoney, did not expose the bases of their faith in Voleur and Enlever.They surely ought not to have concealed the security in theirpossession, the arrest of their debtor, or a few other small incidents.
I thought the respectable members of the house of Downey and Grabbledeserved punishment as criminals. It appeared, however, that no part ofthe criminal code could touch them. As yet, moreover, it was, on theauthority of a lawyer of repute in the City of London, not possible torecover, by an action at law, the value of the goods supplied to Voleurand Co. on the strength of their English reference. But I had not yetfinished my investigations.
I soon after this alighted upon a grand discovery. I got hold of all theconfidential correspondence between M. Voleur and the English manager oftheir house. This young man, who had been more sinned against thansinning, also assisted me in tracing the delinquencies of his masters,and their confederates or supporters.
The correspondence was exceedingly interesting. M. Voleur, who was theprincipal correspondent, knew English as well as his mother tongue, orhe was entitled to rank among the highest of French _litterateurs_. Thepathos was fine. The letters had such passages as these: "We are in soredistress for money." "Buy goods any where; sell or dispose of them anyhow; and send us here to Paris the money, or we are ruined quite." Thenthere were worldly maxims, that would have done credit to CaptainBarabbas Whitefeather, such as, "Pay no cash. It's a bad principle. Getevery thing on credit." The most unique passages were, however, thosein which the Frenchman explained to his English agent how thetrade-protection societies were to be managed, hoodwinked, or bribed. Inthe interests of trade I must, however, conceal this part of theswindle.
It now appeared to me that, by gathering up all the items of fact, anduniting the written with the oral evidence, my case against Downey andGrabble was complete. A solicitor was consulted, and he took counsel'sopinion on the matter. That authority pronounced that the evidence wouldnot sustain a criminal prosecution, and in truth Mr. Brown did not muchcare about that, to him, barren remedy. He wanted to promote the welfareof society in a mode that would recoup his loss. He wanted to compelDowney and Grabble to pay the amount they had induced him, solely bytheir representations, to trust the Frenchmen. In the way of even thisthere were, it was thought, some difficulties.
That eminent old lawyer, Lord Tenterden, had been, many long years ago,at the pains to provide a statutory immunity for people like Downey andGrabble. Mr. Brown, as an Englishman, ought to have known the laws ofhis country--it is
presumed that every man has all the written and theunwritten, the common, the civil, and the criminal codes engraven on thetablets of his memory--but Mr. Brown did not know it was requisite forhis safety that the many representations of the English firm should bewritten down in unblushing ink. Even if he had known so much as wasrequisite for his security, he might have relied upon the mistakensupposition that Downey and Grabble were truthful men.
In the hope that this case had features which took it from under themischievous aegis of Lord Tenterden, in reliance upon a notion thatDowney and Grabble would not dare to allow the cause to reach a publictrial, and also prepared to risk something in the interest of themercantile community, Mr. Brown brought his action against these"respectable" men. It cost him something, did this resolution. He had toemploy first-rate counsel, whose fees were not small. The cause wasdefended. Downey and Co. knew that this was but one of a series ofclaims, which, under the like circumstances, might arise against them.At the trial all the facts I have mentioned were clearly established.The learned counsel who led the plaintiff's case denounced, in terms ofjust severity, the conduct of the defendants. The judge, the jury, andthe spectators would have been glad to see financial equity enforcedagainst the wrong-doers. At the conclusion of the evidence Mr. Brown wasable to offer, the counsel for the defendants argued that he had no caseto answer. He took his stand upon the Act of Parliament. He did notattempt to deny the merits of the plaintiff's case. He could not answerthe damnatory facts. Upon the dry technical question, whether or notMessrs. Downey and Grabble were shielded by the obnoxious statute, therewas a long argument, which ended in the judge's expressing an opinionthat he was afraid they were; and the plaintiff was nonsuited.
The respectable house of Downey and Grabble did not long survive itsdamaging triumph. It has ceased to appear in the _London Directory_, andits members have found it requisite to their comfort to emigrate beyondthe limits of a most unenviable notoriety.