ed for Bristol and there took observations of
the suburban house they had fixed upon. At this stage the local
detectives, to whom of course the metropolitan officers were bound to
give the case, declared themselves and seized the criminals; and the
case was disposed of by a nine months' sentence on a minor issue.

Most people can be wise after the event, but even that sort of belated
wisdom seems lacking to the legislature and the law. If on the occasion
of their previous conviction, these men had been asked what they would
do on the termination of their sentence, they would have answered, "Why,
go back to business, of course; what else?" And at Bristol they would
have replied with equal frankness. On that occasion they openly
expressed their gratification that the officers did not wait to "catch
them fair on the job, as another long stretch would about finish
them"--a playful allusion to the fact that, as they were both in their
seventh decade, another penal servitude sentence would have seen the end
of them; whereas their return to the practice of their calling was only
deferred for a few months. Meanwhile they would live without expense,
and a paternal government would take care that the money found in their
pockets on their arrest would be restored to them on their release, to
enable them to buy more jimmies and wire and screws, so that no time
would be lost in getting to work. Such is our "punishment-of-crime"
system!

"Quiet Joe" made a good income by the practice of his profession; but he
was a thriftless fellow who spent his earnings freely, and never paid
income tax. "Old Carr" was of a different type. The man never did an
honest day's work in his life. He was a thief, a financier and trainer
of thieves, and a notorious receiver of stolen property. But though his
wealth was ill-gotten, he knew how to hoard it. Upon his last conviction
I was appointed statutory "administrator" of his estate. I soon
discovered that he owned a good deal of valuable house property. But
this I declined to deal with, and took charge only of his portable
securities for money. The value of this part of his estate may be
estimated by the fact that on his discharge he brought an action against
me for mal-administration of it, claiming L5000 damages, and submitting
detailed accounts in support of his claim. Mr. Augustine Birrell was my
leading counsel in the suit; and I may add that though the old rascal
carried his case to the Court of