Old Bailey Proceedings, 26th May 1784.
Reference Number: 17840526
Reference Number: f17840526-1

THE WHOLE PROCEEDINGS ON THE KING's Commission of the Peace, Oyer and Terminer, and Gaol Delivery for the CITY of LONDON; AND ALSO The Gaol Delivery for the County of Middlesex; HELD AT JUSTICE HALL in the OLD BAILEY, On Wednesday the 26th of MAY, 1784, and the following Days;

Being the FIFTH SESSION in the Mayoralty of The Right Hon. ROBERT PECKHAM , Esq; LORD MAYOR OF THE CITY OF LONDON.

TAKEN IN SHORT HAND BY E. HODGSON, PROFESSOR OF SHORT-HAND; And Published by Authority.

NUMBER V. PART II.

LONDON:

Printed for E. HODGSON (the Proprietor) And Sold by J. WALMSLAY, No. 35, Chancery Lane, and S. BLADON, No. 13, Pater-noster-Row.

MDCCLXXXIV.

[PRICE SIX-PENCE.]

THE WHOLE PROCEEDINGS UPON THE

KING's Commission of the Peace, Oyer and Terminer, and Gaol Delivery for the CITY of LONDON, &c.

BEFORE the Right Honourable ROBERT PECKHAM , Esq; LORD MAYOR of the City of London; the Honourable JOHN WILLES , Esq. one of the Justices of his Majesty's Court of King's Bench; the Honourable Sir RICHARD PERRYN , Knt. one of the Barons of his Majesty's Court of Exchequer; The Honourable JAMES ADAIR , Esq; Serjeant at Law, Recorder of the said City; John William Rose , Esq; and Others his Majesty's Justices of Oyer and Terminer of the City of London and Justices of Gaol Delivery of Newgate, holden for the said City and County of Middlesex.

London Jury.

John Moore

John Wynne

John Parker

Robert Jobling

Charles Dare

Richard Gardner

John Wathen

William Syms

Elias Hibbs

* James Renat Sims

* John Gould served the last day in the room of James Renat Sims .

John Baylis

Robert Moore

First Middlesex Jury.

John White

Robert Winckworth

William Morris

Thomas Neale

Joseph Barks

John Hayter

Thomas Tomlins

Francis Underwood

William Sherman

William Roberts

Andrew Cunningham

Thomas Alsop

Second Middlesex Jury.

Thomas Vardy

Robert Willarton

George Martin

John Iveson

John Pickering

John Cooke

James Morris

Robert Cotterell

Robert Barker

Ralph Walker

William Dickins

William Mortlock .

Reference Number: t17840526-1

519. JOHN RICHARDS and MOSES BUTLER were indicted for burglariously and feloniously breaking and entering the dwelling house of George Dodgson , about the hour of three in the night, on the 9th of April last, and feloniously stealing therein, two silver table spoons, value 20 s. one metal candlestick, value 2 s. 6 d. one yard of silk ribbon, value 2 d. one canvas bag, value 1 s. an iron key,

value 2 d. one linen table cloth, value 2 s. the property of the said George; one muslin apron, value 2 s. one cotton gown, value 4 s. two aprons, value 2 s. one pair of stockings, value 6 d. a bed gown, value 1 s. two aprons, value 8 d. one handkerchief, value 1 s. 6 d. one half linen handkerchief, value 6 d. one cap, value 6 d. one yard of silk ribbon, value 6 d. one shift, value 2 s. the property of Sarah Preston , spinster; four linen shirts, value 8 s. one silk handkerchief, value 1 s. 6 d. one velveret waistcoat, value 3 s. the property of George Martin Hoggard ; one gown, value 8 s. one pair of shoes, value 3 s. three handkerchiefs, value 3 s. four caps, value 1 s. 6 d. three shifts, value 4 s. two aprons, value 5 s. two cloaks, value 8 s. and one linen handkerchief, value 1 s. the property of Sarah Olier , spinster .

GEORGE DODGSON sworn.

I live in St. Martin's-le-grand , I am a house-keeper , on the 9th of April my house was broke open, two iron bars were taken out of the back part of the house from over the area, it is a place where I put my cloth; they got into the house, and got off unperceived, the door was not broke open, they got in at the kitchen window, there is no other fastening to the cellar window, but the iron bars which were gone.

Had you observed this area, and the cellar window the night preceeding the robbery? - I saw them there the evening before, between five and six, I lost the things mentioned in the indictment, there was a small piece of ribbon which was wove on purpose for a brother of mine, which came from the East-Indies.

Court. What were the value of these things? - The silver spoons were valued at 2 guinea, the other things that were taken away, were not my property, they were my servants, they took away every thing belonging to to the two maids, except what they had on the bed with them, I was not alarmed at all, the property was put in a canvas bag, which was in my house.

SAMUEL ROBERTS sworn.

On the 9th of April, between five and six, I and two of the patrols were watching about Fleet-lane, about the houses of the receivers of stolen goods, the two prisoners came to Mr. Small's house, and rung at the bell; I suspected they had something about them they should not have, and in about eight minutes Mr. Small opened the door, and I went in directly after them, and the patrols followed me, I brought them into the street, I secured their hands and searched the prisoner Richards, in his left hand breeches pocket, I found this flint and steel, and these two keys, one of which is the prosecutor's key of the street-door, in his right hand breeches pocket, I found these two silver table spoons, these things have been in my custody ever since. I took one to one Compter, and the other to the other; there was nothing found on the other but a brass castor, which does not belong to this prosecutor; I asked the prisoner Richards where his father-in-law lived, he told me in Blue-court, Saffron-hill; he did not lodge there; I heard him say to Butler, let my father know, and he said he lodged in Long-lane, his name is Dennison, a taylor; I went and searched there, and under the table I found all the property which is in the indictment, they were in a bag, and I divided them for each of the owners to own their property; they are the same that were found in the apartments, (the things produced and deposed to) belonging to the prosecutor.

EDWARD RYLAND sworn.

I am one of the patrol; I went into Small's house, in company with Mr. Roberts and Mr. Trew; I saw Roberts take the two silver spoons, and the flint and steel, and the two keys from his pocket; on the 9th of April, between five and six, we went into Fleet-lane, on purpose to look after some suspicious persons that we had seen there; I saw the two prisoners go to Small's house and ring the bell, they went in, and we went after them; Roberts searched them, and found these things.

Jury. What is Small? - He keeps an old iron shop in Fleet-lane; I went to search

the lodgings of the father-in-law, and found this bag full of all this property.

WILLIAM TREW sworn.

I am one of the patrol; on the 9th of April I was with Mr. Roberts and Ryland in Fleet-lane, in order to apprehend any person or persons that should bring stolen goods, as we had information; between five and six in the morning, I saw the two prisoners come to the house of Mr. Small and ring the bell, I believe in about eight or ten minutes the door was opened, the two prisoners went into the house, and we pursued them; Roberts went into the house first, we brought out the prisoners and searched them; Roberts took the two silver spoons, the flint and steel, and two keys out of the pocket of Richards, we then took them to the two Compters, and as they parted, Richards said to Butler, let my father-in-law know; we returned to Butler to enquire who the father-in-law was, he told us Mr. Dennis, who lived in a court in Long-lane; we went there, and in his house we found this bag with this property, which is owned by the prosecutor and his servants.

SARAH PRESTON sworn.

I am servant to the prosecutor; on the 9th of April, I lost the things mentioned in the indictment, the things were in a drawer in the kitchen.

Can you form any judgment of the value of them? - Ten shillings I believe.

Who was the last person up in the house? - The young girl.

(The things deposed to belonging to her.)

SARAH OLIER sworn.

How old are you? - Fourteen; I am a servant to the prosecutor; I went to bed at on the 8th of April, the bars were about nine all safe; I lost the things mentioned in the indictment.

Court. What is the reasonable value of all these things? - Twenty shillings.

(The things deposed to belonging to her.)

GEORGE BARKER sworn.

I fastened up the front door of the house the night before the robbery; I slept in the house that night, I had the key of the door, and I went in and fastened it after me.

PRISONER RICHARDS's DEFENCE.

I never saw the bundle before I saw it at Guildhall; I had the spoons in my pocket; I was going to work, and I found these two spoons and two keys at the end of Jewin-street, laid at the edge of the curve stones; I went into Long-lane, and I met the prisoner Butler, who was going to Fleet-lane, and we rung at Small's door, and we were taken; my father's is a lodging house, and any body else might put the things there as well as me; my goods were seized the day before, and I put this flint and steel in my pocket.

PRISONER BUTLER's DEFENCE.

I was in Long-lane, and I knew the prisoner, and I met him and went with him.

The prisoner Butler called four witnesses, who gave him a good character.

JOHN RICHARDS , GUILTY Death .

MOSES BUTLER , NOT GUILTY .

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury, before Mr. Baron PERRYN .

Reference Number: t17840526-2

520. GEORGE DANE was indicted for burglariously and feloniously breaking and entering the dwelling house of John Vandane , between the hours of eleven and five, on the 10th of March last, and feloniously stealing therein, one brown cloth coat, value 10 s. one silk handkerchief, value 6 d. two guineas, value 2 l. 2 s. one half guinea, value 10 s. 6 d. the property of the said John .

A Second Count, for feloniously stealing the same goods, being in the same dwelling house, and afterwards burglariously breaking out of the said dwelling house.

JOHN VANDANE sworn.

I live in East Smithfield, Butcher-row , near the Maypole, I keep a publick-house , on the 10th of March the prisoner concealed himself in my house before we went to bed.

How do you know that? - By his own confession; I went to bed between twelve and one, I was the last person up, and locked up every place, I have several lodgers in my house, every door and window was made fast, and the back door was bolted, my servant came to my chamber door and the chamber door was open, somebody had wrenched it, for I am positive I locked it the night before, and the key was on the inside.

Who lay with you? - Nobody but my wife.

Did you hear any body in the night? - No, I did not; when I got up I missed two guineas and a half, that was in my breeches pocket under the foot of the bed, I did not miss my money till a sailor, to whom a guinea and a half belonged, came and asked me for it, that was about nine in the morning, the money was in my pocket when I went to bed, I am positive to that; one of the witnesses came to me and asked me for his bag, which I had in my custody; when I went up I found the bag was cut open, and a coat was taken out, the coat that was taken out belonged to one M'Mullens, and a handkerchief.

Court. How is it laid in the indictment?

Mr. Reynolds. The property of John Vandane .

Prosecutor. It was in my custody; I also lost a silk handkerchief of mine; I believe one Mr. Lee went down first, if the things had not been found upon him, I could not have said that he robbed me.

When had you any conversation with him about this fact? - When he was taken, which was the same day.

Was his confession taken in writing? - Yes, it was taken down I believe.

When did you first hear him confess any thing? - The same day before the Justice; he was taken at ten at night, he was going in the stage to Portsmouth, I was present, there was seven shillings and fourpence halfpenny on him, and a coat, and a handkerchief round his neck.

(The handkerchief produced and deposed to by the Prosecutor.)

- LEE sworn.

I lodge at the prosecutor's on the 10th of March I rose in the morning between five and six, and came down stairs, it was just between light and dark, I went to the backyard and found the door unbolted that leads to the street, it was just drawn to, but not quite to, I took the prisoner myself about a quarter after ten at night, on the 11th of March, we had some suspicion of him, he had the prosecutor's handkerchief round his neck, and this coat on his back, I brought him to the prosecutor's, he said when I took him, O good Lord!

Did you ask him how he came by the coat and handkerchief? - I took him at the Spread Eagle, he was going to Gosport, we put him in a coach, and I found seven shillings and fourpence halfpenny in his hands, which he was shifting from one hand to another, and was going to throw it down; when he came to the prosecutor's, he said he was sorry for what he had done.

This was before he was carried to the Justice's? - Yes.

What did he say he had done? - He said he had taken two guineas and a half out of the prosecutor's breeches pocket, and four shillings in silver out of his wife's pocket.

Did he say how he got in, or in what manner? - He said he secreted himself up stairs and came down, and with a knife he pushed back the bolt of Mr. Vandane's chamber door, and that he had taken the things away, the coat and handkerchief.

Did he say what time he took it? - He said it was between three and four in the morning, he was taken before the Justice next day and searched.

Did he say what time he got out of the house? - He said he came out immediately after he unbolted the back door, and went over the yard door.

Did he make the same confession before the Justice? - He did, I believe it was not taken down in writing.

Court to Prosecutor. Was you present at this confession? - Yes.

Was it as this witness has represented it? - Yes, much the same.

JAMES M'MULLENS sworn.

I am a sailor, I left my coat at the prosecutor's on the 10th of March in a bag, which the prisoner confessed robbing the prosecutor of, and two guineas and a half.

Did he say how he got into the chamber? - No, he did not confess that before me, I did not hear the whole of the confession.

PRISONER's DEFENCE.

I met a man in the street, and he had this coat and handkerchief under his arm, and he asked me to buy it, and I bought them of him.

Court to Jury. Gentlemen, this coat that is charged to be the property of the prosecutor, proves to be the property of another man, therefore it is only a circumstance in the case; the sta tute of the 12th of Queen Anne enacts, that if any person shall enter into the mansion or dwelling house of another by day or by night, with intent to commit felony, and shall break out to get out of the same, he or they shall be ousted of the benefit of clergy; the breaking open any chamber door in the night time, if you are in the house before, in order to commit a robbery, is a burglary.

GUILTY Death .

The Prisoner was humbly recommended to mercy by the Prosecutor, who said he was an unguarded youth, and had got into company with a bad girl.

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury before Mr. Baron PERRYN .

Reference Number: t17840526-3

520. THOMAS WHITE was indicted for burglariously and feloniously breaking and entering the dwelling house of the Right Honourable Ann-Mary Lady Forrester , about the hour of two in the night, on the 8th day of May , and burglariously stealing therein, one pair of silver candlesticks, value 5 l. one pair of silver snuffers, value 20 s. one silver snuffer-tray, value 20 s. one silver soup-spoon, value 40 s. two silver gravy-spoons, value 50 s. seventeen silver table-spoons, value 9 l. twelve silver desert-spoons, value 40 s. one silver sugar spoon, value 8 s. one silver mustard ladle, value 5 s. seventeen silver teaspoons, value 63 s. one silver muffineer, value 12 s. one silver coffee-pot, value 6 l. one pair of silver sugar-tongs, value 12 s. one pair of steel snuffers, value 5 s. one linen table cloth, value 10 s. one silver pepper ladle, value 5 s. one silver sallad fork, value 8 s. twelve silver handled knives and forks, value 42 s. six desert knives and forks, value 18 s. one pair of pistols, value 50 s. one man's cloth great coat, value 60 s. the property of the said Lady Mary.

BETTY KERTON sworn.

Examined by Mr. Sylvester, Council for the Prosecution.

I am house-keeper to Lady Forrester in Portland-street , her family consists of myself, a house maid, a cook, a man servant, and a boy.

When did the prisoner come into your lady's service? - On Monday the 3d of May.

What happened on Saturday the 8th of May? - On five o'clock on Saturday evening, Lady Forrester, attended by two chairmen, and her man servant, went to Lord Salisbury's to dine there, the man servant was ordered to attend her at night to go to the opera; our house was made fast by eight that evening, I fastened some part, and the boy the other, and the house maid the other, I fastened the door into the back yard, and I saw the boy fasten the windows in the pantry, that is what is commonly called the back parlour, that is the room where the prisoner laid, I believe the other parts of the house were fastened by the other servants; I went over the house myself about half past eleven, I went to every door and

window in the house, I found them all fast, I bolted three inner doors below stairs on the ground floor, the other servants went to bed at eleven, I came down stairs from them, and went and examined the house, Lady Forrester was not then come in, about ten minutes before twelve my lady knocked at the door, I came down and let her in, I went into the front drawing-room with her ladyship, to deliver some messages I had received, then went into her ladyship's bed-chamber, and waited till she came there, when she was undressed I wished her ladyship a good night, she said good night Kerton, I expect that you see Thomas's candle is out, that was past twelve, I then went down stairs to Thomas's room, took hold of the handle of the door, the key was on the outside, it was bolted within, and I held the handle of the door while I spoke to him, says I, Thomas I hope you have been very careful to put out your flambeaux safe, I said likewise, I hope you are very careful of your candle; his answer was, he was very careful of his candle.

What fastened the door on the inside? - A slip bolt, which is a part of the lock, I then went to the front door; it is a rule of our house that the key of the street door should always be taken up stairs by me, the bottom bolt was bolted, and the chain was up, I tried the lock, it was not locked, I double locked it, I am very sure I double locked it, and put the key in my pocket, and then went to bed.

Court. Did you bolt the top bolt? - It will not bolt; about five o'clock the next morning I was alarmed by an unusual noise as I thought, in a passage leading to the passage.

Where do you sleep? - In the front bedroom, two pair of stairs.

Court. Nobody slept below stairs but the prisoner? - No, I got up and looked over the bannisters; ours is a well stair-case, and there I saw a man pass along the passage.

Who was that man? - I cannot pretend to say.

Did he say any thing to you? - No, I returned immediately into my bed room, and threw up the window, there were several people about the door, and I said, pray gentlemen what is the matter in our house? one of them answered me, they believed there was thieves in the house? I immediately went into the garret and said, for God's sake, maids, get up, for I believe there are thieves in the house; I returned immediately to my own room, and there was the foot of a man coming up stairs, which I apprehended to be one of the thieves, which frightened me very much, I fastened my own door again, and opened the window, and said, gentlemen pray do not leave the house, for I believe there are thieves in the house, the answer was, a watchman was in the house; I then put on my clothes, and her ladyship came out of her room, and enquired what the noise was about, I immediately went into the back-parlour, and when I went in I said, bless me Thomas, when did all this happen? he said about half an hour ago; I passed by his bedfoot, and to the cupboard where we kept our china; he said, one of the men said, let us take the china, and the other said it was not worth while.

Court. Repeat his own words? - I opened the cupboard door, and he said, one of the men said, let us take the china, and the other said, it is not worth while; I said, should you know the men if you was to see them; he answered me yes; the one was a short thick man with his face blackened, the other was a tallish man, and a crape over his face; that was all that passed between him and me.

Was he tied? - I believe not, I cannot positively say whether he was or was not.

What situation was he in? - I think he was sitting on the bed-side.

Was he dressed or undressed? - I know he had not all his clothes on.

Court. You are not positive what situation he was in? - No, I am not.

Did any body go into the room with you? - There was somebody, I think it was the watchman and lamplighter.

Did he describe the men in any other way than you have said? - No.

What articles of plate did her ladyship lose?

(The witness recites the various articles in the indictment.)

Now what was left behind? - Two drinking cups that are plated and gilt withinside, they were with the other things, and a plated tea kitchen, which was also with the other things, two small plated waiters, four tall candlesticks which were plated.

Court. Was there any article of silver left? - No.

Were the plated articles and the plate all kept together? - There is one cupboard at the head of the bed where the tall canclesticks stood, and the bedchamber candlesticks from the cupboard was taken away, a pair of silver candlesticks, one plated candlestick, and one tutenage, all the other plate was kept in another cupboard, at the bottom of it.

Were those closets so open that any body might see them that came into the room? - Yes.

Court. What locks were on these closets? - Small locks.

Who had the charge of the things? - The key was delivered to him, he had the charge of the things.

Did you go into that room on the second time in the evening? - Yes.

Did you, at either of these times, observe whether those closets, where the plate was kept, were shut, or locked, or not? - I did not.

Did you make any observation of the prisoner's door or the street door? - The private watchman came and desired me to go along with him to see in what part of the house they broke in; we went down into the kitchen; the two doors leading into the front kitchen were unbolted; there is a door that is in the passage that incloses the front kitchen and passage, them I bolted myself.

Then they must have been unbolted from the inside of the house? - They must; in the kitchen a small cupboard belonging to me was broke open, of which I had the key.

What was taken out of that? - Two or three tea spoons, the kitchen drawers were opened, the windows of the kitchen were perfectly safe, they were fastened as I left them; we then went to the door that leads to the area; and that was perfectly fast; from there we went into the back kitchen, and examined the fastenings there, and they were all fast; we went up stairs, and the room doors withinside the house were all locked, the parlour door excepted; we lock the doors every night, and leave the keys in; we went into the rooms to see if the windows were all safe, and they were all safe; when I returned her ladyship was in the parlour; I went and informed her, that all the house was safe.

Had you been in that parlour that morning? - I had not till I went into my lady.

Were the parlour windows shut or open? - They was opened.

Who went in with her ladyship to the parlour? - The house maid.

Is she here? - She is not.

(The house maid sent for.)

Had you observed any thing of the door, or by the door? - I saw the lock of the street door lay on the mat, with three of the screws and a chissel.

Did you observe whether there was any marks of violence on the door? - I examined with the smith, and I saw none; I went with the smith, and looked at the prisoner's room door particularly; the smith is here.

There was no appearance of violence on the prisoner's room door? - I made no other observation.

Court. Was his lock a mortise lock, or a lock screwed on withinside? - It was a mortise lock.

Was his door open in the morning when you went down? - Yes.

Was the bolt out or drawn back? - I did not particularly observe that.

Were the windows of his room when you went in shut or open? - One of the windows of his room was open, I believe.

Speak correctly, as well as your memory will serve you? - I believe it was.

Do you mean the shutters or the sash? - The shutters.

How do these windows fasten on the inside? - With a pin, there is a little pin at the top of the sash which comes through the shutters, and pins on the inside.

Is that the only fastening to these windows? - Yes.

Are there any holes cut in the top of the shutters to let in light? - Yes, there are.

What is the distance from these holes to the pin? - They are near to the top of the shutters.

Is the window a very high one? - A common size window for a low room.

I suppose these holes are within two feet of the pin; are they within the length of a man's arm from the pin? - I cannot pretend to say.

Was there any pane of glass broke in the window? - No.

Are you quite sure of that? - Quite sure of that.

Are you sure these windows were pinned the night before? - I am.

Where do these windows of his room look into? - Into the back yard.

Is there any area before them? - There is.

Do you happen to recollect, whether the door of that room opened easy or with difficulty when it is not bolted? - Perfectly easy.

Are you perfectly sure that it was bolted that night when you went down to speak to him? - I had the handle in my hand all the time, I went with an intention of opening the door, but I could not open it.

Then you have no doubt but it was fastened on the inside? - I have not.

Mr. Garrow, Prisoner's Council. This room that the prisoner slept in has a chimney in it? - Yes.

Any chimney board? - Yes.

Up at this time? - Yes.

When you went over the house at night, did you examine the chimnies? - I did not look into the chimnies.

Did you look under the beds? - I did not.

You did not look under the prisoner's bed? - I did not.

Consequently somebody might be concealed under the bed? - It is a press bedstead, I should think nobody could be under it.

However, by bare possibility, there might be somebody under the bed? - I did not look under that bed; there was a chimney board, and by the chimney board stands two chairs, there was our chairman's coat and hat on them.

Court. Were these two chairs there in the morning? - Yes, they were, but the great coat had been taken away.

Were the chairs standing in their usual places in the morning? - They were.

Was the chimney board up? - It was.

Are you sure it was? - I am.

Do you take upon you to say, that these chairs were in the usual places? - Yes. there is a very narrow space between the fire-place and the bed, there can but one person just pass.

In the other rooms, however, it was possible somebody might have been concealed? - There is not a room in our house but what is occupied either in the day or night.

But you know at present you have no fire in your parlours or drawing room; are all your bedchambers occupied? - All but one, that is a small room that goes through one bedchamber into another; I observed the key of the man's door was on the outside.

From the time he came in with your lady to the time you went down to his door, Lady Forester had had time to receive the messages, and go to bed? - Yes, that was about three-quarters of an hour.

The probability was, that the man servant was in bed too? - I do not know, I did not see him.

It was not very probable, that a person of your modesty and propriety, should have had it in your intention to go into his room?

- I should only have opened the door, I should not have gone into it.

My defence is, upon the footing of your modesty; you did not knock at the door? - I did not.

If you had opened the door, you must have seen the bed? - No, Sir, it is a small room, but the door opens to the left-hand, and I should have seen the table and not the bed.

I think there is a probability, however, that you could not be perfectly sure that the door was bolted withinside? - I am perfectly sure it was.

Can you be perfectly sure, that, in spite of your feelings, and in spite of those sentiments of modesty, which I am sure always attend you, you tried to open the door? - I went down stairs, with an intention to open the door.

You was satisfied with asking him through the door? - I was.

Then your purpose could not have been to open the door to see about it? - If the door had not been fastened, I should certainly have opened it.

I cannot conceive for what purpose; your object was to know whether the flambeaux and candles were safe, and you was satisfied by asking him through the door, at that time the candle was in truth burning? - I cannot say, I did not know that.

These are a sort of slip-bolt locks? - It has a separate handle.

It is not at all usual for the bolt to be pushed some small matter forwards without design? - I cannot say.

Do you happen to know, whether it was a custom of this man to bolt his door withinside? - I remember wanting a brush one morning, and sent the boy for it.

Had you ever any occasion to go into the man's room at any time when he has been retired to rest? - I do not remember that I had.

You slept in the two pair of stairs front room? - I did.

This place was the back parlour? - It was.

Consequently a noise made there might have escaped your ears at that distance? - A well stair-case gives the noise pretty plain, but I certainly did not hear any noise, till the noise I mentioned.

Court. Does the door in that back room in which he slept open to the well-staircase? - Yes.

How is the stair-case situated in the house, is it situated as a back stair-case? - It is a back stair-case that goes over the back kitchen stairs, there are no other stairs; it is not a yard from the stair-case to his door.

Mr. Garrow. When you left the other servants, were their room doors locked? - No.

How long had the other servants lived in the family? - The house maid has lived seven months, the cook had only come to our house the Tuesday before.

Both of them young women, I suppose? - Yes.

Like enough to have sweethearts? - You had better ask them that question, Sir.

It is not uncommon, and they were not locked into their rooms, they could certainly come out if they chose it? - They could.

How long had the boy lived there? - About sixteen months.

You do not know that the man was tied in the morning? - I did not see.

Have not you heard that he was severely tied? - I heard he was tied.

Did you never hear him say, that the persons who robbed the house made use of his lanthorn? - I never did.

You never saw the chissel before? - Never.

Court. What situation was the pin of the window when you went in? - The pin was nailed to a bit of leather, and hanging as usual.

Mr. Silvester. When you was in the room, was the bed made? - The last time I was in the room the bed was made.

Jury. Whether the press bedstead was let down to be made? - Yes.

SARAH ALDWINCLE sworn.

Examined by Mr. Devilsme.

How long have you lived with Lady Forrester? - I came the 4th of this month; I went up stairs about half after nine of the Saturday night with the boy, when the prisoner rung at the door, with intent to ask the prisoner to take some things up stairs for me; the prisoner told me he was in a hurry, he had over staid his time, and that my lady would want to come from the opera, he came for his flambeaux, and went away directly; he went out, and I shut the door and locked it, and the boy and I returned down stairs, and the house maid and I went into the room to make his bed.

What kind of a bed is it? - It is a press bed.

Was it up or down when you went in? - It was up, pinned in with folding doors.

Did you and the house maid let it down? - We did, and then we made it; we returned down stairs, and we examined my apartments to see they were all safe, all the windows and doors; I had not fastened them myself, but I ex amined them, and they were all safe; I then went up to bed with the house maid.

Had you observed whether the keys were in the closet where the plate was? - I did not observe, but the doors were shut, I then went with the house-maid to the parlour, and saw that the windows were safe; and then we locked the parlour door, we then came out and looked under the beds, and then went into our apartments, we looked under my Lady's bed and all the beds in the house, and behind all the curtains, then we went to bed, and about five in the morning we were alarmed by Mrs. Kerton, who came in and said for God's sake maids get up, there are thieves in the house; we got up, and going down stairs, I saw a watchman coming up stairs with a large stick in his hand, which I thought to be a thief, I was very much frightened, he told me he was one of the watchmen, he was very glad to see us alive, for he supposed we were all dead, or confined in our beds; I went into Thomas's room, where I saw him sitting at the foot of his bed with some of his things on, I said for God's sake Thomas what is the matter, how are you Thomas; he said he was very much hurt, he said he was robbed, and he was ruined, he had lost his watch, a pair of knee-buckles, and his money; he then turned to his box, took out some money in a paper, and said no they have not taken it all, and I saw some, I believe it was a guinea; I then returned to my Lady, and she was coming down stairs, and said for God's sake, cook what is the matter, I told her what Thomas had just said to me; I then returned to Thomas again, and found him crying and very much affected, I then went down stairs, and found both the kitchen doors open and one of the windows, three drawers in the kitchen were open, I do not know who opened them, and the cupboard was broke open, I examined the drawers and I missed a cloak that I had put in the night before, I then returned to Thomas, and he had his coat and waistcoat in his hand, and I helped him on with his coat and waistcoat, and he said he believed they had broke his shoulder, it was very much hurt.

Court. Did he appear to you to be much hurt any otherways than saying so? - I did not take any notice of that.

Did you observe in his manner of putting on his coat, when you helped him on with it? - No, Sir, I cannot pretend to say that I did, in turning out of his room I observed one of the screws of the door laying in his lanthorn.

Court. Where was the lanthorn? - Upon the table, at the foot of the bed.

What lanthorn was that? - A lanthorn that they go to bed with for fear of droping any snuffs of candle and grease.

Was that the lanthorn that Thomas used to go to bed with? - Yes.

You are sure of that? - Yes.

Did you make any observation of that? - I said Lord, Thomas, they have put one of the screws into your lanthorn, with that he turned his head, and shook his head.

Court. Did he say any thing? - No

further than saying he wished he had his watch again, I then went out of his room, and went up stairs with one of the watchmen and we hunted all over the doors, up the chimnies, and every part of the house, and found every thing as we had left it before.

Was there any mark of any foot, or of any body having came down the chimney? - Not in the least.

Did you observe the street door? - When I came down stairs the lock lay upon the mat, with three screws and a chissel by the side of it, I saw the lock at first, but I did not observe the screws till somebody came and said one of the screws were lost.

Cross-examined by Mr. Garrow.

Thomas had lived in the family a day longer than you? - Yes.

You are a single woman I take it for granted? - Yes.

You say you do not know any thing about the quantity of plate that was lost or left? - No.

But it is not extremely easy for people to know plate from plated? - I cannot say.

The watchman had been into Thomas's room before you went in? - Yes Sir, the watchman and lamplighter unloosed him.

After that he put on some of his clothes? - Yes.

Did you examine his leggs or his wrists to see if he was galled with the rope? - No, Sir, I was glad to see him alive, I saw some bits of cord laying.

He was a good deal affected at the time, you say he shook his head? - Yes he was.

That is pretty common I believe, when people have escaped from a great danger? - Yes.

Was there a chimney board? - The chimney board was up when I made the bed, and two chairs stood by it, and the chairman's great coat lay in a chair.

Are you sure of that? - Yes.

Were the chairs in the same place in the morning? - Yes.

And the chimney-board up? - Yes.

What stood behind the chimney-board? - A stove.

What sort of a stove? - I cannot pretend to say, I believe it was a loose stove.

Is the chimney a large one or a small one? - Not a very large one, nor a very small one.

Was there room enough behind that chimney-board, for a man to conceal himself, the grate standing where it does? - I cannot say, it appeared to me to be rather shallow, I locked the door of the front parlour when I went to bed.

Who first went into the front parlour in the morning? - I cannot say, somebody was in.

Where does your Lady sleep? - In the second floor backwards.

Does any Lady sleep on the first floor? - No there is a drawing room, a parlour, and a little room which has a press bedstead with folding doors.

None of the family sleep in that? - No, there is a gentleman comes once a week, nobody in ordinary sleeps there.

Are there chimney boards on that floor? - No, there was never a chimney in this back room; to the front drawing room, and the other back room there is no chimney-board, we could not look under that bed it is so low.

On the two pair of stairs, how many bed-chambers are there? - Two, my Lady's and the housekeeper's, the two maids and the boy sleep in the garret, there are three garrets, I and the house-maid sleep in one, the boy in the other, the third is a little room that goes out of our room, it is within our room, we went into that room, we go in there every night, there was nobody there.

The doors leading from the kitchen to the stair-case are fastened up at night? - Yes.

Did you fasten them up? - No, only the kitchen windows and the area door, the housekeeper fastened the rest.

The last of these doors, how far is it from the stair-case? - A very little way.

Is there any closet, or any thing between the foot of the stairs and that door? - None at all.

Mr. Garrow. There is no room within the folding doors of the press bedstead for any body to stand? - No.

Not for a boy? - No.

Mr. Silvester. Was there any appearance of soot? - Not the least morsel of soot.

WILLIAM DAVIS sworn.

How old are you? - Fourteen last March, I have lived with Lady Forrester sixteen months.

Do you remember the night of the robbery? - Yes.

Did you make any observation of any thing particular the next morning? - Yes Sir, I found one of the wax candles that had been in the silver candlestick, removed from the silver candlestick in a plated high candlestick.

Did you observe what candlesticks the wax candles were in the night before? - In the silver candlesticks, the next morning I found one of the wax candles almost burnt, in the plated candlestick, at the head of the prisoner's bedstead, and the other which was not burnt, in the top draw in the pantry, where the prisoner sleeps, in a little cupboard, the socket was taken out, and it was turned down in the candlestick.

Did you see those candles in the candlesticks the night before? - Yes.

Were they long candles, or were they much burnt down? - They were in long pieces.

(The piece of wax-candle produced.)

Were they of equal lengths the night before? - Yes.

Did you observe any thing else? - No.

Was the plate visible when any body came into the room? - It was visible when the cupboard door was open.

Mr. Garrow. Did the keys of the plate closet usually stand in the door? - Yes, the key was always left in the cupboard door.

What candle was there in the lanthorn? - A little bit of tallow-candle.

Are you sure of that? - I saw the piece in the morning.

What account did the prisoner give of the wax candle being burnt? - He said that the persons that had broke in, had lighted one of those candles, and that they had used it in robbing the house, the little piece of tallow-candle was found in the lanthorn.

I fancy you know what we all know, that candles burn a good deal faster when there is a high wind comes to them? - Yes.

And burn faster for being hurried about? - Yes.

SUSANNAH FREEMAN sworn.

I am house-maid to Lady Forester, I was not the first that went into the parlour, I opened the windows.

Before you opened them, did you examine whether they were fast or not? - Yes, Sir, they were fast.

Were they in the same situation they were the night before? - Yes, they were.

I mean shut and pinned, and all that? - Yes.

Is there a chimney-board in the front parlour? - None at all.

Is there any press, or cupboard in the front parlour? - No.

Mr. Garrow. The parlour door was open before you went in, did you look up the chimney the night before, to see if there was any body there? - No.

Court. I ask you this general question, did you find any soot in any of the chimnies in the house? - No, Sir, I did not.

JOHN HANNAM sworn.

I am the private watchman, I passed my Lady Forrester's door, about two minutes after five, in company with the parish watchman, and the serjeant of the night of that division, I went to Queen Ann's street, which is two doors down.

When you passed it, was the door open or shut? - It was visibly shut, the clock

struck five about ten minutes before, I then returned the same side of the street that Lady Forrester's house is on, I went to the extent of my walk, I returned back directly on the same side of the street as far as Lady Forrester's door. I looked at the door, and it was about three inches open, I look upon it not to be above two minutes before I returned.

Court. It might have been that much open, when you went past before? - No my Lord, the parish watchman is very particular, so am I; as soon as day light appears in the morning, we are very cautious to examine every window, and area, and door.

You did not try it, whether it was fast or not? - No, I did not, it was visibly shut, all the windows were seemingly secure on the outside, observing the door open, I stood about a minute on the flag stones opposite the door, expecting to see some of the servants come to the door, supposing some of them were up, I likewise looked down the area, to see if the kitchen window were opened, finding nobody come out, I drew close to the door, and laid my ear as close as possible to the vacancy between the door and the door case, and saw the chain hanging down, I stood in that position a minute and half, I heard not the least noise, every thing was quiet, this was Sunday morning, I then took hold of the rapper and gave a single rap for fear of alarming the house, as soon as I gave the rap, I heard a voice inside, which I underderstood afterwards to be the prisoner at the bar.

Court. Immediately on your giving the rap? - Yes, my Lord, immediately, the voice cried out, who is there, and before I had time to answer, the voice said for God's sake come in, he said he was robbed, tied and ruined.

Court. Did he cry out immediately? - Yes, immediately, I then made answer, and told him to have a little patience, I would come in as soon as possible, I meant to have witnesses with me to go in, and see what situation things were in, when I found from the voice withinside, that the house had been robbed, it being Sunday morning, and the watchmen gone off, and nobody was passing and repassing, but the lamplighter who was trimming his lamps, he was the only person I saw at the time, he was a small distance, and I called to him for God's sake to run towards the watch-house, for the Serjeant of the night or any of the watchmen, and bring them to my assistance, and during the time he was gone, one of the parish watchmen was coming along at a little distance, I called to him, and he came, and before the time he reached me, the lamplighter and another watchman came likewise, then there was a decent looking man at the door, as I took particular notice of, there was several people at the door, I wear side arms of a night, and I gave this decent looking man my stick and to take care that he let nobody out, one of the watchmen was left likewise within; when I went in, the first thing I saw, was the lock of the door, three screws, and a chissel, laying on a foot mat inside the door. (The lock, screws, and chissel, handed to the Court and Jury.) I then desired that no person would touch the lock till the housekeeper and my Lady came down, I first looked at the parlour door, which is on the left hand going in, I found it shut. I did not try whether it was locked or not, I was satisfied by the appearance of the front parlour, that it was not broke into, I then proceeded along the passage it was rather dark, I expected the voice came from below stairs, I went down three of the kitchen stairs to the best of my remembrance, and called out where are you? I heard a voice behind me say, here, I then returned into the passage, and came to the back parlour door where I understood the voice came from, I found the door open, I found both the windows of that room shut, as soon as I went into the room, I opened one of the window shutters to give light to see what situation the man was in, as soon as the windows were open, I immediately tried the sash, the under part was fall down, I did not examine by what fastening, there were two other windows in the

house, I told them not to touch that till they come down; I then looked to the bed where I saw Thomas White laying, he was laying atop of the bed, and likewise laying atop of the clothes seemingly, or part of the clothes might be thrown off for what I know, he was laying with his two hands tied behind him, he was rather turned upon one shoulder, and likewise his legs were tied close by the ancles, I cannot positively say whether his legs were across or not; after the window was open and we got light, the lamplighter put his scissars, and with my assistance and the other watchman, cut the cords of his wrists first, (here are the cords) and likewise of his legs; as soon as he was untied, he stood on his feet, the marks of the cords were round both his legs and ancles, I cannot say whether the skin was cut or not; as soon as he stood up, and I saw him off the bed, I desired the watchmen to make as little noise as possible and go and acquaint the housekeeper; when she came, we examined the house, and there was no place were any body had broke in, nor no mark of violence; I was satisfied: I examined the outside fastenings of the house, that was all I was afraid of; I went to the window, and opened that one window which you have heard was open.

Court. You opened that? - Yes, I am sure of that, quite sure; then I went round, all the kitchen windows were fast at the back and front, likewise the outside door.

Did you examine the street door, was there any marks of violence upon that? - Not the least; there is an iron plate on the outside of the key-hole, put on with six screws, there even is no mark of violence on that plate: I then went over all the house with Mrs. Kerton, I found every door and window fast, and the trap door at the top of the house was fast.

Court. Was it fastened withinside? - I cannot say that it was fastened, but there is a pole stands, which is set up against this trap door, so that if it is lifted up, that pole must fall down and alarm the house; I knew the fastenings of that house and that door particularly, because I have been round the house before; I did not examine the fastenings of his room door particularly.

Mr. Garrow. You found his room door open? - Yes.

In what state was it? - I remember in particular, afterwards I saw the key on the outside.

You did not observe that on your first going into the room? - No.

His hands were tied behind him? - Yes.

Pretty severely tied by your account? - Yes, seemingly so, there was the marks of the cords on his ancles, if they had been cut there must have been some appearance of blood; he was lying upon the bed, with his hands tied behind him, rather under him; he complained very much as soon as I went in of losing his watch, knee buckles, and money.

Some information of this robbery had been given at Bow-street? - Yes.

Has any of the plate been found? - Not that I know of.

Was the information given immediately? Yes.

By what time that morning? - I cannot say.

After the family came down, I suppose some suspicion fell upon the prisoner? - Yes.

Was the prisoner's box searched and his clothes? - Not in my presence.

Do you know whether they were, and by whom? - After we reached the watch-house, he told me he had two guineas and a half wrapped up in a bit of paper, that was in his trunk, and they had not taken it out; after going to the watch-house he wanted something to drink, he pulled out this money and sent for a little beer, he changed half a guinea; after the man brought in the beer he gave his money in care of the keeper of the watch-house's wife; so I left him.

You did not at any time see his box searched? - No, my Lord.

Were his knee buckles in his knees? - No, my Lord, they were not, he complain-

very much of losing his watch and knee buckles, and likewise the money he had in his pocket.

Court. Is the lamplighter here? - We could not find him, we tried to find him but could not.

FRANCIS WITTE sworn.

I am a smith; I examined the street door and his chamber door.

What observation did you make on the street door first? - I looked at the lock that lay on the mat, the bolt was double shot, there were two screws on the edge of the door which shuts in the architrave, this plate screws on to the edge of the door, therefore they could not get the lock off till they had twisted and broke this; I examined the prisoner's door, that was a mortise lock, and, when bolted, it could not be opened without great violence, this plate was remaining on the door when I went there; I took this off myself, and by twisting it backward and forward they had broke it, and it appears to me to have been cracked before.

(The lock produced.)

Jury. Could that be done on the outside? - No, them two screws are screwed into the edge of the door, they had broke the inner part off, which was left on the door; the staple was on the door.

If it had been forced from the outside the staple must have been forced off? - Yes, and the screws, if they had given way that would have been by the edge falling off, and not by drawing; the bolt could not be picked in the usual sense of picking a lock, no instrument introduced into the wards of the lock could draw back the bolt, that must have been drawn by violence, but not out of the lock; you might draw the two screws of the staple by violence, but not of the lock.

From the appearance of the lock, you are perfectly satisfied that it could not be done from without? - It could not.

Mr. Sylvester. Did you observe the door of his room? - I did; that door was likewise double locked, for I could not unlock it till Mrs. Kerton came down.

Did you observe the bolt and the chain? - Yes.

Were either of them forced? - No, the chain goes quite to the back of the door; the door is perfectly safe on the outside, there is not even the mark of a screw-driver or chissel; the door of his room has a mortice lock on it, the key was on the outside of it, there is a sliding bolt withinside; I shut the door, and tried to see if the bolt would bolt, which it did; when it is fast it is impossible to open it, without violent forcing; I think not by a picker or any thing of that kind, for a sliding bolt is of greater security than locking it; that door shuts into a rabbit, there is a little distance, which with a chissel you must cut away.

Were there any marks of violence? - Not the least in the world.

Mr. Garrow. I am afraid I am a very bad locksmith, but it seems to me as I could pick this lock of your's, the bolt is at the bottom of the lock? - Not quite.

Do you think it impossible to introduce through the key hole a crooked instrument that might work on that bolt? - I do, I wish you would inform me how I could do that, for it would save me a great deal of trouble.

Court. In the construction of this mortise lock, is the bolt in the inner work of the lock? - Yes, I think it impossible to pick it, the handle of the sliding bolt turns like a upon an axis, you cannot pull the sliding bolt back.

Mr. Garrow. The key-hole is through the door? - Intirely so.

I do not believe any more than you, that you can introduce a picker and pull in the lock nor the sliding bolt, that is not my object; but I ask you whether it is not possible to introduce through the lock a crooked instrument, which, by being turned round, should lay hold of the bolt and draw it back? - I never heard of such a thing; if it could be placed so, the handle drops down, they must raise that handle first before they could turn it.

I think you and me between us could make such an instrument? - I do not know but I might.

A great many very ingenious instruments are contrived for the purpose of housebreaking? - I have not a doubt about it, I have seen such that I have not thought of.

Court. Might it not be possible to put through the key hole, an instrument which should catch the handle, and draw it back? - The handle after it was bolted or unbolted drops down.

Yes, but it keeps in the position you leave it? - Yes.

Mr. Garrow. If the Court will have the goodness to wait till such a lock is produced, I undertake to do it.

Court. Perhaps it may be too nice a supposition, but that it is possible is perfectly clear.

Mr. Sylvester. Was the key in the door or not? - Yes.

Mr. Garrow. Aye, on the outside, and therefore I say it was taken out, for the purpose of introducing this instrument, and putting it in again.

Court. I will send for a mortise lock.

Mr. Garrow. And for a plain piece of wire, which I undertake in Court to make the instrument of.

Court. The locksmith, the witness, seems to be a very fair man, let him go and fetch such a lock.

(The witness went to fetch a lock.)

Mr. Garrow. This is a lecture upon house-breaking!

CHARLES LEET sworn.

I am one of my lady's chairmen; I do not lay in the house; I have seen the prisoner twice since he was committed.

Mr. Silvester. What observation did you make on his clothes? - I saw him in New Prison, and I saw him at the Rotation-Office.

How long after he was committed? - This was on the Friday after he was taken up, there was something of a flambeau, or wax candle about his clothes; I went to fetch those clothes, which were my lady's.

Mr. Garrow. He had been out with you with the chair with his flambeau? - Yes.

Court. Could you discern whether it was the wax of the candle or the flambeau; - No.

What sort of flambeaux do you use? - Wax flambeaux.

Did any of the officers, when this man was taken up on suspicion, search his trunk or box, for that should have been done in a case like this, where it is extremely important to investigate the truth, for the public are interested in a case like this.

Mr. Garrow. They should have done that and traced him to his former lodgings.

Mr. Sylvester to Mrs. Kerton. Were the boxes examined? - I believe they were, but I was not present; the man's name was Dixon.

Was any thing found there? - No.

Did you enquire where he had lived before? - I never made that enquiry.

Did any body else in your presence? - I do not recollect.

Court to Prisoner. Do you wish to say any thing in your defence? - I leave myself to the mercy of your Lordship and the honourable Jury.

Mr. Garrow. I have some very respectaable witnesses, my Lord.

Prisoner. Here is Major Paulet who will give me a character.

Court. Do you wish yourself to give any account how these people got into your room? - I cannot tell.

Were you asleep or awake? - I was asleep.

Where did you live last before you lived at Lady Forester's? - I lived three weeks with Lord Galloway, he hired me as lady's footman, and I did not like the situation; before that I lived with Major Paulet .

WILLIAM BAGOT , Esq; sworn.

I think I have known the prisoner about fourteen years; I was present when he was

hired by a sister of mine, who is a married lady in Dublin; I think he lived in that family three years, I generally spend about eight months in the year there; before he quitted that situation he was ordered, on account of his steadiness and integrity, to attend on the nearest relation I had in the world, in a very aweful scene, she went into the country, and was in the last stage of her illness; the whole family had the highest opinion of him from that time; I have no perfect knowledge with whom he lived, but I understood, and have good reason to know, that he has lived with some respectable families, in all of which he has maintained a good character; I met him in London, and he told me he came to town to get a place; I told him I would recommend him, and I would have recommended him to the nearest friend I had in the world, but I went abroad. Major Paulet sent for me particularly, I have seen him attending here to give him a good character.

Mr. Sylvester. May I take the liberty Sir, to ask you who you are? - A private independent gentleman, I possess an hereditary estate from my father.

I should not have asked you that question, only you called yourself captain in Bow-street? - I am no trade or profession, and they called me captain, because every gentleman of property holds some rank in the volunteer army, I only came there by curiosity.

The Justice asked you who you was, and what you was? - Sir, that is an absolute falshood, nobody asked me any such question, I came there but as a spectator, and this young man sent one of his companions to desire I would appear at the Publick Office.

Then you did not come as a spectator, upon your oath was you not called upon? - Upon my oath I was not called upon, nor asked the question, nor did I refuse to answer that question, nor am I of that rank in life to refuse answering any questions.

Where do you live now? - I lodge now in King-street, Soho, No. 17; there are estates of very large amount that are vestd in me during a life, they are estates of about two thousand a year, they have been vested in me for several years, I am only here occasionally; I came over upon the business of this trust.

Who keeps the house at No. 17 in King-street, Soho? - His name is Long, he is a woman's millener; I do not know what you call it, he makes women's clothes, I have seen him working at women's clothes.

THOMAS HANNAM sworn.

I live at the George in Jermyn-street, the prisoner lodged at my house when he was out of place, I have known him better than a twelve month, he behaved very civil, and orderly and quiet; the first time he lodged with me five weeks; he has lodged with me three different times.

JOSEPH TAYLOR sworn.

I am a gentleman's servant out of place, I lived last with Lord Galloway, the prisoner lived there the time I was there, I knew him when he was with Major Paulet , he bore a very sober steady character.

What was his character as to honesty? - Very much to be spoken in his favour, I have known him much about three quarters of a year, down to this time.

Mr. Sylvester. Is Lord Galloway in town? - I believe he is.

(A new mortise lock produced, and a piece of of wire.)

Court. There is no doubt about the probability of this.

Jury. We see there is not.

JOHN GADO sworn.

I am a servant, I have known him about twelve months, I never heard any thing to his prejudice.

Mr. Sylvester. How long did he live with Lord Galloway? - I cannot say.

Court to Mrs. Kerton. Who had your Lady this man's character from? - From Major Paulet .

I take it for granted, she would not have taken him without a good character.

Mr. Sylvester. Was it a written character? - A written character.

Do you know of his living with Lord Galloway? - He did not mention that circumstance when he was hired.

Court. All families should take care, not to take servants with written characters.

Court. Gentlemen of the Jury, this indictment is capital from the value, whether the person that took the things, committed a burglary or not, provided you are satisfied the goods are stolen, and that they are of the value, or any thing like the value laid in the indictment; for they must be stolen, whoever stole them, in the dwelling-house. In point of law, a servant opening the door of the house which is properly fastened and secured before, to admit persons coming to commit a felony in the master's house, makes it as much a burglary in all the persons concerned, in the servant, and in those let in, as if there was an actual forcible breaking for the unlawful opening of any lock or fastening, for that certainly is breaking to all intents and purposes in point of law; so the opening a lock by a pick-lock or false key is sufficient opening to make a burglary, so is the opening, even though it was with the key of the door, it is equally unlawful as opening it with a false key, and will make a burglary; that being the law, this case has taken up much of your time, but not more of your time than the case requires, for it is a case as important as can easily come before a Court of Justice; the charge is not only of a very atrocious nature, but of a kind extremely dangerous, affecting the safety of every body, and the security of all families; no offence can be more alarming to the peace and safety of society, than that of servants admitting housebreakers and thieves to their masters and mistresses in the hours of rest, nothing more dangerous, nothing more alarming in the idea; therefore whoever is proved to be guilty of that offence, should be brought to the punishment they deserve; but on the other side, it is equally important to justice and humanity, that innocent men should not be fixed with a crime so atrocious in its nature, and so penal in its consequences; in proportion therefore to the malignity of the offence, and the certainty of the punishment that will follow the conviction of it, ought to be the clearness of the evidence by which it is supported, for it would be a dreadful thing on the mind of any humane man, to run any risque of placing an innocent man in that situation, that your verdict must do on conviction; this is the case, it therefore requires that diligent and conscientious attention, which I perceive with pleasure you have all given to it, it is a case depending intirely upon circumstances; circumstances put together may amount to proofs as satisfactory as the positive testimony of the witnesses can do; it is for your consideration in this case, whether the circumstances which have been laid before you, with a great deal of accuracy, do make that impression on your minds, as amount to that full conviction which you ought to have, in order to find the prisoner guilty; that circumstances have been proved which throw a strong conviction on this man, cannot be denied by any body that has heard the evidence, whether that amounts to full conviction so as to assure your minds, must be for your determination. The regularity of this family has furnished us with precise evidence in this case, which evidence I will state to you, and then make one or two observations that occur to me, leaving the decision to yourselves. (Here the learned Judge summed up the evidence, and then added) I think, in favour of the prisoner, we should suppose the character which this lady had with the prisoner was genuine, as the man from whom it was written has been here in the course of the sessions, to give him a character: the interval between the watchmen passing the door from one time to another, is scarcely long enough for screwing off the lock, and forcing it in the manner the smith describes, therefore the probability certainly is, that though he did not perceive it, the door was open before, and it might be shut too, even close, without fastening, and there being then no lock or fastening upon it, the wind might have blown it

open, even those three inches. With respect to Mr. Bagot, he gives an account of himself, as a gentleman of independent fortune, he stands unimpeached, and they have not attempted to set up any evidence against him. This case, as I mentioned at the outset, depends entirely on circumstances; the strong circumstance, beyond all others, against the prisoner, is the improbability, proved by a vast chain of evidence, given with wonderful accuracy; the improbability amounting almost to impossibility of any body having got into this house in the state in which it was found; the robbery, which is established beyond a doubt, must have been committed by some persons who broke in, or got in from without, or were let in by some person from within; there is no mark of violence whatever on any of the outer fastenings: there is very strong evidence from several witnesses, in a very regular family, that there was no neglect, by means of which any body could come in without violence, and every place was fastened the night before: there is strong evidence also, that this house could not have been opened in the manner in which it was found in the morning, without violence, from the state in which it was, because you are excluded from the idea of supposing that the locks were picked, by its being proved that the door was not only double locked, but the chain and bolt were fast the night before, and the lock is intirely taken off from the door, and in a manner that is perfectly clear to demonstration, it must have been taken off by somebody within the house, and not without, therefore it seems to be proved as strongly as a thing of that sort can be proved, that nobody could get into this house from without, from the state in which it was found; this is the strong evidence against the prisoner, and the only avenues that are left to the suggestions of conjecture, are the chimnies; and there is not the least probability of any body having got in that way: and with respect to the prisoner's room, it is proved almost to demonstration, that they could not get in there, not only the chimney board was up, but the two chairs were in the same place, and it is improbable that housebreakers, getting in by the chimney, should put every thing into order again, and put the two chairs and the chimney board up: there is another conjecture still left, for in this case I am clearly of opinion, that if you can find a reasonable conjecture, that this house was broke into without the concurrence of the prisoner, you should acquit him; and this conjecture is, that somebody might be concealed in the house, man or boy, and lay still till the family were in bed, and then by screwing off the lock, let in the robbers; that conjecture is met by a wonderful chain of evidence, for the witnesses had examined the house very strictly; but there is a bare possibility that in some part or other of this house, from top to bottom, some person might be concealed; you are therefore to judge, whether you think that bare possibility goes far enough, comparing it with all the evidence that has been given, to warrant reasonable men from making that supposition; but that supposition does not meet the whole case, because, if a person had concealed themselves in the house, though that will account for the taking off the lock of the street door and every circumstance of that kind, it still does not account for his room door being fast; now, if you think Mrs. Kerton was not mistaken, that part of the case becomes extremely material; and then the persons supposed to be concealed in the house must get into his room, and if the room door was bolted they could not get in; but the bolt might by possibility be opened, and you are to judge how far that possibility weighs your mind.

The remainder of this Trial in the next Part, which will be published in a few days.

Reference Number: t17840526-3

THE WHOLE PROCEEDINGS ON THE KING's Commission of the Peace, Oyer and Terminer, and Gaol Delivery for the CITY of LONDON; AND ALSO The Gaol Delivery for the County of Middlesex; HELD AT JUSTICE HALL in the OLD BAILEY, On Wednesday the 26th of MAY, 1784, and the following Days;

Being the FIFTH SESSION in the Mayoralty of The Right Hon. ROBERT PECKHAM , Esq; LORD MAYOR OF THE CITY OF LONDON.

TAKEN IN SHORT HAND BY E. HODGSON, PROFESSOR OF SHORT-HAND; And Published by Authority.

NUMBER V. PART III.

LONDON:

Printed for E. HODGSON (the Proprietor) And Sold by J. WALMSLAY, No. 35, Chancery Lane, and S. BLADON, No. 13, Pater-noster Row.

MDCCLXXXIV.

[PRICE SIX-PENCE.]

THE WHOLE PROCEEDINGS UPON THE

KING's Commission of the Peace, Oyer and Terminer, and Gaol Delivery for the CITY of LONDON, &c.

Continuation of the Trial of Thomas White .

If you should first presume, that they were concealed in the house after that strict search was made, and afte rwards that they had hit upon this very ingenious device of pushing back the bolt, and carried it into execution; then there is another circumstance, but which is of infinitely less weight in my opinion, but still it is a circumstance, and that is, the screw found in the lanthorn, which the prisoner used to light him to bed; now if you go so far as to make the other two suppositions, you will certainly not hesitate to go a little further in supposing the robbers to make use of the prisoner's lanthorn, for that is not near so strained a supposition as the other, and if they made use of his lanthorn to give them light, when they opened the street-door, the screw might get into the lanthorn, as likely that way as any other; and it would be more likely that a stranger should leave the screw in the lanthorn, who would not care what inference should be drawn from it, than that the prisoner should leave that evidence against himself. If you are satisfied in this case, that there could be no persons concealed in the house, or that nobody could get into the prisoner's room without his letting them in; still I think the probability is, that the prisoner is not the man that unscrewed the lock of the hall door, but that it was unscrewed to let some other persons out who had got in, and that makes an end of the materiality of the screw being found in his lanthorn, altogether; with respect to the circumstance of the wax candles, the person who came in might make use of that light for the purpose of examining the house, they might find that as necessary as the prisoner; they would not however, so well know where to find it, and they must have other light at first to search for it; but the length of time it was burning is material, for it is turned down in the candlestick, it was not left burning by the people that went out, and it had been burning I should think two hours, by the length of the piece, and the prisoner had no occasion, if he went to bed immediately to burn that candle, because the candle in his lanthorn was not burnt out; the length of time is material, because if these people were so long as two hours in the house or more, it is very extraordinary that the prisoner should not be able to find any means of alarm, though it is possible

that he might be intimidated by threats; the chissel is not a common chissel, it is clearly a house-breakers chissel, a chissel that certainly did not belong to the prisoner, but to people whoever they were, who either got into the house, or were let in by him: the declarations of the prisoner as far as they go would be very material, but we do not find that at any time, he has given any distinct and satisfactory account of the manner in which the people got in, he says he was asleep and cannot tell how they got in, but what they did after they got into his room, how they lighted the candles, how long they continued, that he has given no distinct account of; he declared he had lost these things himself, and there is no evidence he had not lost them; he complained very much of being hurt, but there is no evidence of his being hurt, or in what degree; these are all the circumstances that I have thought it my duty to point out to you, which appear to press against the prisoner; on the other hand there are some slight circumstances that seem favourable, first his crying out instantly and immediately upon the person rapping at the door, like a person in distress, glad of receiving relief; he instantly crys out who is there, for God's sake come in! and then makes complaints; he was convinced the thieves would not knock at the door, and he instantly called out to the person that did: that standing by itself, is certainly a circumstance rather pointing at innocence than guilt: and another circumstance in his favour is, that he appears to be very strongly and effectually tied, and tied tight with cords, and long enough to have left marks of his being pretty severely tied, on his legs and ancles; however any person that would venture to commit this offence, would not much object to the hardship of being tied in order to avoid the punishment; you will take all these circumstances into your consideration: that there is a strong suspicion against the prisoner from those circumstances, nobody as I said before, can doubt; but God forbid that upon mere suspicion, a man should be convicted of a crime which must effect his life if he is convicted; and it is therefore for you who have attended this trial, to determine whether there is a reasonable supposition without putting a violence on common sense, which will be consistent with the innocence of the prisoner: Juries are not to carry their lenity so far as to run quite wild into conjecture, to suppose things altogether shocking to common sense, and probability; but wherever they can find such a supposition as a reasonable man can, consistent with common sense and probability; it is therefore for you to determine whether there appears to you sufficient grounds, to think it possible that some person might be concealed in the house, and if concealed in the house, might by some ingenious device or other, get into the prisoner's room and force it open, if you believe it to be bolted on the inside; another thing is, whether you are sufficiently sure of the door being bolted, for there is a possibility that the door might hitch or catch, and if she gave it but a very slight push, she might very easily be discouraged from trying it further; if you suppose the prisoner's door to be unbolted, the case is not half so strong against him, as if you suppose it to be bolted: but it is for you to judge, to attend to the circumstances that will appear to you to have weight on the one side or the other, and you will find such a verdict as your conscience will direct, and I do not doubt but it will be satisfactory.

GUILTY Death .

When Sentence of Death was passed on this prisoner, and on the other capital convicts, Mr. Recorder particularly alluding to his offence, addressed him and them, in the following words.

Prisoners at the bar, you have all of you been convicted, after a full investigation of the circumstances of your respective cases, and an impartial hearing of every thing that could be urged in your defence, of crimes which the laws of your country have thought necessary to punish with death. The safety of society requires that

the guilty should suffer for the protection and preservation of the innocent, and that those who have proved that they can be restrained by no laws human or divine, from making the most dangerous attacks on the persons and properties of their fellow subjects, should be removed from that society, to the peace and security of which they have become so hostile. The offence of one amongst you, Thomas White is of a nature which requires particularly to be mentioned, you have been convicted of associating with others, to plunder the house of your mistress, in which you had been lately admitted as a servant, and in which you were under trust and confidence, in the hour of night when the family were gone to rest, and when the loss of their lives as well as their properties, might have been the consequence of your admitting ruffians of that description into the house: this is an offence so dangerous in its nature, so alarming to every individual, so perfectly destructive of the peace and safety of families, it is an offence of such a nature, that it raises apprehensions that will prevent any man from going quietly to rest, if he cannot have confidence in those of his own family; and, therefore, I am afraid it will necessarily call for a severe example in your instance: I do not mean, by any thing I say at this time, to preclude the mercy of your Sovereign, but thus much it is my duty to say, that your offence is of a very aggravated nature, and I am perfectly satisfied, there must be some new and extraordinary circumstance, other than has already appeared in your favour, to induce your gracious Sovereign, who has a regard for all his subjects, as well as for extending mercy to the guilty, to extend that mercy to you; you should therefore prepare particularly for that fate which you must expect, and I hope that in the reflections of your own mind, your guilt will appear to you in such a light, to make such impressions and produce such a change of disposition, which may entitle you to that mercy hereafter which you cannot probably expect here. The same impressions I wish to be made on the minds of the rest of you, several of whom must shortly expect the same fate; and which impressions of guilt and remorse for your crimes, whether you are to be removed from society, or to be permitted longer to exist in it, will be equally beneficial to yourselves: in that hope it only remains for me to pronounce on you the dreadful sentence of the law, as the inevitable consequence of your conviction; which is, that you, and each of you, be taken from hence to the place from whence you came, and from thence to the place of execution, there to be hanged by the necks until you are dead, and the Lord have mercy on your souls!

Reference Number: t17840526-4

522. ELIZABETH DAY and MARY CARTER were indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 10th day of April last, seventy-six yards of silk sarsnet, value 6 l. the property of William Bennett , privily in his shop .

FERDINAND SMITH sworn.

I am shopman to Mr. Bennet, a mercer , in Oxford road , the prisoners came to our shop together about five in the afternoon, on the 10th of April, there were several other customers in the shop at the time, there was my mistress and the apprentice boy besides me; the apprentice served them, I was serving a lady with some black silk mode, they asked for some white Persian, I called the boy out to shew it them, I was called into the other shop, and in the mean time, while I was in the other shop -

Mr. Garrow, Prisoner's Council. Do not tell us what happened when you was absent. - My mistress sent me out to run after them, I went and returned, and this piece of blue sarsnet had come from the weaver's just before; I took it in; I followed the prisoners, I did not stop them, but returned and went out again, and I brought them both out of a hair-dresser's shop; and coming along the passage at the hair-dresser's, the prisoner Carter dropped this piece from under her clothes.

Court. Are you sure the prisoners at the bar are the same persons that came into your

shop, and enquired for the sarsnet? - Yes.

Will you positively swear that that roll that dropped from the prisoner Carter was your master's property, and was in the shop when the prisoners came in? - Yes.

What do you know it by? - By the number at the end.

Have you examined the texture of it? - No, I swear by the number.

What did the prisoners say when you charged them? - They could not speak at all.

Court. How far was the hair dresser's from your shop? - About forty yards in the same street, it goes into Oxford-market, I took them into the shop, and sent for a constable, and the young woman said to the old one, see what you have brought me to now, or something of that sort.

When did you first observe that roll to fall from Carter? - It came from under her cloaths, either her cloak, or underneath her petticoats; I believe the young one went back to my mistress, they were taken and committed.

Mr. Garrow. How long might you have been engaged in the stuff shop, after you left the mercer's shop, before you passed these people in the street? - Perhaps ten minutes.

So that what had passed, during that ten minutes, in the other shop, you cannot tell of your own knowledge? - No.

You say Day came back in your absence on some business? - Yes.

Have you ever heard your master give an account of that? - No.

The barber's shop has a passage in common with that house; does not it lead to some other places in common use, some necessaries? - There is a passage that leads to the necessary.

Carter had been at the necessary at the barber's shop? - Yes.

How long might she have been there? - I cannot tell.

Long enough to have thrown down the piece in the necessary, I take it? - She had thrown the paper down the necessary.

How do you know that? - I would not swear any thing but what I know to be true.

Then you know nothing about the paper being in the necessary? - The boy found it.

You say Carter, if she had that piece of Persian in the necessary, had certainly an opportunity to have thrown it down? - I suppose she had.

Had you left it folded up in the same package it came in? - I had taken out the bill of parcels, and tied it up.

It seems very singular, that you should know a piece of Persian, which is very like all other pieces? - I am very sure of it.

Shew me the mark by which you swear to it? - We had not another piece in the shop.

That is true, but other shopkeepers had many; now this mark is made by somebody before it comes to your shop? - By the weaver; I know the number, it is two thousand two hundred and twenty-two.

What does that import? - It is only to distinguish each piece from one another.

Then after the Persian had been sold, the stick would have been applied for whatever purpose you chose to want it? - The stick is generally thrown backwards.

Is not an old roll applied to a new purpose? - Not in our shop.

May there not be an infinite multiplication of these four two's in the mercor's shops in this town; I ask you this upon your oath, without referring to the bill of parcels could you have told me there were four two's upon it? - It is always the case.

Answer my question? - Yes, I could.

Do you swear positively? - I swear that positively, because I had compared them with each other when I opened them.

Whether independent of the bill of parcels you knew there was 2222 upon it? - I could.

You mean to swear that positively? - Yes, I do swear it positively.

Are there any other marks upon the roll? - Only the selvage.

That is common; is there any other mark upon it? - I do not know that there is.

Did not you see the mark? - I did not observe it.

Did not they ask for a petticoat? - Yes, Miss, Day gave my mistress an order for a blue silk petticoat.

Did not she leave two shillings earnest? - Yes, she did, and gave me a false direction.

How do you know that? - I went there, and somebody told me she did not live there.

Mr. Garrow. My Lord, I submit there is nothing to charge the prisoners, and I would not advise them to make any defence, for this man had been absent ten minutes, and the piece might have been sold for any thing he knew; all that this man says is, that it was there, and that he afterwards found it in a barber's shop; how it came there non constat.

Prisoner Day. I am quite innocent.

The prisoner Carter called two witnesses, who gave her a good character.

Court. Gentlemen of the Jury, I think you may lay aside the capital part of this case, this was immediately known; it could not be done so privately but it must have been observed, or what occasion was there for that immediate suspicion; the pursuit commenced immediately: and in this case the apprentice is not brought here, nor the wife; why are they kept back? they might have informed you that they saw it taken, which would have taken away the capital part; therefore, in my apprehension, you may find Carter Guilty of the taking, but not privately, and you may excuse Day, unless you are confident that she came with the same intention.

The Jury withdrew, and returned with a verdict

ELIZABETH DAY , MARY CARTER ,

GUILTY Of stealing, but not privately .

Each to be privately whipped , and confined to hard labour twelve months in the House of Correction .

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury before Mr. Baron PERYN .

Reference Number: t17840526-5

523. SARAH SLATER was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 22d of April last, one silk cloak, value 42 s. the property of Thomas Banks , privily in his shop .

JANE BANKS sworn.

I am wife to Thomas Banks , he is a millener, piece-broker, and salesman , he keeps an open shop; on the 22d of April last, I lost a mode cloak, with a broad lace on it, it was quite new.

What might be the value of it? - Forty-five shillings.

That was the saleable price, I suppose? - Yes; the prisoner came into the shop to buy a cloak, on the Thursday the 22d of April, she asked the price of a cloak that hung at the door, and I asked my daughter to come and look at the price; she said that would not do, and desired to look at some more; she came into the shop, as I told her I had more; I shewed her several more, but she did not buy any, she stayed near half an hour, she asked the price of several, but bought none; she looked over the cloaks all the while.

Did you see her take any thing whilst she was in the shop? - I did not see her take any thing; I was putting up the cloaks and I missed a cloak before she got out of the shop, because it was a broader lace than the rest; she was going, and I came round the other side of the compter, as I thought it might be dropped; it was not dropped; then she rather made to the door, I was rather confused, and I said, you have fixed upon one at last; she said, I pitch upon a cloak of your's, you wicked woman, I have none of your cloak, nor nothing belonging to you, and she turned herself round and held up her arms to shew that she had nothing

about her; I stopped her in the shop, my daughter called in a neighbour; when my daughter came in, I shook her clothes, and could find nothing; at last of all she had concealed it under her petticoats, and it came down, I am sure it fell from her; ( the cloak produced) it is my own making.

Court. What did she say? - O then she cried out for me to forgive her; I said to her, have you any money to purchase any one cloak I have shewn you; she said no, she had but half a crown and two pence; a little before this happened, she bought a little bit of muslin for ten-pence.

ANN SAFFORY sworn.

I am daughter to the last witness; I saw the prisoner come in, she bought a bit of muslin, and she looked at some cloaks, but bought none; she asked the price of several, near twenty, and particularly one that hung at the door, then she was going out of the shop and my mother would not let her go; I called in Mr. Harwood, a gentleman next door, and he came in.

Had she been searched? - Only shook; I only called him at the window, and was back again in two minutes; I saw the bulk of the cloak under her petticoats before it dropped, and I saw it drop from her.

Court. You did not see her take it? - No, I saw the top of the lace before it dropped from her.

THOMAS HARWOOD sworn.

I live next door; I was called in, and as I was going in I saw the prisoner drop the cloak from under her petticoats, or under her apron.

Court. Are all of you sure that is the woman? - Yes.

PRISONER's DEFENCE.

I was going along the street, and I saw an old apron hanging up in the shop, and went in and asked the price of it; she said one shilling, I bid her ten-pence and bought it; the cloak lay upon the floor when I went in and when I came out, and I never touched it with my hands.

Court to Prosecutrix. Did she buy that apron of you? - She did.

Prisoner. I am quite a stranger, I never was in London before in my life; I had been but two days in London.

GUILTY Death .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury, before Mr. Justice WILLES.

Reference Number: t17840526-6

524. JOSEPH HICKMAN and JAMES DYER were indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 24th day of March last, one hundred and fifty pounds weight of lead, value 20 s. belonging to the Rev. Carrington Garrick , clerk , and then and there affixed to a certain building called Hendon Church, of the said Carrington Garrick, then and there being, feloniously did steal, take, and carry away .

A Second Count, laying the lead to be the property of John Bond and Ralph Mitcheson , the church-wardens , as church-wardens.

A Third Count, laying the lead to be the property of the inhabitants and parishioners of the said parish.

The witnesses examined apart at the request of the prisoners.

JOHN BOND sworn.

I am one of the church-wardens of the parish of Hendon ; on the 24th of March last, the prisoners were both taken with a quantity of lead upon them; I was in town, the plumber came to me, and informed me on the 25th; I went down to Hendon to examine whether the lead was belonging to the church or not, it corresponded exactly; we have found all the lead since by information of a man who is in Court, one Lively, we found it in a dunghill in Edgware-road.

THOMAS JONES sworn.

I am a plumber at Hendon on the 26th of March last, I was called on by Mr. Bond, the church-warden, to try some pieces of

lead which had been found on some people that had been taken up; I had leaded this church before, here is a piece now in Court which matched exactly, and corresponded.

(The piece produced.)

Mr. Bond. It has been in my custody; I marked the lead with my own name, and I left it with a gentleman here in town.

Mr. Jones. I applied it and it corresponded exactly; I have no reason to doubt but it is the very same lead that was on the church.

WILLIAM RUTHERFORD sworn.

I am an inhabitant of one of the bye lanes on the Edgware road; on the 24th of March last, just turned eleven in the forenoon, I saw the two prisoners coming down the bye lane facing my door; I keep the Harp on the Edgware road; they had two bags, like carpenter's nail bags, as I suppose they had been formerly; I had some suspicion of them, and I watched them about two hundred yards from my house, they got out of the road over a gate, and in about a quarter of an hour these two men came by my house without the bag, I went and searched for the lead, and in a field I found a bag with two sheets of lead; Sermon found a bag over the hedge; these are the men that had these two bags on their backs.

Are you sure they were the same bags? - Yes, I am.

Prisoners. By what marks do you know the lead? - I know I saw you carry it.

THOMAS HAWKINS sworn.

I was in company with the last witness in searching for lead; I was coming along the Edgware road, near the five mile-stone, on the 24th of March, I stopped for a pint of beer, the two prisoners came by empty handed, going towards the country, the landlord came in and asked me if I saw them, he said they had been by before, loaded with lead or copper; we went together, and took a pair of pistols with us, and searched a barn, and up came another young fellow, and asked us what we were after, we told him, and he helped to search after it; I was not present when the lead was found.

JOSEPH SERMON sworn.

I was present with Rutherford in searching for some lead, I was coming down the road, and Rutherford and Hawkins were seeking for something; I asked them what they were seeking for; he said, here is a man has used Mr. Rutherford ill; I got over to them, we looked round, and I found a bag laying in a ditch, and I pulled it out, the bag contained lead, but I cannot say the weight of it; Hawkins and I went in pursuit of these two men, and took them at a public house, better than a mile off, they denied it very strong.

Prisoner. I suppose Rutherford is a man that will say any thing, he has two young men here, that I never saw, that will take my life away.

MARY BATT sworn.

On the 24th of March, a man in a lightish coloured coat threw a bag off his shoulders, and covered it over with some dung.

Court. Can you say it was the prisoner? - No.

Then you need not be examined.

JOHN LIVELY sworn.

Do you know either of the prisoners at the bar? - Yes, my Lord, I was here last sessions for a small trifle, and I laid in the same ward with them.

Court. Was you tried here? - Yes.

Was you convicted? - No; when I was coming out after my trial, they asked me if I would dispose of a quantity of lead for them.

Which asked you, both, or one of them? - Both of them; they said they believed there was about six hundred weight of it, if I would take it and carry it to Oxford-road and sell it; I went there, and took a man with me, and I was detected and stopped between Kilbourn and Paddington; we were taken to the watch-house, and from the watch-house to the Rotation Office,

then to New Prison; and they advertised the lead, and they could not make it out, so they discharged us: after we were discharged, we went and looked for more, and there we found three hundred weight more; then we went and acquainted the Gentlemen of the Parish, I went to Mr. Bond's house.

Court to Bond. Was this last lead applied? - We applied part of it.

Prisoner. What he says is very false, this young man lay in the upper ward, and I never changed ten words with him.

Lively. You lay by me every night.

Court to Jones. Does this lead appear to have come from the church? - It appears to me to be the same kind of lead; but there is some deficiency in the quantity, the last witness says he was detected with two hundred and a half, which I have not seen.

Court. Have any of the witnesses a knowledge of these two men at the bar.

Bond. I know the man with the cut lip, that is Dyer, I have seen him loitering about the roads frequently.

Prisoner Dyer. I never was there in my life.

PRISONER HICKMAN's DEFENCE.

I was out of work, and this young man asked me to go and seek for work, so we went to Mr. Rutherford's house, and I came into the road again, and I went to have a pint of beer, and we drank it and called for another; these gentlemen came up and said, I take you into custody on suspicion of stealing lead; I asked him what he took me for, he could not say, and the justice committed me.

Jury to Rutherford. Did you take them into custody? - Yes.

The prisoner Hickman called one witness, who gave him a good character.

Court. In my apprehension it cannot be the property of the vicar, for he has no freehold, and this is a part of the freehold: it would not have been an indictable offence, if it had not been for this act of Parliament, it was therefore necessary to have a special law for the purpose. If the indictment is to be supported at all, it must be on the third count; but whether by coupling inhabitants with parishioners will prevent them from being convicted under it, will be the subject of a future enquiry.

BOTH GUILTY .

Sentence respited till next Sessions .

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury, before Mr. Baron PERRYN .

Reference Number: t17840526-7

525. WILLIAM SMITH was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 28th of March last, six live hens, price 6 s. one live cock, value 2 s. five live ducks, value 4 s. and four eggs, value 2 d. the property of John Mayor .

JOHN MAYOR sworn.

I keep the Bear and Castle Inn , in Oxford-street ; on the 28th of March last, between five and six, I went up to the hay-loft, which was usually locked up, and I found all the poultry, except one, and all the eggs were gone from the nest; I had not then found the fowls, but turning round, I found six hens and one cock in a bag, they were all dead and warm but one; in the stable, the corner of the hen house, I found the prisoner under the manger; I immediately examined the remainder of the stables, the ducks were not then found; I pursued the prisoner and took him, he refused being searched, but on searching him, we found four eggs upon him, he said they were taken out of the nest.

Was there any promise made him? - No, none at all.

- WHITE sworn.

I was present when this man was found; I came home between five and six, I went and looked in the stable next to the hen house, and I found the prisoner under the manger, I saw the bag of fowls found behind the door.

CHARLES YOUNG sworn.

I took the prisoner and searched him, and found the eggs upon him, four of them were whole and one was broke; he said a man gave him the eggs, and that he took the ducks away.

PRISONER's DEFENCE.

A man gave me the eggs to boil, a sailor; I have no friends at all, I came out of Warwickshire.

GUILTY .

Transported for seven years .

Court. What are you? - I was bred up in a farmer's yard in Warwickshire, my father and mother are dead, and I have no friends, therefore I came to town; I am twenty-five.

Tried by the second London Jury, before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-8

526. WILLIAM EGGLESTON was indicted, with one TIMOTHY HURST , for feloniously assaulting one William Coe , on the King's highway, on the 2d of February last, putting him in fear and danger of his life, and feloniously taking from his person, and against his will, one man's hat, value 5 s. the property of the said William.

The prosecutor and witnesses not appearing, the prisoner was ACQUITTED .

Reference Number: t17840526-9

527. JOHN ANDERSON was indicted for feloniously stealing on the 2d day of April , three linen table cloths, value 20 s. and three linen aprons, value 6 s. the property of Stephen Cook .

The witnesses examined apart at the request of the prisoner.

ELEANOR COOK sworn.

On the 22d of April, about the middle of the day, I was alone in the kitchen, and I heard the parlour door making a shrieking noise, which did not appear like the unlocking of a door to me, I listened again and heard the same, I heard a footstep along the parlour, and a man came out of the parlour with a bag in his hand, and I said hey! hey! what are you about? and he got off, and this man at the bar rushed out of the parlour and knocked me down; and beat me several times, cut my head, pulled my cap off, my hair was all about my ears, my husband and daughter were in the yard, and they came to my assistance, but did not imagine it was me, the sight of him was never lost from me, he was but a very few yards off, he was brought back in an instant.

What things did you miss? - Three aprons that were cut from the lines, and two table cloths.

STEPHEN COOK sworn.

I first saw the prisoner, and as soon as my wife cried out, I was backwards in the mangling room, I have only one step across the yard, and I opened the door, and saw her with her hair all about her head, and her forehead all bleeding, I first got sight of him about ten yards from the house, I cried out, stand you thief, and he run; he was hardly out of sight all the time, he was stopped, and I brought him back to my house, he said he did not know what other people might come to; says my daughter, you cannot eat your dinner without a fine table cloth; says he, hold your tongue.

JOHN GLOVER sworn.

The prosecutor asked me to assist him, I went with him as he said he had been robbed, I saw the prisoner and the woman bleeding.

Court to Mrs. Cook. You see you were mistaken in supposing this man never got out of sight; are you sure that was the man that was in your house? - I am positive he was one of the men, I followed him out of my house, I seized him twice, I had no great opportunity in looking him in his face.

Ho do you know that this is the same man? - I am well convinced this is the same man.

Prisoner. They stopped me, and began disputing about the reward.

Prisoner. I had my hair tied then.

Court. Was that so? - Yes, it was wrapped round in the nature of a pig-tail.

Prosecutor. His father was with me last Sunday.

Prisoner. My father was never with you.

GUILTY .

Court. Your conduct on this occasion proves you to be a very unsafe person in this country, and you are ordered to be.

Transported to America for seven years .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury, before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-10

528. CHRISTIANA, otherwise CATHERINE WIGMORE was indicted for feloniously stealing on the 12th day of April last, one copper chocolate pot, value 3 s. and one copper candlestick, value 2 s. the property of John Reynolds .

JOHN REYNOLDS sworn.

On the 12th of April I lost the things mentioned in the indictment, when I came home in the evening I missed them, I believe, I left my mother-in-law at home, my wife was out, I went to the broker's, and enquired for such things, and they told me there had not been such things for sale then, but he told me to go to the publick-house, I went to the house and found the things; the man's name is Moses; I never saw the prisoner but at the Justice's.

SAMUEL MOSES sworn.

Do you remember the last witness coming to you on the 12th of April? - On the 12th of April I was sent for by Belle Frazer ; they took charge of the prisoner for another thing, when I came to the prisoner, I laid hold of her, she had something of a bundle in her apron, she would not tell me whose property the things were, I took her into custody, and she was committed; the things have been in my possession ever since.

Prosecutor. The door was left on the latch, there is nothing else below that is worth taking away.

ISABELLA FRAZER sworn.

When I stopped the prisoner these things were found upon her, I saw them taken from her.

(The things deposed to.)

PRISONER's DEFENCE.

A woman gave them to me, and said she had pledged them at one Smith's, a pawnbroker, and desired me to tell them there she wanted to pay me eight shillings she owed me. I have no witnesses.

GUILTY .

To be privately whipped , and confined to hard labour six months in the House of Correction .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-11

529. JAMES BAGLEY was indicted for feloniously stealing on the 27th of February , one silver watch, value 40 s. the property of Thomas House .

THOMAS HOUSE sworn.

On the 27th of February last, I lost my watch in a street opposite Chancery-lane, in Holborn ; it was about seven in the evening, I was going up Holborn, and I saw a croud, and there was a cart overturned, I went to see what was the matter, I had not been there a minute before this fellow run out against me, and gave me a jostle, and said something, I cannot tell what; I found his hand down at my fob, I rather found my watch drawn, and he run away immediately, he run down Chancery-lane, and I followed him and overtook him, I cried stop thief, and a man tried to stop him, but he

run on, and I pursued him, and he fell down, and I fell down, and as I got up I saw him getting up, and I pursued him again, and overtook him on the other side of the way.

Was he ever out of your sight? - Only when I fell down, and I got up directly.

Was he so out of your sight, as that you could mistake one person for another? - No, my Lord.

Had he your watch when you took him? - Not when he was searched, we did not examine him immediately, I never got the watch since.

Are you positive that the watch was in your fob when you stopped? - Yes.

How long before had you seen it? - Not a great while.

Had you stopped in any croud before? - No I had not, the prisoner said he had not the watch himself, but he knew who had.

Court. Was there any promise made? - I told him if he would let me have the watch, all should be well.

Did he tell you who had it? - No, he said his father lived in very good repute.

Mr. Garrow Prisoner's Counsel. How long had you been in the crowd, before you observed a hand in your pocket? - Not a minute.

Was there a very considerable crowd? - Not many.

How many do you think? - Very likely a score.

This was in the evening? - Yes, it was a very light evening, I clapped my hand down as quick as I could, I pursued him and never lost sight of him at all, till I fell down.

How far did he run down Chancery-lane before he was stopped? - About two hundred yards.

Nothing was found upon him? - No.

From the time you took him, till the time he was searched, had he any possible opportunity of conveying away the watch? - I cannot tell.

Before you got hold of him, you never lost sight of him? - No, only when I fell down.

Did you see him throw any thing away or give any thing to any body? - No.

Have you enquired whether what he told you respecting his father is true, that he is a reputable Watchmaker? - Yes.

And this young man is by trade a Watchmaker? - Yes.

And all the private conversation between you was relative to you getting your watch again? - Yes.

Court. That declaration went to the returning of the watch.

PRISONER's DEFENCE.

On this evening, I was going down Chancery-lane, and I turned my head and there was a great mob, and a cart was fell down, in about a minute and a half, two young fellows shoved against me, and shoved me down, I had my fife in my hand, I heard the cry of stop thief! that gentleman came up, and bid them search me directly, and coming up Warwick-court again, the prosecutor said give me my watch, or make me recompence for it, says I, my father is a watchmaker; a gentleman said you had better settle it, and said he had rather do any thing in the world than see me in trouble.

Court to Prosecutor. Did you search him before you delivered him to the constables? No, we did not.

Prisoner. The prosecutor searched me in Chancery-lane.

(The prisoner called five witnesses, who all gave him a good character.)

GUILTY .

Transported for seven years .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury, before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-12

530. WILLIAM HARRISON was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 20th of March last, one iron stove, value 4 s. the property of Daniel Barret .

WILLIAM BARRET sworn.

My father is a Broker in Castle-street, Long-acre , on the 20th of March last, about nine at night I was shutting up shop, and had almost got in all my things, and about five minutes before, I missed an iron stove, and I said to my mother the stove is gone, I run out immediately and looked two or three ways, and I saw two men in Short's Gardens carrying a stove, one of the men was the prisoner, and he had my stove, I took him in Short's Gardens, just by our house.

Court. How did you know that to be your father's stove? - I had taken it in and out several times, the prisoner was carrying the stove before him, I took hold of the prisoner's collar, and told him to bring it back again, he said he found it as he came along; when he came to the Justices, he said a man chucked it down, and swore he would carry it no further, any person might have it that would.

PRISONER's DEFENCE.

I was going home, and a man was carrying this grate along the street, and he said I am tired with carrying it, if you will carry it up as far as the Seven Dials, I will give you four-pence, I was glad to earn the four-pence, and I took it up.

Jury. What weight was the stove? - About half a hundred weight.

GUILTY .

Whipped .

Tried by the Second Middlesex Jury before Mr. Baron PERRYN .

Reference Number: t17840526-13

531. FRANCIS BLAKE was indicted for burglariously and feloniously breaking and entering the dwelling house of Anne and Alice Crow , spinsters, about the hour of two in the night, on the 17th of May , and burglariously stealing therein, nine linen shirts, value 18 s. two pair of silk stockings, value 4 s. four handkerchiefs, value 2 s. two pair of ruffles, value 12 d. eight oz. weight of chocolate, value 2 d. the property of William Rapley ; and six muslin neckcloths, value 20 s. the property of William Curtis , Esq .

WILLIAM RAPLEY sworn.

I am servant to Mr. Curtis, I was at Maidenhead Bridge at the time with my master, the prisoner had lived with Mr. Curtis, and had been discharged that service about two months.

MARY BOWER sworn.

I lodge at the house of Mr. Curtis.

Mr. Garrow Counsel for the prosecution. Who was up last in the house, the night this burglary was committed? - Miss Alice Crow .

Did you see any thing broke any where in the morning? - Yes, about six in the morning of the 18th of this month, I saw a window broke, and the door unbolted, the window was close by the door, it is divided from the door only by the door post, it was a small leaded window which had no opening, the lead was taken off a few of the panes, by which a man could introduce his hand to open the bolt of the door.

In what state did you find the bolt of the door? - It was open, I had not particularly observed the window, I had no reason to think it was broke, it is a window to the back part of the house, that looks into the yard which adjoins to a stable yard, and we pass it constantly.

Court. Where is the house? - In Bond street.

PENELOPE GARNON sworn.

I lodge in the house of Mr. Crow in Bond-street.

Did you go down stairs in the night or the morning that this burglary was committed? - I was down stairs between four and five in the morning.

Had you occasion to pass by this window? - I did, I saw it was broke, I did not observe the door.

Had you seen that window in the course of the preceding day? - Yes it was quite whole.

Court. At what hour? - I saw it in the evening, about dusk.

In what way was the window broke in the morning? - There were three panes broke.

Could any body introduce his hand through that hole? - I rather suppose they could.

Was it light when you went down stairs? - Quite light.

Whose house was this? - Mrs. Crow's.

- JONES sworn.

I am a coachman, I live near Mrs. Crow's house, about the 17th of this month, about seven in the morning, the servant Mary Bower called over to me, that she rather suspected there had been, or were, some thieves in the house, I went down stairs and saw the kitchen, and the things being thrown about gave me a suspicion; in the further corner of the kitchen, between the copper and the water-tub, I found the prisoner covered with a basket, with some shoes in it.

Court. What time was that? - It was about seven.

Were there any things in the basket with him? - We found a bundle with some shirts and things, and some chocolate tied up in an apron of the maid's.

What account did the prisoner give of himself? - The maid asked him at that time what brought him there, he said he only wanted to see his fellow servants, I remember his living in the family before; the bundle is in Court, I had it in my custody till the re-examination, then I delivered it into the man's hands that swore to it.

(The bundle produced, and deposed to.)

Court. Where were these things found wrapped up in that manner? - Between the water-cask and the copper, under the prisoner, he upon that, and the basket upon the prisoner.

Prisoner. I know nothing about the charge.

Court. Have you any witnesses to call? - No.

Court. Gentlemen of the Jury, this case will give you very little trouble, the only question is, whether you will find him guilty of the burglary or of stealing in the dwelling house only.

GUILTY. Of stealing to the value of 39 s. but not of the burglary .

Transported for seven years .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury, before Mr. Baron PERRYN .

Reference Number: t17840526-14

532. EDWARD HUDSON was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 14th day of March last, eight hempen coal sacks, value 20 s. one hair cloth covered, value 20 s. three live hens, value 3 s. and one live Turkey, value 2 s. the property of Richard Holmes .

RICHARD HOLMES sworn.

On the 14th of March, I perceived I had been robbed, I live in Kentish Town; and deal in coals, there had been a little snow in the night, and I traced some footsteps, and I found a part of the property concealed which contained eight coal sacks, and I left a man to watch them, to see who would come for them, I lost three hens and one turkey.

JOHN CLARK sworn.

I am servant to the last witness, on Sunday March 14th, my master and I went and traced the man over the field, to some old buildings, and we found a coal-sack there, I waited, and about six at night, I walked down the road towards Kentish-Town and up the field again, and as I came back again, I perceived two men taking them out of the place, that was about six o'clock on the 14th of March, they were in two parcels, I pursued them over the fields into Islington road, and then the patrol pursued them, and I lost sight of them and the patrol too, I never lost sight of them before the patrol took them.

Was the prisoner one of these persons that took the sack? - Yes.

How near was you to them? - As near as I am to you, and he turned round, and seeing me pursuing he said he would not be taken, they both run for it immediately, there was several people that run in the field, but nobody any further but himself.

Court. Is the patrol here that took him? - No.

Prisoner. When you called to me first, and told me the property belonged to you, I said if it belongs to you take it, it is not mine, and I put it down immediately? - I asked him where he was going with them, he turned and threw down the sacks, and said he would not be taken.

Prisoner. I have witnesses to call, at the first hearing the prosecutor did not know how many sacks there were; on Sunday I went as far as Islington after a shop-mate of mine, I went from there to Holloway, and they said he lived at Kentish Town, I could not hear of him, I went to the Blue-last, at Kentish Town, and drank two pints of beer, I was coming home and had occasion to ease myself, and these things lay in this old ruinous place, and I took up part of them, I had not carried them above twenty yards before this young man called to me, and said it was his property, I said they were not mine, he might take them, and I laid them down immediately.

The Prisoner called one witness, who gave him a good character.

(The things produced.)

Court. Is there any mark on them? - There is none on them.

You say these are the sacks your master lost? - Yes.

And they were dropped by the prisoner? - Yes.

GUILTY .

Transported for seven years .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury, before Mr. Baron PERRYN .

Reference Number: t17840526-15

533. ANN ROBERTS , otherwise Hall , was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 10th day of May, fourteen yards of printed cotton, value 34 s. the property of Henry Thwaites , privily in his shop .

THOMAS BALL sworn.

I am shopman to Mr. Thwaites, linen-draper , in West-street, Seven Dials ; about three in the afternoon, the prisoner came to our shop with another woman, and asked for some printed cotton, there were many others in the shop besides me; I shewed her several, and after seeing several, after some time hentating, and not seeming to like any of them, I saw her conceal this under her clothes which was one of those that was shewn her; I let her go out of the shop before I let it be known to any one; I then immediately followed her into the street, and brought her back to the middle of the shop, and informed my master; and a constable was sent for, and while he was sent for I ordered her to drop the cotton that she had concealed under her clothes, which she immediately dropped on the floor; this is the cotton.

(The cotton deposed to.)

PRISONER's DEFENCE.

I went into the shop to buy a bit for a bedstead, I bid him two shillings a yard, and he pulled me back into the shop, and I said, he was very welcome to search me, and he took up my petticoats, and found nothing about me, and found the cotton laying upon the ground close to the counter, and he said, Oh! here it lies; it was in the middle of the shop, three yards from any compter.

Ball. It is false what she says.

Prisoner. If you speak the truth, you know it did, you know you said so at the Justices, so you know you did.

Jury. Was it tied up when taken away, or loose? - It was loose.

GUILTY Of stealing, but not privately .

To be privately whipped , and confined to hard labour six months in the House of Correction .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury, before Mr. Baron PERRYN .

Reference Number: t17840526-16

534. SAMUEL PEYTON was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 3d day of May , one watch, with gold enamelled case, value 7 l. and two cornelian seals, set in gold, value 3 l. the property of William Henry Bunbury , Esq ; in his dwelling house .

WILLIAM HENRY BUNBURY , Esq; sworn.

I live in the Office belonging to the Paymaster General.

Have you a lodging there, or is it the name of the house? - The ground floor is the office, I have all the upper part of the house.

Who does the house belong to? - It belongs to government, I apprehend.

Do you hire it, or is it given to you? - It is given to me, I have the first floor, second floor, and the garrets; I lost an enamelled watch, and two seals set in gold, the beginning of this month, but the hour of the day I cannot precisely say.

Whose house do you call this; who is the officer that lives there? - I look upon it to belong to the Paymaster.

Who had the lower floor here? - It is the publick office.

Then you properly call it the Paymaster's house, or the government's house? - Yes.

Mr. Garrow. I shall certainly, my Lord, standing here for the prisoner, contend this is not the house described in the indictment.

Mr. Baron Perryn . I believe there will be no occasion to trouble you.

Mr. Justice Willes. The only difference is, if it is not stealing out of the dwelling house, it is not a capital offence, that is all the difference.

Court to Prosecutor. Where did your watch hang? - It generally hung at the bed's head, my bed room was on the second floor.

What might be the value of it? - I cannot positively say, it cost me seventeen guineas, there were two cornelian seals set in gold; on Monday the 3d of May, when I came home in the evening, my wife said she had been very much alarmed, that a strange man had been found in her dressing room; I did not miss my watch till Thursday following; Mrs. Bunbury was taken ill that night, and I did not think of my watch; I did not usually carry this watch in my pocket, it was the watch she used to wear; I went the next morning after I missed it to Bow-street, and had it advertised, and there I found my watch and the prisoner, on whom it was said to be taken.

Mr. Garrow. Do you recollect at all how long before it was you had seen this watch? - I cannot.

Being Mrs. Bunbury's watch, you had not frequently seen it? - No, it generally hangs at the bed's head; I cannot say upon oath, but I think it was at the bed's head the day before, which was the 3d.

You did not miss it till the 6th? - No.

Did the prisoner in your hearing give any account how he came by the watch in Bow-street? - Yes, I think he said he won it at cards, that he played three guineas against it to the best of my recollection; he said it was in some alley out of Leadenhall-street, but he could not describe it; the prisoner has totally altered his dress since he was at Bow-street, and he had his hair tied.

JOHN LEBAR sworn.

I belong to Bow-street Office; I and another man apprehended the prisoner on the 3d of May about four o'clock.

Court to Prosecutor. What time on Monday, the 3d of May, was it you came home? - I did not come home till evening, but there is a witness that will speak to the time he was seen.

Mr. Garrow. I beg Mr. Bunbury's servants may go out of Court.

Court to Lebar. Where did you apprehend him? - In Pearl-street, Spital-fields; I imagine he was just come from his father's house; I apprehended him on another affair; I seized him in the street, we put him in a hackney coach in Bishopsgate-street, and conveyed him to Bow-street; I searched him directly as he got into the coach; I

found this watch upon him in his right-hand.

Was it in the condition it is in now? - Yes.

(The watch produced, and deposed to by Mr. Bunbury.)

Court. Did the prisoner give you any account of that watch? - He said he had won it that day at cards, at a coffee-house in Leadenhall-street.

Court to Prosecutor. Is it gold enamelled? - Yes.

Are the seals set in gold? - Yes.

Court to Lebar. What became of the watch? - I have had it ever since.

Are you sure it is the watch you took from him? - Yes.

Mr. Garrow. What distance is it from Whitehall to the place you apprehended the prisoner? - About three miles.

Near his father's house? - Yes.

Did he persist in the same story at Bow-street? - I believe he did.

Has he been uniform in that story? - Yes.

Leadenhall-street, where he describes, is near the place where you apprehended him? - About three-quarters of a mile.

Is it in the road to his father's house? - It is in that neighbourhood.

ISAAC PETCH sworn.

I am servant to Mr. Bunbury; I saw the prisoner come to my master's apartments between two and three, as near as I can guess.

What did he come there for? - He enquired for a young lady whose name I cannot remember, he was in the dressing-room when I saw him.

Prosecutor. The door is open at the bottom of the stair-case.

Court to Petch. Was any body in the room? - No.

What did you say to him? - My mistress was in the drawing-room, and she was ending me up for a sheet to lay on the sopha; I asked him who he wanted, he said he had been knocking this half hour, and could make nobody hear, and he mentioned the name of Miss somebody, which I cannot remember, and I told him there was no such person in the house; he moved his hat, and said he was sorry for the trouble he had taken.

Was he dressed as he is now? - No.

Are you sure that is the man? - Yes; I called the maid servant, and asked her if she knew that gentleman; she said no; he also moved his hat to her and went down stairs, and I followed him; he moved his hat at the door, and said he was sorry for the trouble he had taken; the door was upon the latch, and he opened it and went out.

Are you sure this is the man? - Yes.

Court. Is not there a door out of the dressing-room into the bedchamber? - Yes.

Mr. Garrow. How was the prisoner dressed? - He had an olive green coat on, and a round hat, and his hair was tied and very elegantly dressed.

Had you ever seen that person before? - No.

How soon did you see him again? - In Bow-street, he was charged with this robbery.

He had a fetter upon his leg? - Yes, he had.

All that corroborated a little towards inducing you to swear him? - Yes, Sir.

This was at the distance of four days? - Yes.

You had not seen him in the mean time? - No.

Is the stair-case light? - Yes, very light.

Could you have sworn to the man if you had met him in the street, would you have said that is the gentleman that was at our house? - Yes, Sir, I saw him there.

And that helped you pretty much? - No.

You say you think you should have known him? - Yes.

Why a flap round hat does not help one much to know a man again; was his hair

well dressed at the Justice's? - I do not recollect it, his coat was a sort of olive green, inclinable to brown.

That is pretty difficult to describe; did you swear to him at the Justice's? - Yes.

Positively? - Yes.

Could not your fellow servant see him as well as you? - He was a very pale faced young man.

And you following him, and seeing the back of his well dressed head, could swear to his pale face? - She did not see his face not two minutes.

How many minutes might you see him? - Not long, I do not know how long; Mrs. Harris said, she believed him to be the man.

You are not sure that you should have known him any where but at the Justices, with a fetter on, standing at the bar? - No, Sir.

Court. I think you said before, you should have known him, are you sure that is the man by seeing him fettered, or by the recollection you have of his person? - I am sure that is the man that was in the house.

Court to John Lebar . You took this prisoner about four in the afternoon; was his hair tied or not? - Yes.

Can you recollect the colour of the coat he had on? - It was green.

Was he genteelly dressed at that time? - Yes, he had a green and gold waistcoat on.

Court to Petch. Do you recollect his waistcoat? - No, I do not.

You see if he was the man he had hardly time to change his clothes.

Prisoner. My Lord, I wish to ask the witness a question.

Court. You had better write it down and send it to your Council.

Mr. Garrow. What time of day was it that you saw this person in your house? - As near as I can guess between two and three, or a little after three.

What did you say about the hour at the Justices? - I told him it was about two or three.

Are you sure of that? - Yes; I do not recollect particularly.

Did not you say it was between four and five? - No, Sir, I did not.

Upon your oath you did not say that? - I am sure I did not say that, I said between two and three.

MARY FOLEY HARRIS sworn.

I saw a man at the door of my lady's dressing-room, the boy called me, and asked me if I knew that gentleman; the boy said he came up stairs to enquire for a gentlewoman with a French name, I have forgot the name; I told him I knew no such person, and he pulled off his hat, and said he hoped I would excuse the liberty he had taken; I cannot say whether the prisoner is the man; it was between two and three o'clock.

Prosecutor. The stair-case opens to the hall and the door was open.

PRISONER's DEFENCE.

I went to the Coffee-house in Leadenhall Street, between seven and eight in the morning, and after I had been there the space of half an hour, t here came in this man and offered this watch to sell, to two or three, and he came to me, and I played him three games at cribbage for three guineas a game, and won this watch of him.

Court to the Prisoner. What is your father, Sir? - A master Stone-mason.

WILLIAM WESTON sworn.

I have known him somewhat under two years, never knew but he was a hard working young fellow, he is a Stone-mason, his father is a Stone-mason, he works under his brother of the same business, I keep the Horse and Groom, in King-street.

Court. Did you ever hear of his being in Newgate before? - Never in my life, I never knew he was.

Court to Jury. With respect to the capital part of the case you will be relieved; for the prosecutor lives in the Invalid office, which is an office under government, he is permitted

to reside there. Now a chamber, in a college, or an Inn of Court, where each inhabitant has a distinct property, is to all intents and purposes the mansion house of the owner; so also is a room or lodging in any private house, the mansion for the time being, if the owner does not dwell in the house; but if the owner lives there it is to be considered as the house of the owner: therefore this not being in acceptation of law, as stated in the indictment, the dwelling house of William Henry Bunbury , although you should be of opinion, that this young man was guilty of stealing the watch, as to the capital part of the charge you must acquit him.

GUILTY Of stealing, but not in the dwelling house .

Transported for seven years .

Tried by the Second Middlesex Jury before Mr. Justice WILLES.

Reference Number: t17840526-17

535. JOHN HUNTER was indicted for feloniously stealing on the 22d day of May , one Scotch lawn handkerchief, value 3 s. one garnet neck-lace, value 10 s. one pair of gold ear-rings set with gold, value 10 s. one gold mourning ring, value 18 s. one amethyst ring set in gold, value 20 s. a cornelian seal set in gold, value 15 s. one enamelled ring set in gold, value 20 s. one stone marquoisite ring, value 5 s. one diamond ring, value 20 s. one stone ring, value 6 s. one silk watch chain, twisted with gold, value 5 s. eighteen guineas, value 18 l. 18 s. four half guineas, value 2 l. 2 s. and one silver dollar, value 4 s. 6 d. the property of John Harris , in his dwelling house .

JOHN HARRIS sworn.

I am a silk-dyer and scowerer , I live in Chapel-court, Oxford-chapel , I am a housekeeper, I missed my property, which was a purse containing eighteen guineas, and four half guineas, which was in a drawer in a bed-room, in a small nest of drawers, the other articles, the rings, and every thing mentioned in the indictment, were in the same purse, I lost a Scotch lawn handkerchief, and I found it at the prisoner's lodgings; I charged the prisoner on suspicion.

Why did you suspect him? - On Saturday last he was working for me, and had for some time occasionally; part of the things that were in the purse were found on the chair, and upon looking into the drawer, the purse was gone, he had worked for me before at different times but not constant, since the middle of March last; when he had done, which was about three o'clock, I paid him what I owed him, and sent him on a message to my calender's at Moorfields, he went and returned without the things, and I was at the back-door, and saw him give the wrappers to my wife; he went from there, and in about an hour and three quarters of an hour, my wife, (here she is) she and I heard somebody going up stairs, she called to our little apprentice, who is that, she said John, what business has he there? says I, he is gone up for a coat that he had up stairs, which I gave him leave to clean; in a few minutes after he came out, which was a little before eight, I went and saw the prisoner go from my door, I did not see him come down stairs; on Sunday morning between three and four, I was informed the purse and all the things were gone, I went to the Rotation-office to get him secured; the Monday morning about seven, the prisoner came back again to my house and pushed open the door, he was going up stairs to fetch some clothes that were to brush off, I told him he should not work there again, I had paid him off on Saturday night, he asked me why; I told him he should know soon, I had him secured and kept him till the time to go to the Rotation-office; I took him before the Justice, where he denied the fact, my apprentice said she saw him go up stairs that night; you are a liar, says he to the girl; he denied coming in my hearing, he was searched and nothing found upon him belonging to me, I went and searched his lodgings, and looking over the things, I found a cambrick handkerchief, I took it up, and he said it came from the country,

and he told the Justice the handkerchief was sent him by his mother from the country, with a pair of stockings.

FRANCES HARRIS sworn.

On Saturday evening between six and seven, that man, the prisoner, returned from Moorfields, I said, give me the things and go no further, I then came in, I had some friends at tea, and while I was sitting I saw the shade of somebody, and heard the foot, and I asked Mr. Harris who is that, he answered me it is John; what should he go up for, says I; I have given him leave to clean a coat; says I, I was frightened last week with him; in ten minutes I saw the shade pass.

Court. Did you see the prisoner go up stairs? - I saw the prisoner on the Friday, I only saw the shade of him go out of the passage, I did not see him afterwards till the Monday morning; then when I came down I found my ear-ring, which led to the discovery, I found a garnet ear-ring upon the chair by the side of the drawers, which had been before in the purse, all the articles mentioned were in the purse, eighteen guineas, four half guineas, and a dollar, there were two ear-rings in the purse, one of which I found in the chair, that made me open the drawer where the purse was, it was my own purse.

Mr. Sylvester. Did you go to church that morning? - I had not been out of the house, the next morning he was taken into custody, while I was waiting in the passage, he was at the back-door, he asked me the reason of all this, I said you shall soon know; I said John, you went up my stairs on Saturday night between the hours of seven and eight, he denied it; I said John do not say so, for the girl saw you, upon which he immediately made oath and said, it is a damned lie.

Court. Look at that handkerchief which was found at the prisoner's lodgings? - This handkerchief I missed on the Thursday before, I made that handkerchief, here is the fellow of it.

Mr. Sylvester. Is it not what they call a French cambrick? - No, Sir, it is not.

Are you a remakable good work-woman? - I have been reckoned so.

Perhaps you can swear to the needle that made it; do you mean to swear to the shade? - No.

I thought you might, they are usually hemmed round? - Not all.

Where there is a selvage you do not hem them? - I always do.

This was lost the Thursday before? - I am sure it was the Thursday, because it was the day of the wash.

Did you examine the washerwoman's pocket when she went home? - No, Sir, I had no occasion, she had lived servant with me upwards of seven years.

I take it for granted, that every body that has lived with you, or has any thing to do with you must be honest; whether she took it home with a bit of soap wrapped in it you cannot tell? - No.

You are not angry with me I hope? - Not at all, Sir.

SARAH ROGERS sworn.

What age are you? - Fourteen next Christmas, I am apprentice to the prosecutor.

On Saturday in the evening did you see the prisoner at any hour in the house of Mr. Harris? - Yes, when I went to fill the first tea-pot, it was between seven and eight, I saw him on the stairs.

You are sure it was the prisoner? - I am sure it was the prisoner going up stairs in the chamber.

The remainder of this Trial in the next Part, which will be published in a few days.

Reference Number: t17840526-17

THE WHOLE PROCEEDINGS ON THE KING's Commission of the Peace, Oyer and Terminer, and Gaol Delivery for the CITY of LONDON; AND ALSO The Gaol Delivery for the County of Middlesex; HELD AT JUSTICE HALL in the OLD BAILEY, On Wednesday the 26th of MAY, 1784, and the following Days;

Being the FIFTH SESSION in the Mayoralty of The Right Hon. ROBERT PECKHAM , Esq; LORD MAYOR OF THE CITY OF LONDON.

TAKEN IN SHORT HAND BY E. HODGSON, PROFESSOR OF SHORT-HAND; And Published by Authority.

NUMBER V. PART IV.

LONDON:

Printed for E. HODGSON (the Proprietor) And Sold by J. WALMSLAY, No. 35, Chancery Lane, and S. BLADON, No. 13, Pater-noster Row.

MDCCLXXXIV.

[PRICE SIX-PENCE.]

THE WHOLE PROCEEDINGS UPON THE

KING's Commission of the Peace, Oyer and Terminer, and Gaol Delivery for the CITY of LONDON, &c.

Continuation of the Trial of John Hunter .

Had you given him any leave to go up stairs? - No, Sir, I had no conversation with him.

What could you imagine was his reason for going up stairs? - My mistress saw him go up, says she there is John gone up stairs, says my master, I fancy he is gone up for his coat, says my mistress, he ought not to have gone up stairs, he should have come and said, Sir, I will be much obliged to you to let me go.

I understand your master, that he had given him leave to fetch down that coat.

Court to Harris. Had you given the prisoner any leave to fetch down that coat? - I said probably he was gone up for the coat.

Court to Rogers. Did you see him come down again? - I did not, I certainly saw him go up, he looked at me and I looked at him, I said nothing to him.

Mr. Sylvester. The workshop is up stairs? - Yes.

It was no unusual thing for the workmen to go up? - Sir, it was an unusual thing when my mistress told him not.

Aye, your mistress said he ought to have been polite, she made a speech which he ought to have made himself? - Yes.

She thought it was rude? - Yes.

But there was nothing remarkable in his going up stairs? - No.

Court. Had it been his usual practice to go up and down stairs without asking any particular liberty to do it? - Yes.

Without any opposition or enquiry? - Yes.

ELIZABETH COWPER .

I desire to be sworn according to the Church of Scotland.

Mr. Justice Willes. That is holding up the hand instead of kissing the book.

Mr. Garrow. That is a sort of affirmation.

Court. You see for the sake of the precedent it should be attended to, and ought to be considered.

Court to Mr. Reynolds. Has it been taken here? - Yes, my Lord, several times.

Court to Prosecutor. She can say nothing of any consequence.

Mr. Harris. This woman washed the prisoner's linen.

Mr. Sylvester. What that woman will say is another thing, but we do not want to hear you say what she will say.

Court. Mrs. Cowper cannot say it was the handkerchief of Mrs. Harris.

WILLIAM BLACKETER sworn.

I took the prisoner to the watch-house, I attended for Mr. Newport to take the prisoners to prison, he remained there till six in the evening to be examined again, and he told me he had some money at home, says I, you cannot have any, says I, your lodgings have been searched; says he, I do not trust any body with my money; I went with him myself, and took another man with me, and he said he wanted to go down stairs, I went with him, and he sat there for some time; I said I cannot wait all day for you, and he came up and went out of the door again, without getting any money; says I, where is the money; he said, you will not give me time; I said I do not hinder you, so he hesitated some time, and then he said it is not worth contending; he said I have made away with some of it, and he went down again to the vault, and took it out of a hole in the wall, fifteen guineas in the purse, and gave it to me, (produces the purse and money) there were fifteen guineas in the purse, and four half guineas and a dollar; when I took him back again to his lodgings, he took it out of some mould that was in a bit of paper, he kicked it up with his foot, and the paper was all wet; I put the gold and the other money together, the dollar I kept; this is the same, this is the purse.

Court to Harris. Is that purse yours? - It is not; I can identify the dollar, I have had it in my possession ever since the year 1780.

Any particular mark? - Only rather thin and large.

Court. There is no particular mark upon it? - Not that I know of, only being very much worn.

Have you a dollar of the year 1773? - The date I do not know, but that dollar has been in my possession ever since the year 1780, which came with some other money to me from the country.

There was no mark on the gold? - No.

Mr. Sylvester. It was in King Philip's reign I see, did you observe that before? - I do not know what reign it was in.

Did you ever see a dollar before? - I have.

Court to Harris. Will you swear that in that purse that was taken away, there was a dollar? - I positively will.

Court to Mrs. Harris. Will you swear the same? - I will.

PRISONER's DEFENCE.

When I went to work on Monday morning, Mr. Harris stopped me, I was going up stairs as usual to get a cleaned coat to do off, and he stopped me; I did not get up stairs, he sent for a constable, and told me I was his prisoner; he would not tell me what he took me for; this man told me to produce the money, and I should get clear off, there should be nothing at all done to me, and this money that I have produced is my own, and I did it to get clear.

Court to Blacketer. Did he describe what gold it was? - He said he had made away with part of it, and that he had thrown the trinkets over Black-friars Bridge.

Mr. Sylvester. What did you say to him, tell the whole. - I have told the whole.

No, not quite, it is better for you to own it? - I did not tell him to do that.

What did you tell him? - I never told him any thing, there was no promise upon my oath, I told him it was not in my power to shew him any favours, I said nothing more.

What could induce a man, whom you knew nothing of, to give you his money? - I do not know.

Court. Did you threaten him or frighten him? - No, not at all.

Did you say the prosecutor would shew him any favour? - I did not.

Court. Did you find any of the trinkets? - No, my Lord.

Mr. Sylvester. Did you make any promises at all? - No.

The prisoner called three witnesses, who all gave him a good character.

Court to Jury. The circumstance of the handkerchief is too slight to influence your judgment, and you will judge what credit is to be given to the evidence of William Blacketer , on whose evidence the case entirely rests.

GUILTY, Death .

The prisoner was humbly recommended to mercy by the Jury.

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury before Mr. Baron PERRYN .

Reference Number: t17840526-18

536. JOHN OWEN was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 22d of April last, thirteen pounds weight of lead, value 2 s. half a pound weight of brass, value 6 d. belonging to - Malling , Esq ; fixed to a certain stable then and there situate , against the statute.

JOHN WAINWRIGHT sworn.

I am constable of Allhallows; going down Bush-lane, the prisoner had a sack on his back, on seeing me he dropped the sack and run away, I ran after him and cried out stop thief.

What did you find in the sack? - A lead pipe and chissel.

What did he say for himself? - He said he picked it up.

NATHANIEL COLLINS sworn.

I know the property, it belongs to my master.

How do you know it? - I have known it fourteen years, it belongs to a cistern that waters the horses, fastened by a lock and chain, it slips in a socket.

Was it tried whether it fitted that socket? - Yes, I fitted it, it sits it perfectly well.

PRISONER's DEFENCE.

I was coming out of the yard, and found the sick, but the lead was in the sack, and the gentleman took me to the watch-house.

GUILTY .

Privately whipped , and discharged.

Tried by the London Jury, before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-19

537. JAMES LAPIER was indicted for feloniously assaulting Abina Hobart , wife of George Hobart , Esq; on the 8th of May , and putting her in fear, and feloniously taking from her person and against her will, one gold ear-ring set with diamonds, value 15 l. the property of the said George Hobart , Esq .

ABINA HOBART sworn.

I was going out of the Opera house on Saturday fortnight, at the King's door as I was going into my coach, I felt a person take hold of my ear, and pull my ear-ring, and endeavour to pull it out.

Court. Was your ear-ring taken out of your ear? - Yes, it was separated from my ear, it was a gold ear-ring set with diamonds; the tearing my ear down hurt me very much; my ear bled, I screamed out, and missed my ear-ring; I then got into the coach and got home, after I went home my ear-ring was found in my hair; I did not see the prisoner at all.

EDMUND LASCELLS , Esq; sworn.

I was in company with Mrs. Hobartat at this time I was coming out of the Opera with her, I had hold of her hand at the door, I heard her scream very loud, and said she had lost her ear-ring; I immediately followed the prisoner, and took hold of him; I saw him when she screamed out with his hand up to her ear; I immediately seized him, and gave him to the centry that was upon guard at the Opera-house door; the prisoner was the person.

Court. Are you sure his hand was the only one that was up to Mrs. Hobart's ear? - The only one that I saw.

Were any other persons near her? - There were other persons about her to be sure, her servant and a soldier; when I seized the prisoner, he asked me very particularly, whether the lady said she had lost her earring.

Court. Then had you said any thing about an ear-ring? - I gave charge to the constable, and told him at that time that the lady had lost her ear-ring, and the constable immediately examined the man's pockets.

When you seized the prisoner, did you tell him that he had taken the lady's earring? - I told the constable; I laid hold of him just as he was passing by the sentry, I gave him to him at that moment, and I mentioned something of Mrs. Hobart's earring; he did not ask the question till I had given him in charge.

Prisoner. I beg to ask the lady, whether she can swear that the ear-ring was in her ear when she came out of the Opera-house? - Yes, I swear that the ear-ring was in my ear till it was pulled out; I saw that the person that took hold of my ear put his arms across, I saw his back, and I immediately said, that is the person that pulled my ear.

Jury. Do you think the prisoner is the person that pulled your ear? - I never saw his face.

Prisoner to Mr. Lascells. Whether you ever saw me ha hold of the lady's ear or ear-ring? - I never saw the ear-ring in his hand, but I saw his hand up at her ear just when she screamed out.

Prisoner. Whether or no, when he took me into custody, I did not say to him, I have stole nobody's ear-ring, and he said yes, you have stole that lady's I said ask the lady? - The very words were, has the lady lost her ear-ring?

BLACKBURN CLARKE sworn.

I was upon duty at the Opera-house on Saturday fortnight, I saw the prisoner make up to the lady and lay his hand over her right shoulder, and make up to her ear, and dragged it till the lady called out, O Lord! my ear-ring is gone; that is the lady.

Court. Look at the prisoner, and be certain whether it was him or not? - I am sure it was him; that gentleman made up to him first, and I immediately followed him, and he laid hold of the prisoner, and I took him to the watch-house; the prisoner asked the gentleman to ask the lady whether she had lost any thing.

Did the prisoner deny having touched the lady's ear? - Yes.

Prisoner. Whereabouts was you stationed if you was upon duty when the affair was done, at which door? - I was stationed by the constables that patrol the street, I was near the King's door at the time.

Prisoner. Colonel Lascells took me forwards towards the great door; if the man was before me, which he says he was, he could not see what was done behind him at the distance of forty yards; he took me by the little door, which is forty yards from the King's door. - I was at the lower part, next to Pall-mall, the door that he speaks of was up above; I was near the King's door, I was about six yards behind him.

Could you see him do that? - Yes, plainly.

ANN - sworn.

I am the watch-house keeper's wife, the prisoner was brought on the 8th of this month to St. James's watch-house at twelve at night; on the 9th, between eleven and twelve, there came four men to the door, he was locked and bolted there, one of them asked if he could go down and see his friend, I ventured to let one down, and in three minutes the three men came up, the prisoner had a chissel, the first came up into the watch-house, the other had a bludgeon, and the third had a stick, and the prisoner held the chissel to my breast, and said, you bitch, I will kill you if you make any resistance.

Court. This has nothing to do with the fact. - No, but I am in great danger, I am frightened out of my life.

PRISONER's DEFENCE.

My Lord and Gentlemen of the Jury, as I have it not in my power to employ Council,

if I say any thing that is not strictly proper, I hope you will impute it to the want of a better understanding; the day of the month I cannot recollect, but I was coming by the Opera-house when that gentleman took hold of me, and accused me of stealing that lady's ear-ring; I said I had stole no lady's ear-ring; the soldier came up, and said, you villain, I saw you; you scoundrel, said he, you deserve to be hanged; says he, I will have a new suit of clothes at your cost, thank God; says I, then by that you mean to swear my life away: I am sure he is biassed by the hope of reward to swear what he does; this is all I have to say, and I leave my case to the consideration of the Gentlemen of the Jury.

Court. How do you get your livelihood? - I am a Taylor, I work with my father and mother, No. 20, Church-street, Saint Ann's, Soho.

(The witnesses called, but none appeared: His father came in and said, his friends were here last night till nine o'clock, and I cannot now find them, they are gentlemen of character and respect, in the neighbourhood where he lived.)

Court. Gentlemen of the Jury, I have a difficulty in point of law upon the subject, for in all larceny there must be a taking and carrying away, these are necessary and essential parts to constitute the offence, here there was a taking, the earing was separated from the ear; a number of cases has been decided upon this subject, two of them came before my Lord Mansfield, since I have attended, which I will mention to you; one of them was, a person got up in a waggon where there was a bale of goods, it lay horizontally, but he set it up on the end, and whilst he was taking things out of it, he was detected by the waggoner; that was reserved for the opinion of the Judges, the Judges were of opinion that it had not been at all removed or carried away in any degree, therefore they were of opinion, that it was not a larceny; there was another case which I tried, that was where a parcel of goods taken out of the Uxbridge waggon, went through Oxford-road, and at a grocer's door, a parcel of sugar or other grocery was taken up there, and put into this waggon; a boy that was tried, got up into the waggon, he had taken these to the tail of the waggon, and there he was seized, and that was held to be a larceny, for there it was removed. There is in print a very leading case, where a man lay at an Inn, he intended to steal the sheets, and he took them off the bed, and bundled them up and removed them, but he was detected before he got out of the room; the Judges held that to be a larceny, in this case the ear-ring was removed, and she apprehended it was actually taken away: upon these authorities it is in my apprehension, sufficient in point of law to constitute the offence, but however if you are of opinion, that the prisoner is the person that committed this fact, I will reserve that case for the opinion of the Judges, and they shall decide upon it.

GUILTY, Death.

Court. Let judgment be suspended, I will mention it the first day of next term to Lord Mansfield, let him be kept in custody till next sessions.

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury before Mr. Baron PERRYN .

Reference Number: t17840526-20

538. THOMAS DARKIS was indicted, for that he on the 2d of May , on Robert Sturt , feloniously did make an assault, and in a violent manner did feloniously and wilfully demand the money, with felonious intent, the money of the said Robert, from his person and against his will feloniously to steal .

ROBERT STURT sworn.

I was stopped in a field in Islington parish , at half past seven in the evening, and the prisoner, I am positive it is him, came up to me, and demanded my money with a knife to my throat, I was going to White-conduit house, he kept the knife towards my throat, and swore he would run

it into me if I did not deliver my money, I had a stick in my hand, and I immediately gave him a blow on the side of the head, and I got away from him and cried out murder! he tried to make his escape, I called after him stop thief, these two men run after him and caught him, he turned again and swore he would murder me if I did not get off, these two men were at the top of the field, the prisoner returned and said he would murder me if I did not cease calling out; he ran away and the two men ran after him and called him, he never was out of my sight, I am positive it was the prisoner; when he was taken he confessed every thing to these two men, in my presence, that he was the man, and resigned himself to them, and before the Justice he confessed also.

Was that confession taken by the Justice in writing? - No.

He did not taken any of your property? - No.

GEORGE JOHNS sworn.

I apprehended the prisoner, I had been for a walk, it was on Sunday, the 2d of May, in the afternoon, and coming home at the end of the field where the gentlemen play at cricket, I heard the gentlemen cry murder! and the other man and me came up and took him, he said I am the man, but it is the first time I ever did any thing in my life, he begged to be let go, the gentleman run up, and said hold him fast, he said that is the man that put the knife to my throat.

PRISONER's DEFENCE.

I had not had a bit of bread for two or three days, I met the gentleman and asked him for two or three half-pence, I thought I had better do that than do worse, and the gentleman called out, whereas the people were all walking about, and these two men said they would swear to me for the money.

Prosecutor. He never asked me for any half-pence, here is the mark where he tore my waistcoat, he asked me for no alms, if he had I should have relieved him.

Jury. Have you got the knife? - He was searched but there was no knife found upon him, he run two fields off.

Court. Gentlemen of the Jury, this is an attempt to commit a robbery without an actual taking from the person, the party attacked; the law having said the intention was not a crime for which a man could be indicted, by the act of the 7th of his late Majesty it is changed, and if any person should with any offensive weapon assault, or should by any menaces or in a violent manner demand any money, goods &c. he shall be transported for seven years, the question is whether this case does not fall within the express provision in this act of parliament.

GUILTY .

Transported for seven years .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. Baron PERRYN .

Reference Number: t17840526-21

539. JOSEPH WRIGHT was indicted for feloniously stealing on the 6th of May , two-hundred and eighteen pounds weight of lead, value 40 s. belonging to William Rothwell , fixed to a certain building there situate , against the statute.

WILLIAM ROTHWELL sworn.

On the 6th of May, I was informed there was a person in custody, that was supposed to have robbed a house of mine in Sloan-street, Chelsea , the house had been robbed of near six-hundred weight of lead, they cut the middle, and pulled the sides down into the gutter, they likewise stripped the dormer windows, they wrenched the nails out, and took the lead away, the lead was afterwards found; we went to the places where the lead had been stripped from, and compared, and found it fitted, I sent for a professional man, a plumber, the lead fitted to the zig zag form.

JOHN DANDY sworn.

On the Thursday morning the 6th of this month, I stopped the prisoner about

twenty minutes after four, in Sloan-square, Chelsea, he was coming from the buildings with another man, he had this basket on his head, and another man had the knapsack on his back, there were three pieces of lead in the basket about a hundred weight, I took him to the publick house and left him there, and the basket was opened, and the three pieces of lead taken out, I saw the lead fitted to the place, I carried it up and it fitted it exactly, that was the Monday morning, it was the same lead I took from him.

Prosecutor. The watchman by my desire put his own name on the lead, and it has been at my house ever since.

RUBEN JACKSON sworn.

I am a Plumber, it fitted the place exactly, it was very plain to me, I measured the lead and the gutter, and it answered, I have no doubt it was taken from there.

PRISONER's DEFENCE.

I was going to Knightsbridge, a man had that basket on his head, and he threw it down, and I was carrying it home with an intent to advertise it.

The prisoner called one witness who gave him a good character.

GUILTY .

Transported for seven years .

Tried by the London Jury, before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-22

540. JOHN LUCAS was indicted for burglariously and feloniously breaking and entering the dwelling house of George Curling , Esq ; at the hour of eight in the night, on the 16th day of March last, with intent his goods and chattles burglariously to steal, take, and carry away .

The witnesses examined apart at the request of the prisoner.

JAMES SAMMES sworn.

The prisoner was found in the house of Mr. Curling, on the 19th of March, between the hours of seven and eight, I only saw him after he was taken; Mr. Curling had just purchased the house and paid for it that morning, and he desired me to take care of the things for him.

Court. Did any of the family sleep there? - I put a man in.

Had any of this family occupied it? - No, there was some furniture in it, not much.

How long before had it been bought by Mr. Curling? - He bought it by auction, and paid for it that morning; there was some furniture of mine in it, I paid a man one shilling a night to sleep in it; I saw the prisoner in the passage just within the door, and two more with him, and three or four of my men with them.

What did he say? - He said they took hold of him as he came behind the door; I saw one of the others run.

What day of the month was this - This was the 19th of March.

Mr. Garrow, Council for the prisoner. In what way are you connected with Mr. Curling? - I had the sale of the house and the furniture

You however continued in possession? - Yes, by the desire of Mr. Curling.

At the time you came to the door, I take it for granted there were many people assembled? - There were seven or eight.

So that in that confusion you might very well mistake this man for somebody that came out of the house? - I might.

JOHN FIELD sworn.

Upon the 19th day of March last, about eight in the evening, I was at the next door when this accident happened; one of the witnesses gave me the key of Mr. Curling's house, to go and unlock the door whilst he went to get the candle, I unlocked the door and it unlocked very easy, but there was a catch or bolt withinside that stopped the door from opening, I locked it again; with that I spoke to Maggot, says I, there is somebody in the house, he came out with the candle, I unlocked the door again, it

unlocked very easy, and I pushed it and it flew open to its proper bearings, and there was something stiffish from the door flying open; when I opened it I saw the prisoner at the bar and another man come up to me, I caught hold of him, and cried out thieves! or robbers! or something of that kind, they were in the passage, the man on my right-hand got away, this prisoner I held in my left-hand, and he threw me out of the passage upon the pavement; we took him again and we searched him, and in his pocket we found the handle of a turn-screw.

Prisoner. This gentleman says there was three men came out of the house, and this gentleman says there was only two.

Court. I observed that.

Did you see any more than two? - Yes, afterwards I saw another come out, but they both ran away.

Mr. Garrow. How happened it that you did not tell us about this third man? - Sir, I never was asked.

Never was asked! why you was told to tell your story, did not you know you was sworn to tell the truth; I take it for granted the man could not break open the door with the handle of a turn-screw? - No.

You found nothing else upon him? - Not at that time.

Now do you think you could not mistake this man, who was passing by, for one of those that were in the house? - No, he never got out of my hands till the door was fastened upon him, and then we searched him.

WILLIAM MAGGOT sworn.

Mr. Sammes sent for me to be at his house at night, I went and staid a little, and I went to the house and saw the prisoner come out of the house, myself and Mr. Field took him, it was half past seven, or rather better; I went with Mr. Field and some others, and when I had done my business at next door, he desired me to look into the house, and pull down the windows if any were open, that was my business there; I gave Field the key to open the door, he could not open it, whether it was bolted the inside, or the latch stuck within-side I cannot tell; however they forced it open, and three men came out, and the prisoner was one.

Court. Then you imagine that there might be windows open in the house? - I went with a view to pull down the windows if there were any open.

Mr. Garrow. How many windows were open? - I had not opportunity to see.

Now upon your oath do not you know that some were open?

Court. We certainly shall not presume that they were shut.

Mr. Garrow. Which of the two Mr. Lucas's was it, the gentleman that wore spectacles, or the prisoner that got into the house? - The prisoner.

- BALLARD sworn.

I was ordered to Mr. Sammes's, I was there about seven o'clock, and his apprentice gave the key to one of the witnesses, to see if there was any windows open, and we went to see; we saw but one half shutter up stairs open, says I there is not much here open, says he we will go and shut it; we tried to open the door and could not, the next time he shoved hard, the door flew open, and the first man that came out of the house kicked me, and got away.

Had you been in the house that day before? - No, then I called for assistance; here is a dark lanthorn that was found under the bed.

Mr. Garrow. How do you know? - Another man found it.

Court. Is he here? - No, they had this man in custody.

Then you may withdraw.

EDWARD LUCAS sworn.

I am constable for the parish of St. Giles's, and a Mr. Page came to fetch me.

Mr. Garrow. Where do you live? - No. 1, High-street, I have lived there for six or seven months back.

WILLIAM GROVES sworn.

I am porter to Lord Mansfield; I was

sitting in my Lord's hall, at the second outcry I heard stop thief, and murder! I went soon after, and took my candle in my hand, and went next door, and there I saw one of the porters here had got hold of the prisoner at the bar by the collar, standing at the door; one of the people said he had flung something away, and this little instrument was found, I looked in the highway, and picked up these keys.

Mr. Garrow. You found them in the highway? - Yes.

Court to Sammes. What time had you been in the house? - Not after twelve or one, I took three or four people with me, and went round the house, and found every window shut but one garret window, which was open.

Court. Gentlemen of the Jury, there is no occasion to put this man on his defence, because there is nothing stolen; I will explain the law to you in this case: the offence of burglary is that of breaking and entering a dwelling house in the night, after day-light is gone in the evening, and before the return of it in the morning, and that breaking and entering is a capital offence, even though nothing should be actually stolen, provided it is done with intent to steal, or commit any other felony; but where nothing is stolen then the fact of breaking and entering, and the doing it in the night is the whole fact upon which the offence is to arise, and if you are satisfied of that fact, then you are to consider whether it was done with a felonious intent; now, in this case, there is no evidence before you that a felony was actually committed, because, in order to constitute this offence, there must be a breaking and entering, and that must be in the night; and in order to prove a breaking and entering, you must have actual proof of some part of the house being broke and forced open, of which there is no proof in this case; or at least you must have proof that the whole of the house, all the doors and windows were so shut and fastened, that no person could by any possibility get into that house without breaking it, in this case there is no such evidence, for there is no evidence at all that the windows were shut, on the contrary, one of the windows is found open, the sash open, and it is plain that the witness went with an expectation that some of the windows would be open, and went to shut them; there is therefore no evidence to the breaking, and nobody having been in the house since twelve at noon, there is no evidence how this man got into the house after day-light was gone, especially as on the 19th of March it is day-light till near seven, and these men were found in the house at half past seven; therefore, though there is every reason to suspect that this man intended to commit a burglary, there is no evidence in this case.

NOT GUILTY .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury, before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-23

541. JOHN BRANTON and CHARLES GANLEY were indicted for burglariously and feloniously breaking and entering the dwelling house of Edward Thompson , about the hour of eight in the night, on the 10th of March last, and feloniously stealing therein, one silver milk pot, value 36 s. two silver salts, value 30 s. one silver pepper castor, value 10 s. one pair of silver tea tongs, value 5 s. five silver table spoons, value 50 s. six silver tea spoons, value 15 s. one watch, with the inside case made of gold, and the outside case made of shagreen, value 10 l. one pair of stone shoe buckles, set in silver, value 30 s. one pair of steel shoe buckles, value 3 s. one silver purse, value 2 s. one crown piece, value 5 s. two half crown pieces, value 5 s. one silver three-pence, value 3 d. the property of Edward Thompson .

Mr. Garrow, Council for the prosecution, opened the case as follows:

My Lord, and Gentlemen of the Jury, the burglary in question has already been the subject of investigation in a former sessions, in which one man has been convicted

for this burglary; and I have the authority* of a very learned Judge, who attended in the last sessions, to say, that the burglary is, in point of law, proved; and therefore the whole question is , whether these prisoners are the accomplices in a burglary, which the learned Judge has described to be of a very atrocious nature, though not within the common cases of burglary. The circumstances of the case are shortly these; that Mr. Thompson, being an old gentletleman, and living at Islington, the prisoners at the bar, in company with some others, came there on the 10th of March last, they knocked at the door, and the servant having opened it, they said they had a letter for somebody, they delivered the letter, and immediately rushed in; having got into the house, they secured the maid servant and the mistress, who is an old lady, and they then stripped the house of almost every thing of value. Gentlemen, I shall call the witnesses in proof of these facts, and you will, in that case, have no doubt in pronouncing the prisoners Guilty.

* See Sessions Paper, No. V. Part I.

Mr. Justice Willes. There is no doubt of the law, if a man knocks at any door at night, and gets admittance by a false pretence, that is burglary.

ANN MARTIN sworn.

Examined by Mr. Garrow.

I am servant to Mr. Thompson, he lives at No. 3, in the Lower-street, Islington, I have lived with him almost seven years; about a quarter after seven in the evening, the 10th of March -

Court. Was it dark then? - Quite dark, it was a rainy night, we had lighted candles about a quarter of an hour; there was a gentle knock at the door, my mistress said, somebody knocks: I went to the door and I asked who was there, and I thought they said there was a letter of importance, but however they said there was a letter; I opened the door a little way, and a man presented the letter, I put the door a little way open, this is the letter, I saw a part of the direction.

Court. Had you a candle in your hand? - Yes, in a flat candlestick.

Mr. Garrow. To whom is it directed? - To Miss Young, Islington; I told them it was not for me, nor any body in that house; I was going to push to the door, they said stop, and they pushed the door in, and all rushed in; and one of them took me by the throat; I think to the best of my knowledge there were six of them that came in, one of them seized me by the throat, which stopped me from crying out, but he dropped his hand a little, and I cried out, O Lord Jesus! we shall all be murdered!

Court. How long had you lighted candles before this? - About a quarter of an hour, or rather better.

It was not twilight, it was dark? - It was dark.

Mr. Garrow. What did they do then? - Then I desired them to let me go into the parlour to my mistress, who was just come out of a fit of sickness, as they would frighten her to death.

Court. What is become of the man that was convicted last sessions? - He is under sentence of death.

Has the report been made? - I believe not.

Have these prisoners any Council?

Mr. Sylvester. I am for Branton; take the accomplice out of Court.

Mr. Garrow. What did they say or do on that? - They all went into the parlour, and one of them, who I believe is the tall man that had the cutlass, took my mistress by the head; when they let me go again, I screeched out, and some of them said damn them, gag them, and the other said cut them down the head; one of them had a cutlass, which he pulled out of his breast, he was a tall man in a brown coat, he had a cocked hat on, and a white cloth over the left side of his face, he is one of the evidences; they let me go, and one of them took my mistress by the head; to the best of my remembrance they all went into the parlour at first.

Court. Did they put your candle out, or did it continue? - No, Sir, they took my

candle into the parlour, they went behind my mistress, and I was afraid they were going to kill her, and I began to scream, and then they began to swear again, and bid us be quiet and they would do no harm; I believe they were about ten minutes in the parlour altogether, they stood till we were quiet, then four of them went out and left two in the parlour.

Court. Had they any disguises? - I saw none of them disguised but the tall man.

How many candles had you in the parlour at this time? - My mistress had no candle while I went to the door, and until the four men went of the room we had but one candle lighted, I believe the men lighted the other candle.

Court. As there was but one candle in the parlour, and none of them were disguised, had you an opportunity of observing the faces of the men? - I observed the face of the tall man, and the man at the bar, which is Branton, they were the men that were left in the room, he was dressed in a brown great coat buttoned up.

Court. Was any part of his face covered? - I do not know, he was buttoned up very close, and his hat a great way over his face, and I observed him to be very broad over the shoulders and thick, especially his neck; I saw his nose, and his mouth, and his chin.

Can you swear that man was the man? - I am sure he was the man, I am sure to the best of my knowledge that is the man.

Court. Can you or can you not swear that that is the man? - I am sure he is the man that walked with the pistol in his hand, from the parlour door to the card-table which stood in the room.

How long had you a light after the four men were gone out of the room? - It might be twenty minutes; I saw a pistol in Branton's hand as soon as he got into the parlour.

What were they doing in the parlour? - They never left the room till my mistress said, somebody knocks at the door, let your master in; the accomplice, who had a disguise on his face, William Haskey and the prisoner Branton were walking backwards and forwards all the time; my mistress said, there is somebody knocks at the door, and she said it is your master; I said, no madam, my master cannot be come yet, it is not nigh eight o'clock, for he said he would be at home at eight o'clock; upon that the prisoner Branton left the room, and the other went to follow him, and Branton bid him stop, which he did; he continued in the room with me and my mistress, and some time after that it might be a quarter of an hour as I believe, I heard the street-door open, and the man came into the room in a short jacket, that is him who was tried last sessions, his name is Ganley or Ganby, (now the Judge called for a Sessions Paper of last sessions.) he took the candle out of the parlour, I saw him go in for the tongs, and break open the desk, I saw him take the tongs; nobody was present then but Haskey and Ganley, he came into the foreroom for a candle, soon after that the man in the short dress, that is Ganley, came into the room, and looked round the parlour, and the other followed him, and I saw no more, I did not observe he came in with a candle, there was no candle, but there was a good fire in the room, then Haskey and Ganby went away, then they went out of the house.

Court. I suppose they riffled the house above? - Yes.

Who was in the house besides your master and mistress? - A washer-woman, and a child of about seven years old, a niece of my master's, whom they frightened very much.

What things were lost? - Four silver table spoons and one odd one, and a pair of salts, but my mistress can give you a more particular account; I know there was a watch hanging up at the chamber chimney.

Do you know any thing of the other prisoner? - He might be in the house but I do not know him.

Mr. Sylvester. They were all out before eight? - Yes.

How long before eight? - I cannot tell.

You was very much frightened? - I was not so frightened but I was sensible; I was very much alarmed, I did not think of myself, but I was afraid they would frighten my mistress.

Mr. Garrow. When they first came into the house, did you observe any thing like gags in their hands at that time? - Yes, I observed several pieces of wood in their hands, in the hands of one of them at that time of different sizes, I observed them in the parlour, when they were about my mistress, they cried several times gag them, the child was wrapped up in the curtain, she screamed violently, and when the washerwoman came up, Haskey desired the woman to take the child and quiet her, she took the child and quieted her.

Mr. Sylvester. You say you was very much alarmed the whole of this time? - Yes.

One man was dressed in a brown great coat buttoned up very close? - Yes, the man with the pistol, it was so buttoned up that I could not see any other cloathing; he had a flapped hat a good way over his forehead; I could see his nose, and his mouth and his chin.

I see you are subject to be frightened a good deal? - I was not so frightened then.

What made you so frightened just now? - Because I could not help it; when they were all still and quiet, I had an opportunity of viewing the men, I never saw this man before to my knowledge, nor since till he was taken up; the men were put to the bar, and they asked me if ever a one of them was the man.

You knew there was a reward? - As for reward, I do not come about reward.

Answer my question, that refreshed your memory wonderfully; have not you had part of it this sessions? - No, nor do not intend to have any.

You have had none? - I have had none of it, I know nothing about it.

Court. Have you had any part of the reward for the conviction of the other man? - No, Sir, I never heard there was any for me, but for the man that took them I heard there was, I did not intend to have any, I am not fond of any such things, I came here to speak the truth.

Mr. Sylvester. You never saw? - It is very true.

Who has told you what I am going to ask you, because you tell me it is very true, before you know what it is; now I ask you, as you never saw the man in your life before, and was frightened as every man and woman must be, when six people break into their house, and a man was muffled up with his hat over his face, can you venture to swear to him? - I know the very gait of him.

Does he hobble in his gait? - No he has a stooping manner, I do not know that ever I saw any man walk in his gait like him, I do believe that he is the very man I saw in the parlour.

You say to the best of your knowledge? - I know he is the same.

By what do you know him? - I know very well that he is the same identical man, that had that long cutlass. When people are frightened, they often take a more particular idea of people, than they do at other times, I saw many men at all the offices before these men were taken up, and I never pretended to know any but the man that were in the parlour, and the man who was cast last sessions, who came in and out.

Then you mean to swear to the lower part of the man's face, and to his gait? - Yes.

You are as certain of the one as the other? - Yes.

Court. They were 25 minutes in the room, and a candle in the room.

(The letter produced, being a blank sheet of paper, directed to Miss Young, Islington.)

Was it sealed? - No, it was just as it is now.

ELIZABETH THOMPSON sworn.

Examined by Mr. Garrow.

So much of the account I suppose, as this girl has given of what passed in the

passage, is true as far as you know; what passed in the parlour when these men came in, how many came in into the parlour at first? - I was too much frightened to count them.

Were there two or three? - Yes, I dare say there was.

Do you believe there were six; Yes, I believe there were; the maid and myself were in the parlour, and the child.

How long did they all stay in the parlour? - Some of them went out very soon.

Did you observe the persons of any of the men who were in the room at the time? - Yes, I did.

How many were left in the room, when the others went away? - Two.

Do you know any thing of the persons of one of them? - Yes, I know that one.

Who is he? - It is he that is turned evidence, I do not know the persons of any of the rest.

What did you lose? - I lost my watch which was hanging up in my chamber, it was a gold inner case and a black shagreen case; and a silver milk pot, five table spoons which were in a case up stairs, with some silver handled knives and forks, they only took the spoons, six silver tea spoons, a pair of silver tea tongs, a pair of silver salts, one silver pepper caster, a pair of stone shoe buckles set in silver, one pair of steel shoe buckles.

Did you lose any purse? - A little silver net purse, with a crown piece, and two half-crown pieces, and a silver threepence; I heard them up stairs over my head pulling out the drawers.

Court. They did not rifle you or pick your pockets? - No, they did not, the drawers were all pulled out and rummaged, they were not locked, I saw them go to the desk in the back parlour, I do not know which it was.

Which of the things were taken out of the desk? - A pair of steel buckles, and a silver milk pot, and the tea-spoons and tongs, they were in a green bag in one of the drawers which was not locked.

JOHN SAYER sworn.

I belong to Litchfield-street office, on the tenth of March, about nine in the evening, I, Macdonald, Grubb, and Young, were coming along Broad St. Giles's, we returned into Drury-lane, and we met five or six men, they were walking two by two, I passed them, they were coming up Drury-lane, after I had passed them by the light of a fallow-chandler's shop, I saw a bundle, I turned back and caught hold of one Jacobs, he had the bundle in his right hand, I asked him what he had there, he immediately, flung it round to his right hand for Ganley the man that was convicted last sessions, so that he might take it, when I had hold of him, I immediately let him go and catched hold of Ganley, and I called out to Macdonald, and Grubb, and Young, to lay hold of the others, we only took Jacobs and Ganley.

What is become of Jacobs? - He got out of the watch-house, we took the bundle, we carried it and the two prisoners into the Brown Bear , in Broad St. Giles's.

Do you know who the other men were? - No.

Mr. Garrow. If you are going to tell any thing that Jacobs or Ganley said, when the other two prisoners were not there, you should not say it? - In the bundle there was a good deal of plate which Young took away, he will produce that, I took the pair of steel buckles; Mr. Thompson had them delivered to him when Ganley was convicted; as I was searching Jacobs and Ganley, the prisoner Charles Ganley came in, Young brought him into the tap room, we turned him out, and he came afterwards with his mother to St. Giles's watch-house, she staid about ten minutes or a quarter of an hour, and him and the mother came to the watch-house, and asked if there was not one Ganley there; I let the mother in, and I looked over one side, and saw the prisoner Charles Ganley stand on the side of the watch-house door, we kept him and the mother in the custody till morning, and he was discharged in the morning, then he went over the town with us, to shew us the people that were connected with his brother.

Court. Then you did not intend to prosecute him, I suppose you made use of him, as an evidence? - No my Lord, he was not promised any such thing.

Mr. Garrow. How came the prisoner Charles Ganley to be taken into custody? - By the evidence of the accomplice.

Mr. Garrow. You Lordship will give me credit, that I did not hear one word of that before now.

Mr. Sylvester. You know he weighs forty as well as another, is not that the expression? - I do not know.

Court to Ann Martin . Did you observe that either of these was the boy? - I cannot say that I did.

Mr. Garrow. My Lord, she said on her first examination that if he was there, he passed on her as a man, and not as a boy.

CHARLES YOUNG sworn.

I was along with Macdonald, Grubb, and Sayer, we were coming down Drury-lane, we met the prisoners they were talking aloud, Sayer took hold of Jacobs, I saw the bundle in Jacobs's hand, and I saw him throw the bundle to Ganley; then Sayer seized him, and I took this plate from Jacobs, we took them and the bundle to the Brown Bear , we opened the bundle at the Brown Bear , this is the plate, it has been in my custody ever since.

(The things deposed to by Elizabeth Thompson .)

These are our spoons, they have our mark and crest, the salts have our mark on them.

Was the boy Charles Ganley , in company with these six? - I did not see him in company with them.

Court. What was found on him? - I found some bad money upon him.

Court. Then the boy is out of the case.

Mr. Garrow. I think it my duty to say so.

Court. Besides they have made use of the boy as an evidence, it would have been the cost unfair thing in the world.

Court to Young. At the time you took Jacobs and Ganley, had Ganley the bag or had Jacobs? - Jacobs had it.

WILLIAM HASKEY sworn.

Mr. Garrow. Tell all you know with respect to the robbery committed at the house of Mr. Thomson, and remember you are on your oath? - On the 10th of March last, about six, I met Robert Ganley , Richard Jacobs , Charles Ganley , and the prisoner at the bar.

You composed a company of six? - No, only five, we met in little Moor-fields.

Court. You had been acquainted before I suppose? - Yes.

Mr. Garrow. You had done business before, to speak in your own phrase? - Never but once.

What time might this be? - About six o'clock we were to go the house of Mr. Thompson in Islington, I did not know the name then, but it was to go to that particular house; we went there altogether and Robert Ganley knocked at the door with a letter, and the door being opened we all went in, and Jacobs went down into the kitchen, and fetched up a woman that was there, and Mrs. Thompson and the child, and the maid, and that woman were then all in the parlour together; Branton and I staid in the parlour, I had the cutlass, Branton had the pistol.

Look at that pistol? - That is the pistol that the prisoner Branton had with him, we two continued in the parlour almost all the time: he was there all the time, and I was there almost all the time.

Are you sure Charles Ganley was there? - He was not in the house, he waited at the door with clothes, a great coat and his brother's clothes that he had on, because his brother did not go in, in his own clothe s.

Court. Were there no more than four went into the house? - No more.

Mr. Garrow. What were you doing the time that you continued in the parlour? We were looking up and down the parlour, I was dressed in a brown great coat, a round hat, and a white handkerchief over

part of my face, tied round my hair, it came over the right side of my face, Jacobs and Ganley went away out of the parlour, I did not see the plate till after we got to Ganley's apartment, there were a watch, a ring, and table spoons, and tea spoons.

Did you go into the back room? - Yes, I put the pepper box into my pocket on the right hand side; Charles Ganley and I came to town together to Bob Ganley 's apartment, Jacobs and Bob Ganley came in soon after and the prisoner, there we looked over the things, and then went to Drury-lane; there Jacobs and Ganley were taken.

Who were of the party in Drury-lane? - We five, nobody else, I and the prisoner made our escape; I never heard of Jacobs after he broke out.

Where were you going with this plate? - We had not appointed for a certainty.

Was it dark when you came to the house? - Yes, it was dark and a rainy wet night.

Mr. Sylvester. You have often been yourself at that kind of business? - Never.

Pray what are you? - I was a husband-man, I lived in Tooing in Herts, I have not been in London two years, in March I was out of employment.

What did you do at nights? - Always at home at my lodgings, I rented a farm at four-score pounds a year, and my affairs were bad, I made a sale and sold every thing I brought some money to town with me; about seven months I was in the King's-bench prison, I sold a reversion that I had after I came out of the King's-bench prison.

You did not pay your creditors? - No, I gave my bond for it.

You say there were only four in the house? - No more.

Why you may as well tell the whole, you know you are safe now? - You would not have me say people were there, that were not there, and there were no more.

When was you taken up? - About a month or five weeks ago, on Wednesday morning the last day of the sessions.

You did not give evidence, or information before you was taken up? - I had not heard that they could swear to me at that time, I had no share of the property only the pepper box, I afterwards sold that.

That you did not bring to the account of the partnership, did you? - No, Sir.

JOHN DIXON sworn.

I found these two pistols and the cutlass in the prisoner Ganley's lodgings, and I believe it was by the directions of Charles Ganley himself.

Prisoner Branton. Ask the accomplice how I came into his company? - He was along with Ganley and Jacobs, and young Ganley, I did not know he was to be of the party, I never saw him but once before.

The prisoner Branton called three witnesses, who all gave him a good character.

Court to Jury. Gentlemen, I will just state the law as to the circumstances of the case: the Jury on the former trial received the opinion of the learned Judge who sat here at that time, which opinion exactly corresponds with mine; for if a person gains admission into a house by fraud in the night, that fraud is in the sight of the law a violence; so if a thief by colour of law, by a a false affidavit, gets into possession of a house, or if he gets possession under pretence of taking lodgings. In 1704, Ann Hicks was indicted for burglary; she knew the house, and knew the family were in the country; she got a boy to go with her to the house with the key, he went and opened the door, and let her in, and she robbed the house; her case was reserved for the opinion of the Judges, and it was their opinion that it was a burglary, because she prevailed on the boy by fraud to open the door with the key which she had; therefore they no doubt in this case, that it is that kind of fraud, which in the eye of the law supplies the want of violence and breaking, and is a burglary. You may leave Charles Ganley out of the case, there is nothing to affect him.

To Young. Can you say that Branton was one of the five? - I cannot.

JOHN BRANTON , GUILTY , Death .

CHARLES GANLEY , NOT GUILTY .

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury, before Mr. Justice WILLES.

Reference Number: t17840526-24

542. ROBERT BALE and THOMAS HUGHES were indicted for feloniously assaulting James Fletcher , on the King's highway, on the 14th of April last, and putting him in fear, and feloniously taking from his person and against his will, one silver watch, value 40 s. one chain, value 6 d. one seal, value 6 d. and one key, value 1 d. the property of the said James.

The prosecutor not appearing, he was called on his recognizance, which was ordered to be estreated, and the prisoners were ACQUITTED .

Reference Number: t17840526-25

543. EDWARD NUNN was indicted for feloniously stealing on the 20th day of April last, one brass fire cock, value 5 s. twenty pounds weight of lead, value 2 s. belonging to the inhabitants of St. Andrew Holborn , fixed to a certain building , against the form of the statute.

A second count laying it to be the property of the church wardens of the said parish .

A third count laying it to be the property of persons unknown.

GUILTY .

Whipped .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury, before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-26

544. BENJAMIN HENDELL , otherwise OGLE was indicted for feloniously assaulting Ann the wife of Jeremiah Orgin , on the King's highway, on the twenty-eight of May , and in a forcible and violent manner, unlawfully, maliciously and feloniously did demand from her, one cotton gown, value 5 s. one Marseilles petticoat, value 5 s. and one pair of stays, value 5 s. the property of one Robert Deacon , with intent the said goods feloniously to steal .

Ann Orgin not being able to swear to the prisoner, he was ACQUITTED .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-27

545. JANE BELL was indicted for feloniously stealing on the 26th day of April , one gold handkerchief slide, set with diamonds, value 4 l. the property of Samuel Shelley , in his dwelling house .

There being no evidence to bring the felony home to the prisoner, she was ACQUITTED .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-28

546. SUSANNAH WHITEHALL and ANN PEARCE were indicted for feloniously stealing on the 7th day of May , one gold ring, value 5 s. the property of Charles Brassett , privily in his shop .

BOTH NOT GUILTY .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury, before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-29

547. WILLIAM ATTERBURY was indicted for feloniously stealing on the 18th of May , one silver watch, value 40 s. the property of Samuel Fiddon , privily from his person .

NOT GUILTY .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury, before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-30

548. PATRICK KEMWORTH was indicted for feloniously stealing on the 24th day of May , sixty pounds weight of lead, value 10 s. belonging to John Grub , and affixed to his dwelling house .

GUILTY .

Whipped .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-31

549. MARY MUMFORD was indicted for feloniously stealing on the 25th

day of May , one muslin shawl, value 3 s. 6 d. and one silver tea-spoon , value 1 s. 6 d. the property of Margaret Bannam .

NOT GUILTY .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury, before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-32

550. WILLIAM LANE was indicted for feloniously stealing on the 9th day of May , one blunderbuss pistol, value 3 s. the property of James Adams .

GUILTY .

Whipped .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-33

551. WILLIAM ROBERTSON , Esq ; was indicted for that he, on the 12th day of March last, did falsly make, forge, and counterfeit, and cause and procure to be falsly made, forged, and counterfeited, and willingly act and assist in the false making, forging, and counterfeiting a certain receipt for goods, purporting to bear date the 10th day of May, 1779, and to have been signed by James Rooke , Esq ; who then, to wit, on the said 10th day of May, was commanding officer of his Majesty's garrison at Goree , and purporting to have been signed by the same James Rooke , as Lieutenant-colonel , as an acknowledgment that he had received of William Gambol , purser of his Majesty's ship Superbe, the several goods and provisions following, viz. 11, 200 pounds weight of bread in 100 bags; 3510 pieces of beef, in pieces of 4 pounds weight each, in 20 puncheons bound with iron; 2300 pieces of pork, in two pound pieces, in 8 puncheons bound with iron; 17 bushels of peas; 1200 bushels of oatmeal; 4500 pounds weight of flour, in 15 hogsheads; 1200 gallons of wine, in 10 pipes iron bound; 350 gallons of rum, in 3 puncheons and 30 gallons of oil in one jar, with intention to defraud the King .

A Second Count for uttering the same with the like intention.

A Third Count for falsly forging a certain other receipt for goods, dated 10th of May, 1779, with intention to defraud the King.

A Fourth Count for uttering the same with the like intention.

A Fifth Count, with intention to defraud Jonas Hanway , Alexander Chorley , and others, Commissioners of the Navy .

A Sixth Count, for publishing the same with the like intention.

A Seventh Count, the same as the third, with intention to defraud the said Jonas Hanway and others.

An Eighth Count, for publishing the same with the like intention.

A Ninth Count, with intention to defraud the aforesaid James Rooke .

A Tenth Count, for publishing the same with the like intention.

An Eleventh Count, the same as the third, with intention to defraud the said James Rooke .

A Twelfth Count, for publishing the same with the like intention.

Council for the Crown.

Mr. Solicitor General,

Mr. Wilson,

Mr. Serjeant Walker.

Mr. Sylvester,

Mr. Russell.

Attorney. Mr. Baxter.

Council for the Prisoner.

Mr. Bearcroft,

Mr. Lee,

Mr. Erskine,

Mr. Fielding.

Attornies. Messrs. Gregg and Potts.

As soon as the prisoner was arraigned, Mr. Solicitor General arose and said:

My Lord, I am to make an application respecting this trial; we shall not be ready to day, an accident has arisen, which, if my word may be taken, would make it a great convenience to put it off; one of our material witnesses, Captain Parr , is gone into Warwickshire on the death of a relation, he has been subpoened, he certainly will come.

Court. It is trespassing on the time of the Court, we have postponed all other business in order to accommodate the Council in this trial; the Crown have had time enough to prepare themselves; the bill was not brought before the Jury till Friday, whereas it should have been brought the beginning of the week: you must make an affidavit.

Mr. Erskine. Let us see your affidavit before you go out of Court.

The Affidavit sworn by Mr. Baxter, and read in Court; setting forth, That Captain Parr , of Chiswick, was, as the deponent apprehended and verily believed, a material witness for the Crown, to prove the provisions in the receipt were not, in fact, ever delivered to Lieutenant Colonel Rooke , whose name to such receipt is charged to be forged; and the deponent said, he went to Captain Parr 's house at Chiswick, on Monday last, and understanding he was gone into Warwickshire, the deponent wrote by that night's post for him to come up to town, and deponent expected him every hour; and that this trial cannot, as the deponent is advised and believes, safely proceed without the said Lieutenant Parr 's testimony.

Court. Have you ever had any answer to that letter? - None at all.

Mr. Bearcroft. My Lord, as this application will be attended with very great consequence to the prisoner at the bar, I beg leave to resist it at large. I take it, that the first principles on which any trial of importance can be put off, and there cannot be a trial of greater importance than this, are these. First: that there should have been due diligence on the part of the prosecution to procure and to compel the attendance of the material witness; but when that case is laid down and proved, that alone I contend is not sufficient, for your Lordship ought to see clearly, upon the face of the affidavit upon which the application is made, that the witness will attend at the time to which the trial is meant to be put off: now the circumstances attending this case, and which shew there has not been due diligence, strike me very strongly; and they are these: the prisoner was fully committed six weeks ago, the nature of the charge perfectly understood, the witnesses were on the back of the bill, they were officers some of them superior and some inferror to this lieutenant that is absent; prima facie, therefore, it appears that they know as much of the matter as he can know. My Lord, in the first place, I say there has not been due diligence, nor any thing like it, for although the prisoner has been committed five weeks before Monday last, yet then first it appears by the affidavit, that the solicitor for the prosecution applies for the purpose of getting at this witness, not only a material witness, but as they state him, much more material than these on the back of the bill; now, with respect to the matter of diligence, is it not incumbent on them to apply all their diligence, and to search after the most material witnesses; I have a right to suppose him the most material witness, and a witness without whom they cannot go on: shall it be indured, suppose it should be followed by any thing serious to a prisoner that is to be tried for his life, that the solicitor for the prosecution chuses to sleep for five weeks: I trust, therefore, that I stand on firm and sure ground, when I say, I have pointed out to your Lordship a want of diligence, even as to the time of enquiring after him, for my proposition is this, that it was gross neglect and want of due diligence in Mr. Baxter not to find him out before; I have a right to say that in argument, and Mr. Baxter will excuse me, though in general it is what he is not guilty of; I say it was gross neglect that he did not think of going after this witness till Monday last: but that is not all, he knew where he was, why did not he send express after him? Why did not he send a subpoena after him? What, in a prosecution of this sorttod pend on a message from a servant! and then take no more trouble than to scribble a

letter into Warwickshire to this witness! Why there is not an attorney in the parish that cannot tell him, that he need not regard it: and the prosecution can afford it, there is no difficulty in point of expence; he should have sent down his clerk express with a subpoena, for the purpose of finding out this man, if he was above ground, to have served that subpoena, and to have intimated to the witness the necessity of his attending, and the nature and importance of his evidence. What is the next circumstance? The next circumstance is, that your Lordship must be satisfied on the face of their affidavit, that there is a plain case, and that the object that is now applied for, will be obtained by putting off the trial. Now, my Lord, permit me to ask, does such a thing appear? What does it amount to? Why it amounts to this, perhaps he may come. Why, what a number of perhaps's there are! perhaps he may be at the place where the servant says he is, perhaps he may not, perhaps he may be on a visit, perhaps the letter may not have reached him, perhaps he is not well, perhaps he is engaged on material business, perhaps he is not rich enough to pay for a post-chaise, for they have not even sent down money to pay it; and I venture to say, that if they had gone the length of sending down a subpoena, which they have not, I say that this subpoena, without a tender of the expences, would not have been sufficient: Can this be called due diligence? I have suggested that he may have taken advice about it, and may have earned, that he is not bound to come: it is not too much to suppose this, it would not disgrace any man; if the solicitor of the excise was to send me the civilest entreaty possible, in a case of blood, if he did not send me the compulsory process, I would not come. Your Lordship sees it amounts to nothing more than bare possibility; by possibility he may be here on Monday, and you are to do - what? Now I come to my objection; and I say you are to do not only a possible, but a certain injustice and hardship to the defendant, to give the chance of a witness coming for the prosecution, and to indulge the idleness of the attorney. Now I will state the injustice to the defendant, and we will make affidavit of it, if necessary: we have witnesses of the first character and reputation in the city, and some of much higher rank at the other end of the town, and as this is a charge against a man of high credit and reputation, and great substance in the city, many of these witnesses to my certain knowledge, relying on my brief, are to speak to something besides the character of the prisoner at the bar; something which will go to his acquittal, besides his general character, though his general character is in this case a matter of the utmost importance; and to put this trial off till Monday upon such flimsy reasons as these! and for us to lose the testimony of such witnesses as these! -

The remainder of this Trial in the next Part, which will be published in a few days.

ERRATA. - No. V. Part II. page 707, line 22, first column, after the words

"lock

"or fastening," leave out the words

"for that."

Line 25, second column, for

"conviction," read

"suspicion."

Page 708, line 29, second column, for

"from," read

"in."

Ditto, last line but one, instead of

"weighs your mind," read

"weighs on your mind."

Part III. page 711, second column, line 1, for

"effect," read

"affect."

Line 13, after

"can," read

"entertain."

N. B. James Jenkins and Robert Hughes served some part of the time on the first Middlesex Jury, in the room of Thomas and Francis Underwood .

Reference Number: t17840526-33

THE WHOLE PROCEEDINGS ON THE KING's Commission of the Peace, Oyer and Terminer, and Gaol Delivery for the CITY of LONDON; AND ALSO The Gaol Delivery for the County of Middlesex; HELD AT JUSTICE HALL in the OLD BAILEY, On Wednesday the 26th of MAY, 1784, and the following Days;

Being the FIFTH SESSION in the Mayoralty of The Right Hon. ROBERT PECKHAM , Esq; LORD MAYOR OF THE CITY OF LONDON.

TAKEN IN SHORT HAND BY E. HODGSON, PROFESSOR OF SHORT-HAND; And Published by Authority.

NUMBER V. PART V.

LONDON:

Printed for E. HODGSON (the Proprietor) And Sold by J. WALMSLAY, No. 35, Chancery Lane, and S. BLADON, No. 13, Pater-noster Row.

MDCCLXXXIV.

THE WHOLE PROCEEDINGS UPON THE

KING's Commission of the Peace, Oyer an d Terminer, and Gaol Delivery for the CITY of LONDON, &c.

Continuation of the Trial of William Robertson , Esq.

Court. I should imagine this letter must have been received at Tamworth on Tuesday night, or early on Wednesday morning, on Wednesday it might have been answered, and a letter here on Friday.

Mr. Bearcroft. It is sufficient, I submit the uncertainty of it, but I argue also from the presumption that he will not come. Has he desired him to come in a post-chaise? Has he told him he would pay his expences? I say then the suggestion is, that by possibility he may come; I say the presumption is, that he will not; and in such a case as this, if I lose only six witnesses, what may be the consequence? Will your Lordship be measuring with compasses the extent of evidence? - It cannot be. It is impossible that any man who is used to these kind of prosecutions, but must know that even the loosest evidence that can be give, that relates to the charge, may be a circumstance in the scale of justice that may save my client's life; and you must see it is extremely likely we may lose many witnesses. My answer therefore to the affidavit is this, that upon the face of it, it appears there has not been due legal diligence; there has been a great many neglects, and it does not appear that the witnesses will come; and the presumption is, that he will not: and to put this trial off, would be doing great injustice to my client; nor does it seem to me, but the fact they propose to prove by this witness, may be proved by the others: under these circumstances, my Lord, I hope, on the part of the prisoner at the bar, that you will not put off this trial.

Mr. Lee. I must trouble your Lordship with a few words on the same side, and I beg to observe, that the observations which have been offered, appear to me to be substantial and unanswerable. I cannot help thinking, that this is such an application as never was made to a Court of Justice under the like circumstances: Mr. Baxter who makes the affidavit, and I am persuaded does not mean to impose on the Court in it, I am persuaded that he does not, because the is a man of honour and a man of character most certainly, but he says he takes this man to be a material witness; he does not so much as intimate that he ever saw the man in his life, that he ever conversed with him, that he ever corresponded with him, that he ever made enquiry about him until last Monday; that is the fact as far as can

be collected from the affidavit: but on Monday last, by what illuminations Mr. Baxter has not condescended to explain, it comes into his head, that a man that lives at Chiswick of the name of Parr, may of must know something of the matter vastly important; for what reason does he think so? Now is there any reason upon earth, except this, that he was the Lieutenant of the Superbe! and it is pretty singular that he should take upon himself to say so, without having any conversation with him. Material, why? Why, because he is the Lieutenant; and this in a case where the Captain of the same ship and the Mate are at the back of the indictment, where the Master of the same ship is at the back of the indictment, and without an intimation that this man either did or could know any thing of it, that they did not or must not know: but Mr. Baxter says, I mean to tell you in point of candour how this man's evidence is material, I mean to prove that the goods were not delivered to Lieutenant Colonel Rooke , which were supposed by these papers to be delivered to him. Why, now would you believe, my Lord, that this very Colonel Rooke is the tenth witness on this very bill, and now attending in Court! If the fact is false that there never was any goods delivered to Colonel Rooke , cannot he testify it? or does Mr. Baxter mean to say and insinuate, that Colonel Rooke 's supposed defect in evidence is to be bolstered up by the assistance of this unknown gentleman at Chiswick! I am sure Mr. Baxter does not mean to say, that he thinks Colonel Rooke will not be believed, unless this Lieutenant of the Superbe is brought here to confirm him. There is no colour nor pretence in my apprehension to suppose that the Gentleman can be material, and they cannot pretend to insinuate that he will. My Lord, I beg leave to say, that to put off a trial on the absence of a material witness, against a defendant in a criminal and capital case, where, if there be any blame, it is all the prosecutor's blame, is perfectly unusual: my Lord, I say it would be blame, and great blame in Mr. Baxter, if it were not that I am fully persuaded it would turn out to be totally immaterial if it is to that fact; if it is to prove that Colonel Rooke did not receive goods, after the examination of Colonel Rooke himself whether he did or no, and whose receipt itself is in fact the supposed forgery? It is a gross neglect in my mind not to apply to this man in time, not to furnish the compulsory means of getting him: why your leaving that process is not sufficient, it has been so determined twenty times, that even if he had been subpoened, without tendering him his reasonable charges, the Court would not have granted an attachment against him; it has been determined over and over again. I say, my Lord, there is a moral certainty he will not be here; I know if the letter had been sent to York instead of Tamworth it would have been at York in very good time, at this reason of the year, and that we all know; if he had wrote an answer from York, immediately on the receipt of that letter, it must have been here very early on Thursday: the letter must have got to Tamworth on Tuesday night, it must have been delivered on Wednesday morning early, then he has three days, besides this morning, to come one hundred and twelve miles; why, he might have walked it! and besides, did you ever hear of such a thing, and a prosecution for Government too, with a very considerable number of his Majesty's learned Council, to have it said in a Court of Justice, we have been six days in getting a witness from Tamworth in Staffordshire, and we cannot get a witness one hundred and twelve miles! it is perfectly ridiculous! I will venture to say, my Lord, that in your experience, or that of the other learned Judge, or even of the whole bar, there never was a thing of that kind attempted; therefore, I submit to your Lordship, that there is a notorious clear defect of diligence, and more than that, there is a gross neglect, because, immediately upon finding where he was supposed to be, you should have sent the most expediticus messenger; and I say too, it was the duty of Mr. Baxter, to have told us on the Monday, we cannot go on without this witness; but never to intimate to any human being, that this man existed and was wanted, till the prisoner comes into Court, and then forsooth - why? we cannot try this cause, because in a week's time we have not got a witness from Tamworth! Now the attorney may think, that it may be material to have two, or three, or four witnesses to speak to the same fact, and I know that if he was to swear this ten times over it would not be material; however, I do not enter into that so much, for I rely upon it, that these gentlemen being on the back of the indictment will be quite sufficient.

Mr. Solicitor General. My Lord, to be sure the principles that Mr. Bearcroft has laid down are indisputable; in the first place, that there must have been all due diligence; in the next place, that there is a high probability that the witness will attend; the application of the principles therefore is the true question between us: and first, as to the witness's materiality; I suppose there is no man living that does not know, that a Lieutenant of a man of war is of much importance on board the ship; much of the detail belongs to him more than to the Captain; and likewise if there were three or four witnesses it is little more than possible that some of them may have been absent on important parts of the day, when we are therefore to account for the whole of the day, we must get such separate witnesses as were present in any local station: if it should so turn out, that these gentlemen who are present were not on board that ship any part of that day, if any of the other officers had been on board at different parts of the day, no man's plain sense can doubt but they may and must be very important witnesses. Mr. Lee observes too, that Colonel Rooke can prove all this: now we conceive it important for us to prove, that no such provisions ever did go on board the ship, as well as to prove that they never did go into the garrison. Now, my Lord, with respect to due diligence being used, this man was about the Admiralty frequently, in the day time he was in London, he used to go to Chiswick in the evening, and we had no doubt of his being to be found at a very short warning, but he went suddenly into Warwickshire: to be sure, in the case of gentlemen of his rank, it is not usual to make a small allowance of money to gentlemen; he may not be in want of a little money, but it would prevent his walking up, my learned friend says; now it could hardly occur to any man of business, that he would not come, and it would as hardly enter into the head of any man of business to use the rigorous and compulsory forms or to offer money; as to all the necessary forms they were used on this occasion, such as saying on the back of the letter, that it was for his Majesty's service; and as to the illumination of finding out that he was a material witness, I do not believe it requires a vast deal of sagacity, much less of inspiration, to suppose that it would be very essential to have the evidence of this gentleman, and he being resident in town, we had not the smallest doubt of finding him, and so much was Mr. Baxter persuaded he should find him, that he has been at his house to day, and left a message to conduct him here if he should come; and I think there is no doubt but Lieutenant Parr being a gentleman, and a man of reputation and character, if he did not mean to attend, would have suggested some reason why; the probability is therefore by his silence, that he means to come: and as to the gross neglect in a case where no further delay is desired than till Monday morning, what harm can arise? I am sure, from the respectable appearance of those Noblemen that attend for the prisoner, they will attend on Monday; and there are none of them I hope that are likely to perish between this and Monday, God forbid they should! I conceive, therefore, my Lord, that Mr. Baxter in this case has done what any person would have done, respecting a man who lived at Chiswick, and who was suddenly called into Warwickshire; and with respect to the materiality of this witness, I think no man can doubt but that in

the transaction alluded to, it is necessary to have every person we can. Mr. Bearcroft and Mr. Lee very properly object to this motion on the behalf of the prisoner, and God forbid that any injustice should be done to him; I hope Mr. Lee and Mr. Bearcroft will give us credit, whose fate it is to be employed on the part of the prosecution, that we do not wish any injustice to be done the prisoner; but to be sure, if there is a foundation in this charge, (which I sincerely hope to God there is not) it is necessary that it should have a fair hearing, and that for the sake of public justice it should be sifted to the bottom: I trust, therefore, on these grounds, that this gentleman being at so small a distance, Mr. Baxter has taken all due pains to obtain him, and we shall have the benefit of his testimony.

Mr. Wilson. My Lord, very little is left for me to say on the occasion. This is an important prosecution on the part of the Crown, and it is also important on the other hand for the prisoner; it is therefore fit it should be as fully investigated as to circumstances and times as it possibly can: the circumstance of delay which has been mentioned is but one day; if it had been the wish of the parties to put off this trial till the next sessions, perhaps a stronger affidavit might have been necessary. The gentlemen on the other side endeavour to prove to your Lordship, on the face of our affidavit, that this gentleman's testimony is not necessary; but, my Lord, suppose the Captain was called, and said there was no stores that he received, yet the Lieutenant might for ought he knew; then the objection would be, why have not you the Lieutenant here? and that is an objection which the Lieutenant's presence would remove, and his presence we hope to have here: but they say Colonel Rooke can cure it; now there may be a question perhaps made, when Colonel Rooke is produced here as a witness, and notwithstanding he is a man of as great probity as any in England, they may tell your Lordship, that he is perfectly incompetent, although they now tell you Colonel Rooke will certainly speak the very thing that this Lieutenant can prove: as to Mr. Rooke, it may therefore be a question, whether he can be examined or not; and if he can be examined, it is the constant language of Courts of Justice, where there is an interest in a party, that that interest goes to his credit; or if it does not, it may be very material to confirm his testimony: the learned gentlemen differ widely; one learned friend objects, that the application was not made till Monday; another learned friend thinks it was too soon, and that he might have walked it: my answer to that is this, I am strongly impressed with a belief, that the gentleman will be here for two reasons; the one is, that he is a gentleman, and being so, unless he intended to have come and given an answer to the letter in person, he would have written an answer; for, in point of civility, I do conceive no gentleman would have received such a letter without having written an answer, if he could not or would not come himself: these are the observations that occur to me, and I cannot help thinking that this man being a material witness, your Lordship will, for the sake of publick justice, and for the fuller investigation of this ness, put the cause off till Monday.

Mr. Justice Willes. I will consider very shortly this motion upon the several points, which have been argued by the Council for the Crown, and the Council for the prisoner, and they are three: the materiality of this gentleman's evidence, whether due diligence has been used to obtain it, and whether there is a probability of his being here. As to the materiality of the evidence, it is particularly specified in Mr. Baxter's affidavit, that he is material in this respect, that being a Lieutenant on board the Superbe, he is to prove that no provisions were delivered on board that ship to Colonel Rooke ; that is a material part of the case, because if they were delivered to Colonel Rooke , then the receipt is no forgery, if they were not, then it is a forgery; then it is said, though this is a material part of the evidence, it will be supplied by the other

witnesses, because there are on the back of the indictment, the Master, the Captain, and the Mate; and it is known to all of us very well, that Lieutenant-colonel Rooke is here likewise to prove that he never received those provisions: all that may be very true, and yet Parr's evidence may be material; for in the first place, suppose that these three witnesses on the back of the indictment, that is, the Captain, the Master, and the Mate, should prove that no provisions were delivered, yet we know that all the officers are not on board together, especially when they are in a port, and it might so happen that the Lieutenant might have the command of the ship when there were no other officers present; and therefore, besides having his corroborating evidence, as he might at certain times have the command of the vessel, his evidence is certainly material. But it is said all this may be supplied by Colonel Rooke ; I think not, because he might not always be in the way, and he might not receive them, but some other evidence might; and if the evidence had rested on the materiality, I own I should have been inclined to put off the trial: but there are other points that will govern my determination, which I am going to give. In the next place as to due diligence, Mr. Baxter was early enough in his application to Lieutenant Parr , he waited on him on Monday, it would have been better to be sure to have carried with him a subpoena, but he might not think it necessary, but it certainly would have been prudent when he wrote to him to have sent a subpoena: but that is not the ground on which I refuse my assent to putting off this trial; the ground of my refusal is the uncertainty, or rather the improbability of his being here on Monday; it is a very loose answer, he understood from a servant that he was gone to Tamworth; he immediately writes down to Tamworth, desiring Mr. Parr to come to town immediately, had he been at Tamworth, what would he have done as a gentleman when he received that letter on Wednesday morning? he certainly would have either wrote by post that he could not come, or that he would set out by such a time, or have set out directly in consequence of that letter, and then he would have been here now; the probability therefore is, that he was not at Tamworth, for as an officer of his majesty, he certainly would not have been guilty of any such neglect, as not sending an answer; but in all probability he never received this letter; the foundation for supposing him to be there, is nothing more than a vague loose discourse with a servant, who understood that his master was at Tamworth: now if he did not receive the letter, which appears to me to be the case, what more probability is there that he will be here on Monday than to-day? and in a matter of very great consequence, merely on an affidavit that the attorney expects him on Monday; (and I should be glad to know what ground there is for that expectation) when all the world is assembled here together, and some people of the first consequence in the kingdom, to attend this trial, why should I put off this trial upon such a vague expectation? Taking all these circumstances therefore together, I am perfectly of opinion, that this trial ought not to be postponed.

Mr. Baron Perryn . It is perfectly unnecessary for me to waste the time of the Court; I concur in opinion with my brother Willes for the last reason; I do not see that we shall be in any better situation on Monday morning than now; if we were, my inclination would be to postpone the trial; it appears also to me, that the evidence of other persons might be sufficient even if he was here: and as I do not see sufficient foundation in my own mind, to believe that we shall be more likely to proceed on Monday than now, I am of opinion with my brother, that we should proceed immediately.

The Prisoner desired to be indulged with a Chair.

The Jury sworn.

The indictment was opened by Mr. Russel And Mr. Solicitor General opened the case as follows:

Gentlemen of the Jury. I have the honour of attending you in this case, on the

part of the prosecution. The prisoner is indicted for forging and uttering a receipt, for certain provisions delivered to the garrison at Goree, Lieutenant Colonel Rooke , being then the commanding officer there; and there are circumstances stated to me, whereby we shall be able to shew that no such provisions were delivered, and no such receipt given, and all to shew that the prisoner at the bar, either forged this receipt, or uttered it knowing it to be forged. In opening this case to you, I shall confine myself as decency and duty oblige me to do, to a short state of facts; you perfectly well knowing that it is not from me you are to learn any fact, but from the witnesses themselves: my duty therefore goes no further than to lay before you a sketch of what the witnesses will lay before you themselves, and you will therefore of course dismiss from your minds, any thing that I shall say, further than as it relates to the mere connection of facts, and of dates one with another.

Gentlemen, the prisoner at the bar is by profession an agent for receiving the wages and the prize money of officers, and seamen, and other persons who served in the Navy; in the course of the prosecution of this business he passes the accounts of various persons, and amongst the rest of pursers of men of war, with the different public offices, through which they must be passed in order that they may be finally closed. Amongst others the prisoner was agent for a gentleman of the name of William Gambold , who is know dead, and was purser to his Majesty's ship the Superbe; the prisoner in the course of his profession, delivered in papers for passing Mr. Gambold's accounts at the Victualling Office to a gentlemen of the name of Henry Ebbons Williams , who is a clerk to Mr. Ralph Collier , his business is to keep a charge on pursers, and to adjust the accounts with masters of transports, and that sort of business at the Victualling Office: the purpose of this gentleman at the bar, in delivering in those accounts, was to get them finally settled; these papers Mr. Williams on the 11th of September, 1782, delivered into the office of a gentleman of the name of Richard Sadler Moody , who is clerk for settling pursers accounts, after these papers had been delivered in and examined at this office, the charge of provisions and victualling stores was taken from the books of Mr. Collier's office, with an order from the board, that being usual when pursers are dead, before their accounts are made out; and on the 18th of October, 1782, those items were transmitted to Mr. Moody, this particular account was afterwards stated by Mr. Moody, and it was examined in the office of a gentleman of the name of Henshaw, who is accountant for stores, when it appearing that Mr. Gambold the purser, was considerably in debt for some articles, the account was laid aside, as these papers did not contain so much charge against the Victualling Office as was due from Mr. Gambold; the account was therefore in the course of office laid aside in order to take it up again when the Victualling Office should have a prospect of recovering the deficiency. Gentlemen, before this was done, or any thing more passed on the subject of that account, in the beginning of March 1783, the same Mr. Williams found on his desk in the Victualling Office a note from the prisoner, and that note inclosed an order and receipt, the one purporting to be an order from Sir Edward Hughes to Mr. Gambold the purser, to deliver certain stores in the garrison at Goree; the other a receipt, which is the material paper in question, a receipt from Lieutenant Colonel Rooke , purporting that he had so received such stores on his Majesty's acco unt: these papers Williams found on his table, and the note which he received at the same time, intimated that the papers had been received from the East Indies where the Superbe was, and where Mr. Gambold died; and the prisoner desired Williams to get the provisions and other things wrote to the credit of Mr. Gambold, and that they might be allowed in the state of Mr. Gambold's accounts by the board; Mr. Williams not thinking that note material, he has destroyed that note, however he delivered the order and the

receipt to the same gentleman he delivered the other papers to, which was his superior Officer, Mr. Collier: Mr. Collier observed that this order differed essentially from the usual course of orders which he was accustomed to see and to pass accounts upon, it being an order from the Admiral to the Purser, and he having never before seen any but what was addressed from the Admiral to the Captain, he being the person that afterwards issued his orders to the inferior persons; that being the course of practice occasioned some doubt in Mr. Collier's mind, about passing the accounts in that form: Gentlemen, about the 12th of March 1783, the prisoner came to Mr. Williams, and desired him to write a letter to the board in the usual way, requesting that the provisions and stores mentioned in the receipt, and also that a further account, an extra account, might be allowed in Mr. Gambold's account: Mr. Williams accordingly wrote this letter, and took it to the prisoner to sign it, but he being engaged, desired him to put to it the name of Mr. Bailey; and the fact is, that Bailey had before authorized Mr. Williams to put his name to letters of an ordinary nature to the board; it is not a very regular practice, but very usually done: Mr. Williams did accordingly put Mr. Bailey's name to it, and the letter was to this effect:

"In passing the late Mr. William Gambold 's account as Purser of his Majesty's ship the Superbe, he is not allowed for a quantity of provisions for the use of the garrison at Goree, and Mr. Gambold being dead, I have to request you will be pleased to allow the same, I am honourable Gentlemen, your most obedient servant, Henry Bailey ." The board on receiving this letter, referred the letter and the papers to Mr. Richard Henshaw to certify the case to them, and he made the report, and stated the nature of the vouchers that were produced, that is the order and the receipt; and he observed that it was not quite regular and in the common form, that it was not the custom of the service, for an Admiral to give an order to a Purser, but for the Admiral to correspond directly with the Captain; he observed too in his report, that no notice was taken of the delivery of the provisions in the Captain's account, and that he apprehended that those garrisons were victualled by other persons, that they were victualled by persons under contract with the Treasury, who ought to account for those provisions; and as that was the ordinary course as he apprehended in these cases, and above all as there was that singularity of the Admiral's giving an order to the Purser, he thought himself bound to make these observations on the report: however on the 23d of May 1783. the board directed that the provisions, and the things mentioned in the receipt, should be allowed in Mr. Gambold's account; and that account was accordingly closed, and credit given in that account, for the amount of this second demand given into the Victualling Office of 642. 17 s. 7 d. and a victualling bill was made out for that sum, dated the 31st of May, and delivered to the prisoner, this turned the balance very considerably in favour of Mr. Gambold's account, the small balance that had remained, was something under twenty pounds, and the consequence of this was, that something more than six hundred pounds was due to him. Gentlemen, this receipt from Lieutenant Colonel Rooke , which became the voucher from the Victualling Office for this second charge on them on Mr. Gambold's account, is that which we charge to be forged; in this case we shall likewise give you in evidence some circumstances of the conduct of the prisoner, which it is apprehended on the part of the prosecution, will discover his intentions in this matter, in as much as he suppressed this transaction from persons who were interested in knowing the state of Mr. Gambold's affairs, and whom he was bound at least in honour to inform of the particulars thereof. A Mr. Bevan and a Mr. Millingham, were made the executors of his will, and the prisoner on the 16th of November, 1782, writes to James Bevan one of the executors this letter, he says,

"By the last will of Mr. Gambold, you are

appointed with Mr. Millingham, executor, and as he died in my debt to the amount of 25 l. 16 s. 4 d. I should be particularly obliged to you, if you can inform me how the same is to be paid to me, and what situation his affairs are in." Mr. Bevan on the 28th answered the letter,

"Sir, I received your letter, of the 16th instant, respecting a debt due to you from the late Mr. Gambold, there are several other debts likewise unsatisfied, and as we expect there is a considerable sum of money due to him as Purser of the Superbe, I desire you will enquire at the proper offices whether the books have been received, as we understand they were sent home, by the Prince East Indiaman, you should know the exact account of those affairs. On the 12th of December 1782, Mr. Robertson writes,

"In answer to your's, the accounts of Mr. Gambold are passed, and I am sorry to say, they are very much in debt to the Crown, and if you have any other affairs to settle I beg you will particularize them." When he writes that the accounts were passed, he undoubtedly means the first accounts; but in May 1783, these second accounts were passed, on which Mr. Robertson received a balance in favour of Mr. Gambold, and from that hour to this he never let the executors know that he had passed such accounts: we shall likewise prove, that no such provisions ever were delivered from on board the Superbe, and we shall also prove, that none such were ever received into the garrison of Goree; we shall prove also, that this receipt is not the hand writing of Lieutenant Colonel Rooke . Gentlemen, when all these circumstances are collected together, it will be for you to balance them, and in the first place to see how far the charge and the evidence to support it is sufficient to convict the prisoner, supposing it to stand by itself; and then balancing it against that case, which will be made out by him, whether it will still sufficiently preponderate against him to entitle you to bring in your verdict, that he is Guilty. Gentlemen, I beg to recommend to you again, what I am perfectly satisfied you know, but it is fit I should be anxious in repeating it, that every thing I have stated to you, you are to consider as utterly unproved at present; and that it is from the witnesses alone and not from any thing I have said, you are to collect the guilt of the prisoner. Gentlemen, I shall detain you no longer in opening to you the nature of this prosecution, only expressing on my part a most sincere wish, that you may, after hearing the evidence that shall be adduced on both sides, find yourselves justified in giving a verdict that shall acquit the defendant; but at the same time permit me to add, it is necessary that no frauds of this kind should be committed; and if an unfortunate necessity should oblige you to see that there is truth in this indictment, you will in that case do that justice to the publick, which you shall by dint of testimony be compelled to do.

GEORGE SWAFFEY sworn.

Examined by Mr. Wilson.

What are you? - I am a cashier of the Victualling Office, under the Treasurer of the Navy.

Do you know the prisoner? - Very well.

Do you remember his coming to you at any time with respect to a Mr. Gambold, the Purser of the Superbe? - I do not know that he ever came to me on any business of Mr. Gambold's, there is a general letter of attorney from Mr. Gambold to him entered in the Treasurer's office, here is the book and the register.

By whom is it entered? - By Mr. John Fennell , who was at that time chief clerk in that office.

For what purpose is it registered in your office? - For the purpose of authorising me to pay money in the name of the principal, when he comes with bills, the date of the letter of attorney is the 30th of November, 1778.

Court. I suppose you admit that.

HENRY EBBONS WILLIAMS sworn.

Examined by Mr. Serjeant Walker.

What are you? - I am employed in the Victualling Office as clerk.

In whole office? - Mr. Hume's, I was in Mr. Ralph Collier 's in September 1782.

Was you regularly employed under Mr. Collier or Mr. Hume? - At that time under Mr. Collier.

What were your business? - Charging vouchers against Pursers and Masters of transports.

In that time was any vouchers delivered to you by the prisoner at the bar? - In September, 1782, I received some papers from Mr. Robertson.

What were those papers? - They related to Mr. Gambold's account.

Court. Mr. Gambold was then dead? - Yes.

What was Mr. Gambold? - He was the Purser of the Superbe.

Serjeant Walker. In what character did you receive those papers from the prisoner at the bar? - To solicit them through the offices for Mr. Robertson, as agent to Mr. Gambold.

What did you do with those papers? - I delivered them in to Mr. Burt, clerk at Mr. Moody's office, who is the next person in office to take the Purser's accounts.

That is all you know as to that transaction? - That is all I know.

What were the contents of those papers? - There are the papers, this is an abstract of them.

Did you make it at the time? - Yes.

Prisoner. Give me leave to look at the abstract.

Serjeant Walker. Had you any thing to do with this till March following? - I solicited the account till it was finished.

Were these papers all that were delivered to you at that time? - Yes, they were.

Was Mr. Gambold found to be in debt? - Yes.

To what amount? - I cannot rightly say.

Whereabouts was it? - I think it was nigh twenty pounds.

Did you see the prisoner till you had finished those accounts? - I might see him, I saw him again in March 1783.

Do you know at what period the first accounts were finally closed? - I cannot tell particularly.

Had you any other papers delivered to you by Mr. Robertson at any other time? - In March, 1783.

What papers had you then? - A receipt and an order.

Where did you find those papers? - On the desk.

How did you know that they came from the prisoner? - They were inclosed in a note from the prisoner, in his hand-writing.

What did those papers relate to? - An order from Admiral Hughes on one side, and a receipt on the other.

Who was the order directed to? - The Purser of the Superbe.

What Purser? - William Gambold .

Do you know what the receipt related to? - It related to provisions supplied to Colonel Rooke at Goree: this is the receipt.

What did you do with those papers that you found on the desk? - I presented them to the office, to be allowed and passed to Mr. Gambold's account.

Did you get that account immediately passed? - No, Sir, there was an objection to their being allowed till they were carried to the board.

Who did you deliver those papers to? - To Mr. Collier.

What did you do with the papers? - I applied to the board afterwards.

When did you see the prisoner after this? - I cannot say when, it was very shortly after.

Did you tell him what had happened? - Yes, I told him that these papers could not be allowed without application to the board.

What did he desire you to do? - To write a letter to the board.

For who? - For him, to desire that they might be allowed.

Did you write that letter? - Yes.

At his request? - Yes.

When you had wrote it, who signed it? - I signed it.

Have you the letter there? - Yes, I signed it for Henry Bailey .

How came you to put the name of Henry Bailey instead of the prisoner's? - Mr. Robertson was busy at the time in conversation, and he desired me to put Mr. Bailey's name to it.

Why did you put Bailey's name to it? - He had given me commission to do so.

Was that the general course of your office? - Yes.

Who is Mr. Bailey? - Clerk to Mr. Robertson.

Did you know him to be so? - Yes.

When you had wrote the letter, and signed it in the manner you have mentioned, what did you do with that and the papers? - Sent it to the board; this is the letter.

Court. Did Mr. Robertson read the letter after you had wrote it? - I do not recollect whether he did or did not.

Do you know what was done on these last papers? - They were allowed.

What did the demand that was so allowed amount to? - I cannot say.

Was this last order and receipt taken any notice of before March 1783? - No.

Mr. Lee, Council for the Prisoner. Mr. Williams, I will ask you one or two questions; you was before a magistrate upon this? - Yes.

Who was he? - Sir Sampson Wright.

Do not you recollect, that upon that occasion you said that you wrote that letter by Mr. Bailey's direction? - By the permission of Mr. Bailey to put his name to the letter.

Did not you say that you wrote the letter by Mr. Bailey's direction? - No.

Did you say a word of writing it by Mr. Robertson's direction before that magistrate? - Yes, to the best of my knowledge I did.

Recollect yourself. - Yes, Sir, to the best of my recollection.

You said there you wrote that letter by the direction of Mr. Bailey, Mr. Robertson's clerk? - No, Sir, not by the direction of Mr. Bailey.

You say you did not say so? - I do.

You do? - I think I may.

Then you have an indistinct sort of belief about it; you are not sure whether you did or no? - I am pretty sure I did not.

You have known Mr. Robertson a great many years? - Yes.

How long? - Ever since he was a child.

What portion of that time has he been engaged in navy agencies? - A many years.

Has his employment in that respect been to a pretty considerable extent? - Yes, very much so.

Very eminent? - Very eminent.

I suppose therefore he was as likely as any agent in England to know what was the regular course of doing this business? - He was.

Could he be ignorant that an Admiral corresponded with his Captain, and his Captain with his Purser, that that was the method of doing it? - No, I should think not.

He could not possibly be ignorant of that? - No.

He knew the mode of this business as well as any body? - I dare say he did.

Could he possibly be ignorant, in your judgment, that the mode of doing this business is, that the Admiral commands the Captain, and the Captain commands the Purser, and that the Admiral has no immediate correspondence with the Purser? - No, Sir.

That is a gross irregularity on the face of it. - Yes, any clerk that has been in the office some time must have been struck with it.

What day in September was it that you received these first set of papers? - I delivered them into the office the 19th, but I cannot justly say when I had them.

I am speaking of the first papers, which you say in September 1782 you received from Mr. Robertson, to solicit through the office; what makes you certain it was in September 1782? - I am sure I delivered them in September.

When did you receive them was my question? - I cannot justly say.

Court. He said in September 1782.

Mr. Lee. Can you tell, or can you not tell, whether you received them in August? - It is impossible to tell.

You might have received them in July, or in June? - It is impossible to tell.

How came you to swear that you received them in September? - To the best of my knowledge.

It is a strange thing, that in such a charge as this, that you should begin with saying, you received them in the month of September, and now you say you know nothing about it? - I take it, it was in September that I received them.

What makes you take it? - Because I generally used to deliver papers as soon as I had them.

So that you infer, because you delivered them in the month of September, that you had them then? - I should suppose so.

Will you take upon you to swear that they had not been delivered months before, months, many months; I put it to you, and I tell you there will be some evidence upon that; not one, two, or three, or four, but six months? - I cannot take upon me to swear, I will not take upon me to swear, I should not chuse to swear.

What are you about, to say you received them in the month of September, and then will not take upon you to swear that they were not delivered the February before; that is pretty extraordinary! Now, young man, about all this matter on which there is a possibility of checking you, you get into a good deal of obscurity and uncertainty, but you say you received a letter from Mr. Robinson? - Yes.

It is a little unlucky that was destroyed? - I cannot say when, I received many notes from Mr. Robinson, being of no consequence I destroyed them.

You do not know that you destroyed that? - I have not got it.

Did not you receive papers without letters? - I might receive papers without letters, but I remember finding that paper in a note on the desk.

What a note written by Mr. Robertson? - Yes.

I should have thought it most natural to have preserved that paper with the inclosure? - No, the papers were delivered into the office.

Do you know what became of the letter? - I do not know.

Because you said you destroyed it, you do not know but you might light a pipe with it? - No.

I wish you have not made some little mistake about this letter, Mr. Williams? - I fancy not.

Are you sure about that, I would not ask you if I was not instructed to ask you; will you take upon you to swear that there was a letter at all from Mr. Robertson? - I am certain these papers were inclosed in a note, I know it was from him, and to the best of my knowledge it was his writing.

Now it is only to the best of your knowledge? - I know Mr. Robertson's writing.

Will you swear the letter that you took little or no notice of was his writing, because you said to the best of your knowledge it might be? - It is impossible for me, I did not see him write it.

It might be his clerks you know? - To the best of my knowledge it was his handwriting.

Or it might be his clerks? - It was his hand-writing, I dare say, I very often saw his writing.

Now, I say, young man, as the note was destroyed, what fixes it in your memory so precisely and exactly the time of this delivery of these papers and note? - I wrote to the board immediately after I received the papers in March.

Just so was done you know in the month of September, yet you cannot swear that it was not in the February before; that is no reason with you know? - I am sure it was in March.

What makes you so sure? - From my memory.

O, that is all! When did you apply to the board? - I applied either that day, or the next day, to Mr. Collier.

Court. You sent them to the office; what time in March? - About the 15th or the 16th.

Mr. Lee. Now will you tell me this, whether at the time you received these accounts,

this order and this receipt, you did not receive an account of extra casks, signed by Captain Symonton ? - I do not recollect that.

What is the matter with you, you seem to have the most comical memory that ever was; why it is all of one side! Cannot you tell whether you did or did not; was not he Captain of the Superbe? - Yes.

Do you recollect any account of these extra casks at all, how is that, Master Williams? - I cannot say that I do recollect.

Do not you know that there was an acaccount of extra casks as well as the others sent by Captain Symonton ? - I know there was one.

But you cannot tell whether you received this with the others, or when you received it? - I cannot say.

Did not you receive them at one and th e same instant? - I do not recollect any thing about these extra casks.

At the time you received this order and receipt, was not it accompanied with that account? - I do not remember it was.

Will you say it was not? - I do not remember it was.

You can remember and forget very comically? - I remember the other papers, but I do not remember this.

Do not you remember ever to have seen it, or only that you never saw it then? - I cannot recollect whether I ever saw it.

Now mind, good Sir, this letter is your own letter on the 12th of March 1783, which you signed I think, did not you? - Yes.

You signed with the name of Bailey; why, it is your own letter, look at it; look at that, man; I only want to refresh his memory, not to puzzle him: now, upon seeing your own hand writing, do you recollect it? - I might have not had the extra expences, we apply for one thing at a time.

Why you state the very irregularity of it at the time? - I might know the irregularity, though I had not the paper.

How could you do that, unless by divination? - The first papers were regular, the second were irregular, therefore that application was made.

Now, friend, how could that letter possibly be written, unless you had an account of the extra casks? - I might know it was irregular, though I might not have it.

Now do you mean to swear that when you wrote that, you had no account of these extra casks? - I might be informed that it was not regular to apply for the extra expences, I said before I did not remember ever seeing it.

Did you recollect when I examined you, that you had written such a letter as that in your own hand writing signed Bailey? - Yes, Sir, I know I wrote the letter, but I might not have had the account of the extra casks.

Did you know that the letter was false or true when you wrote it? - I might be desired to apply for the extra casks at the same time.

(Mr. Lee produced an account signed by Mr. Henshaw.)

Look at that for God's sake, and consider what you are about young man; how could that get into Mr. Henshaw's possession without you had received that? - Yes.

How! how? - Any body might have given it to him, I might have been ordered to apply for it, though I had not the extra expences, I know I applied for it, I can say I did not present the extra expence of casks to Mr. Henshaw, I presented the receipt to Mr. Collier,

Will you say you did not present the extra account of casks, at the same time to Mr. Collier? - Mr. Henshaw was the proper person, I might have been desired to apply for it while I was writing the letter, to apply for both at the same time, somebody else might have presented it to Mr. Henshaw.

But how it was, you do not know? - I do not.

Mr. Erskine. Read the order first, and then the receipt, you first desire him to read part of a paper, and then the whole of it, you should first read the order, for the receipt is in consequence of the order, as the Solicitor General stated it.

Mr. Justice Willes. You should read all

the papers together to be sure, let the order be read.

(The order read)

"Signed Edward Hughes :"

"Dated the 9th of May, 1779."

"To Sir Edward Hughes , Knight of the Bath, Rear Admiral of the Blue, &c. &c. &c.

"Whereas the garrison in the island of Goree, is in want of provisions, delivered the following taking proper receipts: bread 11,200 pounds, beef 350 pieces, pork 230 pieces, peas 17 bushels, oatmeal 1000 gallons, flower 4000 pounds, spirits 350 gallons, wine 1200 gallons, oil 30 gallons, bags 100; given under my hand, at Goree, the 9th of May, 1779, directed to Mr. Gambold, Purser of the Superbe, signed James Rooke , Lieutenant Colonel."

(The receipt read.)

"Received the 10th of May, 1779, of Mr. Gambold, Purser of his Majesty's ship Superb, bread 11,200 pounds in one hundred bags, beef 350 pieces in 20 puncheons iron bound, pork 230 pieces in 8 puncheons iron bound, peas 17 bushels in 2 hogsheads, oatmeal 100 gallons, flour 4,500 pounds, wine 1,200 gallons, rum 350 gallons, oil 30 gallons in one jar."

Mr. Solicitor. Now we read the letter dated London, the 12th of March, 1783; signed Henry Bailey .

Court. You have produced the receipt, the next thing is, whether it is Mr. Rooke's hand writing, you must call him to prove that it is his hand writing; in the course of business you have proved a receipt, now you are to prove it was forged.

COLONEL JAMES ROOKE sworn.

Examined by Mr. Sylvester.

Where was you on the 10th of May, 1779? - At Goree.

What station was you in then? - I was commanding officer of his Majesty's troops at Goree.

Look at that, is that your hand writing? - It is so much like my hand writing, that I cannot say it is not my hand writing.

Look at the whole of it, what do you believe on the subject? - The words Lieutenant Colonel appear to be not my handwriting.

While you was commanding officer at Goree, did you every receive those provisions from his Majesty's ship the Superbe? - I did receive provisions in consequence of an application to Admiral Hughes, but I cannot possibly say whether I received those or not.

Did you sign that paper, look at the whole of it? - I cannot swear I did not sign James Rooke .

Look at the whole of it, did you ever sign a paper like that.

(The Prisoner's Council objected to this question.)

Mr. Sylvester. My Lord, but a very few sessions ago there was a forgery on the East India Company, and the Secretary said he would not positively swear that was not his hand-writing, it was so like it, but he would swear that he never signed two.

Mr. Lee. That has nothing at all to do with this case; why you might as well indict me for this forgery.

Court. You cannot stir a step; Colonel Rooke says he applied to Admiral Hughes for provisions, and he did receive a quantity of provisions from Admiral Hughes, and he cannot say what quantity.

Mr. Bearcroft. This would not be evidence in a civil case.

Mr. Solicitor General. I assure you my Lord, if it had not been stated to me, that Colonel Rooke would have said that this was not his hand-writing, I would not have proceeded.

Court. Gentlemen of the Jury, You see the complexion of this, you must acquit Mr. Robertson, and I think he is honourably acquitted.

NOT GUILTY .

Mr. Justice Willes. I have known Colonel Rooke these thirty years, I believe there is not a worthier honester man, and more of a gentleman.

Mr. Bearcroft. My Lord, I had a witness on the part of the prisoner to prove that he received these papers in the condition

exactly that they are now, many months before this application; may I be permitted my Lord, to state that I have a witness who was clerk to the prisoner at the bar, who received these papers that are supposed to be forged, in a package with a great number of others, apparently coming from somebody who sent them from the dead purser's goods; I understand nothing in the world is so common when a death happens on board, for somebody or other to pack up the papers, and send them to the agent: my Lord that clerk would have proved that they were brought to him unopened, and when they were opened, they were exactly in the same state they are now, I think this declaration due to my client's character; I never thought any thing else was in danger.

David M'Cormick who was an evidence on the above trial was ordered to be discharged.

Mr. Robertson retired from the bar as soon as the verdict of Not Guilty was pronounced, but returned in a minute afterwards and said,

"I return my thanks to the Gentlemen of the Jury."

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury, before Mr. Justice WILLES.

Reference Number: t17840526-34

551. ANN POWIS was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 28th day of April last, one Bath cloak, value 5 s. one black silk cloak, value 8 s. one chip hat, value 1 s. one black silk handkerchief, value 2 s. one apron, value 1 s. one plated spoon, value 4 d. one ink-stand, value 4 s. two caps, value 2 s. and six yards of thread lace, value 2 s. the property of John Edwards .

MARY EDWARDS sworn.

On the 28th of April the prisoner robbed me of the things mentioned in the indictment, she came to me on the 24th for lodgings, she said she came up by the waggon, and she had expended all her money; I took her in on Wednesday about one, she went from my apartment and took the things with her; she was to go by Mr. Ward's Birmingham waggon, from the Bell in Smithfield, and in about half an hour after she was gone, I missed the things mentioned in the indictment; I went after her and found her in Smithfield about four, I took hold of her, and a woman came up and asked the prisoner if a man and woman belonged to her; I saw nobody but the prisoner, but the other people said they saw them; the prisoner said yes, and said to my daughter, that man and woman has got the black box and your cloak.

Court. What do you mean by the black box? - The ink-stand; we took the prisoner to the Compter, she had my cloak on her; she never denied taking the things, but said she gave them to this man and woman; she said first that they set her to rob me, then she said she met them in the street and asked them for a lodging, and gave them the bundle.

Mr. Sylvester, Prisoner's Council. How long has this woman been in town? - She has been five weeks in prison.

What are you? - I sell gingerbread and saloop in the street; I live in Hen and Chicken Court, by St. Dunstan's Church.

ROBERT WALKER sworn.

I am a watchman, I took the prisoner into a publick house, and she said she had given the box to the man and woman that had promised to let her a lodging, and they lived at St. Giles's Church; she said she knew nothing of the man and woman, but she gave the box on purpose to get a shilling for a lodging, as she had no money.

She never attempted to run away? - No, she was like a baby, as inoffensive as a lamb to look at, she could not well get from me.

No, certainly, not from you; you are the lion and she the lamb, you are quite a tiger of a watchman.

SARAH PUGH sworn.

I went of an errand for my mother, and I met the prisoner about half past one; she told me my mother had sent her to look for me, she asked me to go with her to wait till the waggon came in, and she desired me to

go first, and she said she would wait for me; when I came back, I found the prisoner gone; I went with my mother to the Bell Inn, to see if she was coming there, and coming back from there, we met her with my mother's cloak on her back, and there was a man and woman with her, the man was dressed like a sailor, and the woman had a red cloak on; the man and woman went along, and a woman came up, and asked the prisoner if that man and woman did not belong to her, and she said, yes, they did, and they had the black box and my cloak; I met her in Fetter-lane.

Mr. Sylvester. You met her a little way from the Bell Inn? - Yes, in Smithfield.

She did not attempt to get away from you? - No, we both laid hold of her.

You are neither of you very strong I see? - No, the Waggon came in that night.

Now this poor creature, you had not known her long? - No, only that Saturday.

You never saw the man and woman after? - No, they both ran down Chick-lane, nobody ran after them, we were afraid to follow them.

RICHARD WILTSHIRE sworn.

I took charge of the prisoner in Chick-lane, about half past five, with this cloak on her shoulders; I heard her say nothing.

Mr. Silvester. You was alarmed to hear there was a thief in Chick-lane? - There are a vast many thieves in Chick-lane.

(The cloak produced and deposed to.)

PRISONER's DEFENCE.

Sir, I came out of the country, and my things were to come the next week; I was not acquainted with the place, I met this woman, and she said she would give me a lodging; I asked her to lend me her cloak, and she said I might have it, I made bold to put it on, and after that she and her daughter followed me and had me taken up.

Where do you belong to? - I came out of Gloucestershire.

What had you to do with the Birmingham waggon? - I came in Mr. Ward's waggon from Shipstone, I came about five miles from Stratford upon Avon; as to the other things, I never saw any of them, but the woman would not mind swearing my life away.

A witness for the prisoner deposed, that the prisoner's clothes had since come out of the country, and were at the Bell Inn at that time.

NOT GUILTY .

Tried by the London Jury, before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-35

552. EDWARD M'QUID was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 26th day of May , one pair of leather shoes, value 2 s. the property of Robert Alexander .

The prosecutor being informed by one Griffin, that the prisoner had stolen his shoes, which were hanging at his door, pursued and took him with the shoes upon him, which were deposed to.

GUILTY .

Whipped .

Tried by the London Jury, before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-36

553. ELIZABETH KELLY was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 26th day of April , two pewter quart pots, value 3 s. and one pint pewter pot, value 1 s. the property of Josiah Knutt .

GUILTY .

Privately whipped .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-37

554. GEORGE HYATT was indicted for feloniously stealing on the 7th day of May , one pound weight of tobacco, value

1 s. the property of a certain person unknown.

GUILTY .

Whipped .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-38

555. EDWARD REUBENS was indicted for feloniously stealing on the 14th day of May , four pounds weight of lead, value 6 d. and ten pounds weight of brass, value 6 s. the property of John Warner .

GUILTY.

Recommended by the Jury, being aged.

To be privately whipped , and imprisoned one month in Newgate .

Tried by the London Jury, before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-39

556. DANIEL DANIELS was indicted for feloniously stealing on the 21st day of May , one copper pot with a copper cover, value 4 s. one pewter dish, value 6 d. one pewter porringer, value 3 d. and one pair of shoes, value 6 d. the property of Joseph Solomons .

JOSEPH SOLOMONS sworn.

Last Saturday was a week, when I got up in the morning, I found I was robbed, we have closets in the yard, I made an alarm, and by applying to the watchman I got some of my property.

JOHN WILLIAMSON sworn.

I am a watchman at Aldgate, I saw the prisoner the 22d in the morning, about half past three, with a copper in his right hand, he pushed down an alley about four yards, and dropped the pot and this dish, I pursued him, and lost sight of him in Cox's-square; six days after he was taken, I am sure it is the same man, I knew him before, I can swear to the things.

Thomas Tyler and John Hopkins confirmed the former account.

(The things deposed to.)

GUILTY .

Transported for seven years .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-40

557. JOHN AYNERS and JOHN ADAMS were indicted for feloniously stealing on the 15th day of March last, 214 pounds weight of lead, value 30 s. belonging to Jonathan Mab , and then and there affixed to his dwelling house , against the statute.

JOHN ROBINSON sworn.

Between eight and nine in the evening, March the 15th, I took a walk round, and at the place called the Circus Building, I went into an house uninhabited, and stood in the door way, with my face towards the door, and the two prisoners came and passed me with each a load, I stood till they got past me, I saw another man behind, he set down his load, I took no notice at all of him, but I went into Quebeck-street and told the people of the publick-house, two of the men followed me, I took one of the prisoners, and pursued after the other two but could not find them, I came round the south side; when I took Ayners, he wanted me to keep it quiet, I told him no, it would not do, then I perceived Adams and another man along with him, I met them half way along the fouth side of Portman-square, I took Adams, and the other man got away, they had both loads on their backs.

Court. When you first saw them, were they coming from that way? - Yes, I took the lead and matched it, and found it had been taken from a house belonging to Jonathan Mab , it fitted exactly, it was taken from the middle gutter, there were nail holes, and it fitted exactly, here is one Robinson, who saw the lead matched.

- ROBINSON sworn.

Did you see this lead tried on the house? - Yes.

Did it fit the places? - Yes.

Was the place cut out even or irregular? - It was cut out irregular.

So that nothing could sit it but the piece itself? - Nothing but the piece itself.

(The lead produced.)

Court to Robinson. That is not so irregular as you described it? - It is impossible for a man to cut it even without he had a line to cut it by, they cut two pieces out from the gutter, they matched exactly to the place.

PRISONER ADAMS's DEFENCE.

I shewed them the man that employed me when he took me.

Court. Where is the man, can you produce him? - No, I cannot, I had a gentleman here last sessions that waited two or three days.

PRISONER AYNER's DEFENCE.

When they took me, I told them the man that employed me was before me, and they took him.

BOTH GUILTY .

Transported for seven years .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury, before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-41

558. ANN WRIGHT was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 11th of May , one cloth coat, value 40 s. one waistcoat, value 2 s. one pair of breeches, value 2 s. one coat, value 4 s. one waistcoat, value 2 s. one pair of everlasting breeches, value 2 s. one cotton gown, value 3 s. one linen gown, value 3 s. one linen apron, value 1 s. one boy's shirt, value 2 s. one black russel petticoat, value 4 s. one flannel petticoat, value 1 s. one pair of cotton stockings, value 1 s. ten copper medals, value 6 d. one silver medal, value 6 d. and one half-penny, value a half-penny , the property of John Hill .

Mrs. HILL sworn.

The prisoner was my servant , about three months she laid with me, on account of my husband being in trouble, he was arrested for a debt that he was bail for, I called her up early in the morning as I wanted to go out, she got up immediately to iron some things, I thought she was up doing her business, a little boy of mine cried and made a noise for his breeches, I was angry with him, and told him to go to Nanny; I then found that the maid was gone, and every box, and every drawer, and wearing apparel, my petticoats, my gown, my shift, and every individual thing but my garters, I believe the keys might be on the table, as I never hardly put them in my pocket; in two days I found the things, the prisoner was going by Bishop's Court, in the Old-Bailey, with all my clothes on her back, my hat and every thing she had on was mine, I took her into custody, and found duplicates in her pocket of a great many things that she had pledged, and the pocket-piece and medals were found in her pocket, she said the devil was very busy with her, she was in liquor.

WILLIAM BOTHMAN sworn.

I have two boys coats, waistcoats, and breeches, the prisoner brought them to our shop, on the 18th of May.

(The things deposed to.)

JOHN TAYLOR sworn.

I have two gowns, a petticoat, an under petticoat, a shift, and a linen apron, all the th ings but one of the gowns were found upon the prisoner's back.

(These things deposed to.)

GEORGE MEECHAM sworn.

I was with Taylor and took the prisoner, these things were found upon her, I found some medals on her, and a pair of white cotton stockings in her pocket, and a remarkable half-penny with a name engraved upon it, and I found all the duplicates.

(These things deposed to.)

PRISONER's DEFENCE.

The prosecutrix gave me the things to keep for her, for she was affraid of having them taken away from her, these things I had on my back she lent me, and I was to pay for them as soon as I could.

The prisoner called two witnesses who gave her a good character.

GUILTY .

Transported for seven years .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-42

559. ELIZABETH MILLER was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 12th of May, one scarlet cloth coat, value 2 s. one linen shirt, value 2 s. one linen shift, value 2 s. two children's linen shawls, value 1 s. one silk handkerchief, value 1 s. and one blanket, value 1 s. the property of Benjamin Bailey .

BENJAMIN BAILEY sworn.

On the 12th of this month, I was informed my door was broke open, I left my apartments between twelve and one in the afternoon, I left my wife at home, she came to me about six in the evening, and told me I must run home directly, I went home and found my place broke open, it was one pair of stairs, there is no lower place to the house, there is no door only the street door, the things mentioned in the indictment were missing.

SUSANNAH BAILEY sworn.

I left my apartment about ten minutes after five, I went up two pair of stairs in the same house to drink tea, and I had been up about ten minutes or a quarter of an hour, and I heard the door go to very hard, I had locked my door and had the key in my pocket, I went down and found my door open, the staple was forced out, and laying down by the chair, the things were gone; I never found the things.

ELIZABETH DINGLY sworn.

I live in the same house, on Wednesday the 12th of May, a little after two o'clock, I went out and came home within a few minutes after five, I saw a woman come out in a bed-gown, I live in the same house, I knew her to be a stranger, I looked at her several times, so much as to know her again, I went up stairs and opened Mrs. Bailey's door, and one of the witnesses asked me if I had been in the room, I said no, Mrs. Bailey said somebody has, I said I saw somebody go out that I should know again, I pursued her but did not find her, I saw her in Rosemary-lane, and took her into custody with the things.

(The things deposed to.)

PRISONER's DEFENCE.

On Wednesday morning I bought these things, I was going to the fair to sell them, and I was taken, I did not know they were stolen, I gave 7 s. for them, I am almost starved alive.

GUILTY .

To be privately whipped , and confined to hard labour 12 months in the House of Correction .

Reference Number: t17840526-43

560. JOSEPH LEVY was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 1st of May , one copper kettle, value 8 s. the property of Sarah Anderson .

SARAH ANDERSON sworn.

I sell saloop in the morning, the kettle stood at the door, and I went to lock the door, and in two minutes it was gone; it was about one o'clock in the morning, I said I have lost my kettle, and a man said he saw a man going down Church-row with a hot fire, and a great kettle in it.

JOHN COLLISON sworn.

I am a beadle, I had been out that night, and between twelve and one I was going home, and saw an uncommon light in Church-row, by Aldgate church, I thought it was a lanthorn with a snuff in it, I went a little further, and the prosecutrix said she had lost her kettle, I told her I saw an uncommon light, and the watchman run down and gave the alarm, I saw the prisoner brought back with the kettle in his hand, they said we have catched the thief I brought him to the watch-house, we appeared before the Alderman, and he was committed; I did not see him take it.

WILLIAM BOX sworn.

I found this kettle in the prisoner's hand, full of saloop and fire under it, I am sure it was the prisoner.

GEORGE WADE sworn.

I was with the last witness, I took the prisoner, he had the kettle in his hand.

PRISONER's DEFENCE.

I picked up the kettle full of fire.

GUILTY .

Transported for seven years .

Tried by the London Jury, before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-44

561. ROBERT JONES was indicted for feloniously stealing on the 26th of April last, two printed cotton gowns, value 10 s. one cotton petticoat, value 5 s. one stuff petticoat, value 8 s. five linen shifts, value 10 s. one cotton counterpane, value 3 s. one linen counterpane, value 4 s. one diaper napkin, value 12 d. two diaper table cloths, value 5 s. a bed gown, value 10 s. a knife case, value 16 s. eleven knives, value 6 s. ten forks, value 4 s. one silver strainer, value 12 d. the property of Ann Walker , spinster , in her dwelling house .

ANN WALKER sworn.

I lost my property; I know nothing of the prisoner.

GEORGE MEACHAM sworn.

On Monday the 26th of April last, between one and two in the afternoon, I met the prisoner in Drury-lane, with this knife case under his coat, I immediately took him into custody, I took him to Justice Walker's, in Hyde-street, Bloomsbury, I advertised the property, and the prosecutrix owned it.

Was there any thing but that knife case found on the prisoner? - I found nothing else, he behaved very civil, and said he bought it of a man just by, he did not say where.

(The knife case deposed to, by the prosecutrix.)

What do you know it by? - I described the case and the knives that were in it, and I have the key in my pocket (The knife case opened) I am sure it is mine, I lost it on the 26th of April, I missed it about three o'clock, it was taken from the top of the house, a drawer was broke open and cleared of the linen; on Thursday I saw the advertisement and described my knife case, I do not know how he got in, I had not been out.

What does your family consist of? - I keep a school, and we had a great many children about at the time, my door stands open, I live in Southampton-street, Covent Garden.

PRISONER's DEFENCE.

I was coming up Russel-street, from Covent Garden, and met a shipmate of mine, he asked me to drink, we went into the corner house and had a glass of rum, he asked me if I was going towards Oxford-road, I told him I was, he asked me to carry it for him, I did not know the property was stolen, I met Meacham, and the man knowing him made his escape, I went quietly with him not thinking they were stolen.

Who was the man? - He was a shipmate of mine on board the Princess Royal.

What was his name? - Thomas Osborn .

Where was he when Meacham stopped you? - He was just behind.

Why did you not call him then? - I was rather frightened, I have no witnesses.

Court. Gentlemen of the Jury; we have no proof of any thing but the knife case, which is laid to be of the value of twenty six shillings only, so that then the offence is not capital, and it is for your consideration, whether you think upon this evidence he stole this knife case, it was found in the afternoon soon after it was missed, he then said he bought it, now he gives a different account, you will judge whether he stole it, and if you think so, you will find him guilty.

GUILTY 26 s.

Court to Prosecutor. Did you say your drawers were broke open up stairs? - Yes, my Lord.

Transported for seven years .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-45

562. MARY GARRAT was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 21st of May , twenty guineas, value 21 l. eighteen half guineas, value 9 l. 9 s. one half crown, value 2 s. 6 d. and two shillings and sixpence in monies numbered, the monies of Elizabeth East , privately from her person .

ELIZABETH EAST sworn.

Examined by Mr. Peate, Counsel for the Prosecution.

Did you sell out any stock, and when? - I sold out 100 l. bank stock last Friday week, out of the 3 per cents.

What did you do with the money? - I paid one gentleman five guineas, and another four, when I paid the money I received some hand-bills, I wrapped up the rest of my money in two of these bills, I went to the Blue Posts in the afternoon of the same day, I wrapped the money up in these two bills, and put it in my pocket, I felt it in my pocket at Taylor's the constable's, and I lost it going down to the Justices, I had a quarrel with a person, and the prisoner was there, I asked her to drink.

Court. In which side pocket was it? - In my right hand pocket.

Mr. Peat. Did you go to Taylor's? - Yes, the prisoner said she would see me righted, and I went to Taylor's, and there I felt it in my pocket, and I saw it in my hand, nobody went with me but the constable and the prisoner.

When you came to the magistrate's, what happened then? - I asked for a warrant and put my hand in my pocket, and said what shall I do, I am robbed of all my money, she immediately cried out she had nothing but the change of a shilling, which I had given her.

Was that answer immediately upon your declaring you had lost your money? - Yes.

What passed then? - Then Mr. Taylor the constable insisted upon searching her.

Did he search her? - He did, and she declared she had nothing but this money, and be pulled out of her pocket two sixpences and some halfpence, and then he put his hands under her arms, and said, by God, here is the woman's money; with that she said, do not make any words, and they opened her clothes, and either under her right breast, or her left breast, the money was found, the Justice saw it found.

Court to Prosecutrix. Did you feel her take it out of your pocket? - No, Sir, I did not indeed.

JOHN TAYLOR sworn.

I am constable of St. Margaret's parish, Westminster; the prosecutor and the prisoner

came to my house between nine and ten, I was at supper, I went with them to get a warrant, when we was at the Justice's, while he was writing out the warrant, the woman felt in her pocket and said she had lost her money; I did not think she had any money, but I said to the woman next to me, I will search you, she said she had no money, and just underneath her arm, I felt a great lump, and I made oath here is the money, I put my hand between her skin and her shift; and there was the money, I put it down by the Justice, and he counted it, and there was twenty guineas, and eighteen half guineas, and half a crown piece, and two shillings and sixpence, the Justice inclosed it and he sealed it, and I sealed it, and he gave me his gold seal to take care of, this is the seal, I left it with the Justice to take care of, it has never been opened, I can swear to the seal, I left it in the Justice's hands for fear of an accident.

Court to Prosecutrix. What were those hand-bills that you wrapped it up in? - This is one of the same sort, I had four or five.

Where did you get these hand-bills? - I paid a person five guineas, and he gave me these bills.

Court to Constable. These two bills were wrapped round the money when you found it? - Yes.

Court to Prosecutrix. Are you sure you did not drop this money, or drop it out of your pocket? - Yes, I am sure of that.

What had you done with the rest of the money? - I had paid away nine guineas, and bought some clothes.

PRISONER'S DEFENCE.

My Lord, the man that the prosecutrix cohabits with happened to have a quarrel, and a great dispute arose, she gave me a gown to hold, I saw something lay, and I took it up, and put it into my bosom; in a little time after she asked me to go with her, I told her I had found something, she never said she had lost any thing at the time, I never looked at what I had, I kept it in my bosom, I went with her to the constable's, and from thence to the Justice's, when I came there, she said she had no money to discharge the warrant, I did not imagine the money belonged to her, or that she could have so much.

Court. Was it before you went to the constable's that you picked this up? - Yes.

Court to Prosecutrix. Are you sure that you had it when you was at the constable's? - Yes, my Lord.

GUILTY , Death .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-46

563. DAVID LANKEY was indicted for feloniously stealing on the 25th of May , one silk handkerchief, value 2 s. the property of William Andrews .

WILLIAM ANDREWS sworn.

On this day se'nnight I lost my handkerchief, I seized the prisoner and took him to the watch-house, but nothing was found upon him.

GODBY HERE sworn.

I saw the prisoner take the handkerchief out of this gentleman's pocket, he immediately conveyed it away; two or three people were very near him, I am clear he was the person that took it.

PRISONER's DEFENCE.

I went on a message for my father, and coming home there were seven or eight people, and this gentleman said I took his handkerchief; I am a taylor .

GUILTY .

Transported for seven years .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury, before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-47

564. WILLIAM HALL was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 3d of April last, seventy-five yards of canvas, value 5 l. the property of William Gardner .

There was no evidence to convict the prisoner.

NOT GUILTY .

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury before Mr. Justice WILLES.

Reference Number: t17840526-48

565. ADAM LUMMERS , otherwise HAINE , was indicted for stealing, on the 17th of March last, one wooden bowl, value 1 d. and 5 s. in monies numbered , the property of Joseph Starling .

NOT GUILTY .

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury, before Mr. Justice WILLES.

Reference Number: t17840526-49

566. LEWIS BURKE and ELEANOR KELLY were indicted for stealing on the 19th of March last, one martin skin muff, value 40 s. one martin skin tippet, value 50 s. and one woollen cloak, value 40 s. the property of Simon Jackson , in his dwelling house .

There was no evidence to convict the prisoners.

NOT GUILTY .

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury, before Mr. Justice WILLES.

Reference Number: t17840526-50

567. BENJAMIN DOUGHTY was indicted for stealing 18 d. in monies numbered , the monies of Michael Young .

The prosecutor not appearing, the prisoner was ACQUITTED .

Reference Number: t17840526-51

568. ANN BURTON and SARAH BAKER were indicted for feloniously assaulting Charles Cross in a certain house near the King's highway, on the 5th of April last, and putting him in fear, and taking from his person and against his will, one base metal watch, value 40 s. one chain value 6 d. a key, value 1 d. a seal, value 6 d. a hook, value 1 d. and 3 s. in monies numbered , his property.

The prosecutor not appearing, the prisoner was ACQUITTED .

Reference Number: t17840526-52

569. RACHEL CRAVEN was indicted for stealing, on the 19th of March last, one table cloth, value 12 d. three handkerchiefs, value 18 d. one sheet, value 2 s. two half handkerchiefs, value 6 d. one shirt, value 6 d. six clouts, value 18 d. and two caps, value 6 d. the property of James Ducheman .

GUILTY .

Whipped .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-53

570. THOMAS STAPLING was indicted for stealing, on the 11th of March , fifteen yards of sail cloth, value 10 s. the property of Edward Hoare .

NOT GUILTY .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury, before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-54

571. BENJAMIN BURWOOD was indicted for stealing, on the 18th of April , one cotton handkerchief, value 2 s. the property of Thomas Monday , privily from his person .

Richard Armitage , a material witness, not appearing, the prisoner was ACQUITTED .

Reference Number: t17840526-55

572. MARGARET WILLIAMS was indicted for stealing, on the 8th of

April , four yards of callico, value 2 s. the property of Thomas Lothbury .

The prosecutor could not swear to the callico.

NOT GUILTY .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury, before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-56

473. THOMAS TYLER was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 31st of May, 1783 , four half guineas, value 2 l. 2 s. and 3 l. 3 s. in monies numbered, the property of Luke Hill , in his dwelling house .

ELIZABETH HILL sworn.

I am wife of Luke Hill, the prosecutor, he lives in White Hart Yard; on the 31st of May 1783, the prisoner came to me and asked me to oblige him with four or five guineas worth of change; he said he was the foreman of Mr. Mortimer's shop, who is a scowerer; he said if I could oblige him with that he would be a customer; I told him where they had their beer they would have the change; I asked him where his gold was; says he, if that is all you want, I will fetch it; he went out and staid about three-quarters of an hour, and asked if the change was ready; I counted him two half guineas, and three guineas worth of silver, and he took and swept it into his hat; then he asked me if I could oblige him with other two half guineas, I told him I did not know that I could, I went up stairs to fetch them, he met me at the bottom of the stairs, and took them from me, and run through the tap room, and the door opening and shutting I lost sight of him.

Court. Did he never give you the gold in change? - No, he ran away through the tap room.

Had you ever known any thing of this man before? - No, never saw him before.

You had great faith in trusting him so far; how came you to do that? - I had no thoughts of any body behaving so, I never heard of such a thing in my life.

Are you sure the prisoner is the person? - Yes I am.

Prisoner. I never saw the woman in my life to my knowledge, it does not stand to reason that I should have waited for the two half guineas, but I should certainly have gone off with the four guineas worth of change; I was at Hallifax in Yorkshire at the time.

Jury to Prosecutrix. Was he foreman to that man he said he was? - No.

ELIZABETH CROSS sworn.

I was in the house and saw the prisoner; a man came into Mrs. Hill's house and asked for four guineas worth of silver.

Had you ever seen the prisoner before? - No, I never saw him before.

Nor between that time and this? - No.

And will you positively swear that is the man? - Yes.

Did you hear any conversation pass between Mrs. Hill and the prisoner? - She made some scruple in letting him have the change, and she asked me if I knew the person where he came from, he said it was not above one hundred yards from where he lived, she then said she would let him have it, he came the second time, he said we were in the living way, we were eating our suppers, he came round her, I saw him put his hand up and take something from her, and I saw him go to meet her at the bottom of the stairs, and I saw him after at the Rotation Office.

PRISONER's DEFENCE.

My Lord, I have nothing to say, any further than this, I know nothing about it, nor her house, nor where she lives; I should hardly have waited in the house while she went up stairs for two more half guineas, but have gone off with the four guineas.

What is your way of livelihood? - I am a scowerer and dyer; I never lived with Mr. Mortimer, I never knew him; I have been in the brokering business for some time, and when I was out of that, I used to be put in possession at times, I have people

to my character, I was in Hallifax, but I have nobody to prove that here.

The prisoner called four witnesses, who all gave him a very good character.

Court. Gentlemen of the Jury, the account Mrs. Hill gives is a very strange story indeed, and it is very extraordinary that the prisoner, as he says, should not be content with four guineas, but should wait for one more; Mrs. Cross was in the house at the time, and they both swear positively to the person of the prisoner, and yet they say they never saw him before in their lives: if there was no testimony on the part of the defendant, I should think this evidence too slight to convict him, but much more so when opposed by so many respectable witnesses.

NOT GUILTY .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. Baron PERRYN .

574. The said THOMAS TYLER was again indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 29th of April last, 52 s. 6 d. in monies numbered , the monies of Richard Radford .

MARY RADFORD sworn.

I am wife of Richard Radford ; on the 29th of April, I gave two guineas and a half to the prisoner at the bar, he came to me to desire me to send two pots of beer to the silk dyer's and scowerer's in the Strand, and desired to know if I could supply them with change, as they were going to change the house where they dealt, and they should be exceeding good customers; he desired me to send as much change with the beer as I could possibly spare to pay their men; I supposed him to be a journeyman, I sent a man with him that was to bring the two guineas and a half back, and the money for the beer, I gave the change into the prisoner's hand.

CHARLES HOWELL sworn.

I went into the prosecutor's just as the prisoner had received two guineas worth of change, her husband came in with me, and she got some more silver of him, and she desired me to go over with the prisoner and to take the two pots of beer and the two guineas and a half, I went along with him out of the back door to the top of Essex-street, and crossing the Strand, there were some coaches that interrupted us, and I stepped up to the door, and having one pot of beer in each hand, I missed him, and I could not get sight of him again then, but I found him the next morning; I am sure the prisoner is the same man.

PRISONER's DEFENCE.

I gave him two guineas again, and he promised to release me if I would give him the other half guinea.

GUILTY .

Transported for seven years .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury, before Mr. Baron PERRYN .

Reference Number: t17840526-57

575. JOHN TAYLOR the younger , was indicted on the coroner's inquisition, for feloniously killing and slaying Edward Jacob , on the 19th of May , by feloniously striking and beating him with both his hands, and giving him a mortal bruise on the right temple, of which he afterwards died .

GEORGE JEWITT sworn.

I live at Feltham ; there was a little bit of a fair in our little village when this was done, it was on Monday the 19th of May, it was at the sign of the Crown, they were standing together as intimate as two brothers, and I said, what is the matter with you, and the deceased Edward Jacobs struck the prisoner and threw him down, that was the first blow that was given; then the prisoner got up again: it was a sudden quarrel all at once, the deceased insisted on fighting, but the prisoner wished not to fight.

Court. Gentlemen of the Jury, this is an unfortunate business, that arose from a sudden

quarrel, the law calls it manslaughter; but though it is not murder, no doubt on such a quarrel where death ensues it is manslaughter, and is an unlawful act.

GUILTY Of manslaughter .

Court. I have a power under the late act of parliament to mitigate the punishment from burning in the hand and imprisonment. The Judges always consider the nature of the case and direct the punishment accordingly, and therefore my sentence is, that you shall pay sixpence and be discharged .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. Baron PERRYN .

Reference Number: t17840526-58

576. JOHN HARRIS was indicted for feloniously returning from transportation, and being found at large within this kingdom on the 17th of April last, without any lawful cause, and before the expiration of the term for which he was transported .

Prisoner. I was obliged to come on shore, and were the captain and the people here they would say so; it was from the last ship. I was taken off the coach box of the Exeter coach; I was coming to surrender myself to the Justice, in hopes of finding mercy; when I was taken they found nothing on me: my Lord, I plead guilty.

Court. If this man was not active I would report him accordingly; let a letter be written to the Captain, who is now at Exeter, to enquire into his behaviour.

Court to Prisoner. I will take your plea, and enquire into the circumstances of your case before I report you to the King.

GUILTY , Death .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-59

577. NATHANIEL COLLIER was indicted for feloniously returning from transportation, having been transported for life, and being found at large within this kingdom without any lawful cause .

Prisoner. My Lord, I plead guilty.

Court. Let his plea be recorded.

GUILTY, Death .

Tried by the London Jury, before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-60

578. THOMAS PETCH was indicted, for that he about the hour of nine in the night, on the 10th of March last, unlawfully, maliciously, wilfully, and feloniously, did set fire to a certain house of Joseph Welch , William Read , and Elizabeth Creed Read , the wife of the said William Read , against the statute .

A Second Count, for setting fire to the same house, laying it to be the property of William Read , and Elizabeth Creed Read his wife, only.

A Third Count, laying it to be the house of William Read only.

A Fourth Count, laying it to be the house of Anthony Foreman .

Court. It is now settled, that if a man sets fire to the house he occupies, it is not arson. In the case of the King and Spalding, tried at Bury the last assizes, the man had insured the house, and he was indicted on two general counts; first, for feloniously setting on fire his out-house; the second, for feloniously setting on fire his house; and it was proved that the prisoner's house was at the village of H - , and there was no doubt but he wilfully set fire to the girder, by which means the house was burnt: the prosecutor called the following witnesses; James Johnson , agent to the Sun Fire-office, produced a book belonging to the Office, in which were entered the names of the Persons, the nature of the property, and the sums insured; and it appeared the prisoner had insured one hundred pounds on his house and goods, and paid six shillings, he also produced the original policy of insurance, which he received from

also produced the receipt of the money from Lady 1779 to 1780; then they called Benjamin Nott , to whom this house was secured; this was laid before the Court to induce them to think that he had the advantage of the insurance money, and destroyed the security: the question was, whether the prisoner's offence amounted to the crime of arson, and the Judges were of opinion it did not. The premises being induced makes no difference in the offence, as for instance, the case of the man belonging to the hospital for blind people at Kentish town; I cannot make any difference between a tenant for three years and for seven years.

Mr. Sylvester. My Lord, I certainly say this man was in possession under this title from year to year.

Court. How long had he been in possession? - Several years.

Court to Mr. Sylvester. If you think seriously that there is any foundation to have a special verdict on this, you shall take it, but I cannot reserve it; we have tried Holme's case over and over again, and it is now confirmed to be good law; it is not another man's house whilst I have the lawful possession. It is now settled, that if a tenant sets fire to the house he occupies, it is not arson: the Judges said Holmes's case governs us. But however I would not have this man discharged by any means in the world, if you will undertake to indict him for a misdemeanor at common law in burning the house.

Court to Jury. Gentlemen, you must acquit the prisoner under this indictment, and they undertake to indict him at Hicks's-hall for a very high misdemeanor in burning his own house, and I wish it may be preferred this sessions.

NOT GUILTY.

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury, before Mr. Justice WILLES.

Reference Number: t17840526-61

579. JONATHAN LEE was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 28th day of April last, one opera glass, value 6 s. the property of Daniel Pultney , privily from his person .

Daniel Pultney called on his recognizance, and not appearing, the recognizance was ordered to be estreated, and the Prisoner ACQUITTED .

Reference Number: t17840526-62

580. HENRY DENNISON was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 16th day of April last, three cotton gowns, value 30 s. two waistcoats, value 8 s. one Marseilles petticoat, value 12 s. one dimity pocket, value 6 d. one linen shift, value 1 s. one handkerchief, value 1 s. the property of Elizabeth Morgan , spinster, in the dwelling house of Betty Purchase :

And ROSE OATS was indicted for feloniously receiving the same goods, knowing them to be stolen .

The prisoner Henry Dennison 's brother, John Dennison , was a servant in the house of Mrs. Purchase, and he had given some things of Mrs. Morgan's, another servant, to the prisoner Rose Oats to pawn, but there being nothing to affect the prisoner Henry himself, who is the principal in this indictment, of course they were BOTH ACQUITTED .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury, before Mr. Justice WILLES.

Reference Number: t17840526-63

581. THOMAS WATTS was indicted for feloniously stealing on the 30th day of April last, three yards of gauze, value 4 s. 6 d. two yards of other gauze, value 5 s. one half yard of other gauze, value 1 s. twenty yards of ribbon, value 3 s. and two yards and an half of other ribbon, value 6 d. the property of Charlotte Jones , spinster .

Margaret Whiley deposed, that she was going to see Charlotte Jones safe home on the 30th of April last, and Jones gave her a parcel to carry, which the prisoner snatched

away from her, but this witness not knowing the contents of the parcel, except by the information of Jones, could not of her own knowledge depose to them, and Jones not attending, the prisoner was ACQUITTED .

Reference Number: t17840526-64

582. ELIZABETH TIBBETS was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 23d day of April , 10 s. in monies numbered , the monies of Morris Gearing .

MORRIS GEARING sworn.

I am a sawyer ; on the 23d of April, at twelve, I went into a house in Chick-lane , it rained; and I called for a pint of purl and a glass of gin, and another girl and the prisoner helped to drink it, and we had another pint of purl and two glasses more gin; then we went out, and the prisoner asked me to go to her private room, and we went up all three, it was about half after twelve.

Court. How long did you stay there? - About ten or twelve minutes.

Was you in bed? - No.

Both the girls were with you? - Sometime; then the other girl said she would go; we were not on the bed together; after the other girl went down, this girl and I stopped about six or seven minutes.

Did you lose your money before the first girl went down or after? - After, the prisoner said she found I was rather cautious of my money, and she would have me take it out and tell it; I did so, and I had two half crowns and five shillings, I put it into my hat, and I had a silver watch, which I also put into my hat; she took the watch out of the hat to see what it was o'clock, she likewise put the hat and the money behind the bed; then she flung herself back on the bed and catched the money in her hand.

You had your watch again? - Yes.

Did not you agree she should have the money for her good services? - No, your Honour.

Did you give her any thing? - No.

Did you see her take this money? - Yes, and catched hold of her hand, she said murder! the other girl who stood at the door came in.

I suppose you was not a match for them both? - No; I let go her hand, and I saved my watch; I did not stay a great while, the girls went down first; there were a couple more people that lived in the house came up stairs and shut the door against me till they thought the two girls were got away; I got away at two o'clock.

Was you concerned at being robbed? - No, your Honour: I am sure that girl took my money out of my hat.

PRISONER's DEFENCE.

I never saw the man till he came into the public house, and bid a man take me; he said if I did not go he would use me ill; he could not swear to me before the Justice till he was persuaded; he said he did not know the consequence of an oath; he offered to make it up for a guinea: the prosecutor came to the bail-dock to me yesterday.

Court to Prosecutor. Is that so? - I went there and she beckoned me, I made her no offer.

NOT GUILTY .

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury, before Mr. Justice WILLES.

Reference Number: t17840526-65

583. SAMUEL MATTHYSON was indicted for feloniously stealing on the 17th of May , one gold watch, value 20 l. two cornelian seals set in gold, value 6 l. one stone seal set in gold, value 20 s. one gold watch chain, value 8 l. the goods of James Adair , Esq ; one of his Majesty's Serjeants at law .

JAMES ADAIR , Esq; sworn.

My Lord, on the 17th of this month I was at Covent Garden, the day that the election closed; I was going from the corner of Henrietta-street towards Southampton-street, the crowd was very great, I pressed through it with some difficulty, and

I got near the corner of Southampton-street, it was then I think about half past two in the afternoon, when I came near the corner of Southampton-street, the obstruction was increased by two men who were either quarrelling, or pretending to quarrell, I found some difficulty in attempting to pass, and I observed that one man, which ever way I pushed in order to pass, pushed against me; after this had happened two or three times, it drew my attention, and I was perfectly convinced that it was done on purpose, that man was the prisoner at the bar.

Court. Are you sure of it Sir? - I am quite certain of it, I have no doubt, for the reasons I shall tell your Lordship presently; when I was convinced it was done on purpose, I laid hold of him, and gave him a pretty violent push past me, telling him to go one way or the other, I had buttoned up the chain and seals of my watch in my breeches pocket, which buttons very tight, just at the instant when I had pushed this man past me, I felt a violent pull at my watch chain, I immediately looked down, and I saw the watch in the prisoner's hand, just moving from my fob, I immediately laid hold of him with one hand by the arm that had the watch, and with the other by the collar, but in the very instant of my laying hold of him, the watch passed from him in such a manner that I could not discern whether he threw it on the ground, or gave it to any body behind him; I then laid hold of him with both my hands to his collar, and endeavoured to drag him along towards the place where the constables stood; there were a number of people round, who endeavoured to force in between us, and several of them endeavoured to drag him the opposite way, I dragged him with a great deal of resistance from himself and others, but no blows were struck either by him or any body else, for about forty yards, I believe, and when I had got him near the constables, he made a violent effort, and there loosed from one of my hands, and then I had not strength to hold him with the other hand, and then I was separated from him by the crowd; during that time I had frequently called on people to assist me, so that the cry was known by the mob, for the struggle lasted several minutes, and he went down Henrietta-street, as I could perceive by the mob going that way, but I could not perceive him for the mob, I pursued the way I understood he was gone, as far as Charing Cross, and these I dropped the pursuit; he was afterwards taken, and I believe there is another witness who will inform your lordship where, for I do not know myself but from hearsay, I had him the whole time face to face, as I held him with both hands, and walked myself backwards, and dragged him in that way the greatest part of the time, his face was within a foot of me, I have not the smallest doubt of his face, though he was a stranger to me before, I know his face as well as any man's; he had at the time of the struggle a black patch on his nose, but when he was brought before the Justice, the patch was taken off; while I was giving information at Sir Sampson Wright's, he was brought in between six and seven o'clock, I knew him in a moment without the least doubt or difficulty.

Court. Give me up the indictment? - It is laid as a single felony, the watch was a gold one, with inside and outside cases, and a gold chain, and three seals set in gold, as stated in the indictment.

BENJAMIN AKERS sworn.

The first I saw of it was the side of Henrietta-street, Covent Garden, I saw Mr. Adair have hold of the prisoner, with that I tried to make through the mob to get to him, I heard Mr. Adair say he had lost his watch, and that the prisoner had it in his hand, with that I endeavoured to get nearer to him, and I heard Mr. Adair say he had dropped it, I pushed the people away to see where he had dropped it, but there were so many people I could not see it nor what became of it; Mr. Adair had hold of him at the same time, I held the prisoner's coat, but he got away from me, and the mob closed in and kept him from me, and he run down Henrietta-street, then I went

through the crowd, and followed him down Chandos-street, I came up with him in a passage and stopped him, and I could not get any assistance, and the people said, did he pick your pocket? I said no, he has picked the Recorder's pocket in Covent Garden; he got away and I pursued him again and stopped him, two men got him away, then, I pursued him to the King's Mews, and took him there; I thought I would stop till the gentleman came up, I got the prisoner to sit down on a stone, and one of the servants came up and said he should not stay there, I should either duck him or let him go, upon which he readily got up from the stone, and got to Spring Gardens, he was stopped there, and I had him brought back to the Mews again, they wanted to duck him, I desired them not, because the gentleman would be there in a minute; he seemed inclinable to go in, I said if you do, I will not leave you till the gentleman comes, he went in without his shoes, and a soldier came and pushed him backwards, he desired him to let him go, he said he had suffered enough, he got out of the pond at another part, and was going off again, I asked the people round to assist me in taking him to the Justice's, some said has he robbed you? I said no, he has robbed a gentleman of his watch, and a gentleman came up and said, I will assist you, and we took him to Justice Hyde's, and I left a notice at Mr. Adair's, when I came back he was removed to Sir Sampson Wright's, and he was committed.

Prisoner. Was it not by your desire that I was used so ill? - No, Sir, I persuaded him and them not to do it, and moreover, a hundred times I suppose, I persuaded them that he should not go in.

Prisoner. I have nothing to say in my defence; what my prosecutor says is very just, but the evidence has not told you how cruelly I was used, I was afterwards ducked in a cistern.

GUILTY .

Court. The Recorder has, with great humanity, laid this only as a single felony, which he might have laid capitally.

Transported for seven years .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury, before Mr. Baron PERRYN .

Reference Number: t17840526-66

584. ISAAC SIMMS was indicted for that he, well knowing that one Isaac Steel had lately served our Lord the King as a mariner , on board the Scorpion, on the 5th of May , feloniously, willingly and knowingly did personate and falsly assume the name and character of the said Isaac Steel , in order to receive the wages and pay then supposed to be due and payable to him, against the statute .

A Second Count. For personating the name and character of Isaac Steel , a mariner on board a certain other vessel called the Scorpion, supposing he was intitled to certain wages, in order to receive the same.

JAMES SLADE sworn.

I am clerk at the Pay-office, on the 5th of May, the prisoner applyed to me, producing this certificate from Lieutenant Scott of the Scorpion, demanding wages for Isaac Steel of the Scorpion, on examining we found there was an Isaac Steel but he was dead, and the money had been paid, I asked him in what capacity he had served on board, he said a Sail-makers mate, I asked him if he was sure his name was Isaac Steel , and he said it was, I said I am affraid your name is not Isaac Steel, for he is dead; he then confessed his name was not Isaac Steel but Simms, I asked him how he came to know of Isaac Steel 's death, he said he was at Long-Island the 24th of July, 1780.

CHARLES WADE sworn.

Was this that passed between Mr. Slade and the prisoner said in your hearing? - Yes.

- SCOTT sworn.

I was master of the Scorpion, I knew

Isaac Steel , he was not the prisoner, his name is Isaac Simms , I gave him this certificate.

PRISONER's DEFENCE.

I was distressed, was the reason of my having done so, I had wages due, I beg my life.

Court to Scott. What sort of a man was the prisoner? - A very good man indeed, I never knew a better.

GUILTY Death .

He was humbly recommended to mercy by the Jury.

Tried by the London Jury, before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-67

585. WILLIAM MACKEY was indicted, for that he well knowing that William Leslie had served our Lord the King, on board the Yarmouth as a seaman , and supposing that certain wages and pay were due and owing to him for such services, on the 19th of May , feloniously, willingly, and knowingly did personate, and falsly assume the name and character of the same William Leslie , the seaman aforesaid, supposing him to be intitled to such wages and pay, in order to receive the same, against the statute .

A Second Count. For personating the said William Leslie , supposing he was intitled to certain wages and pay on board the said ship, against the Statute.

JAMES SLADE sworn.

There was a man applied to me, I cannot swear to the identity of the prisoner.

JOHN COLLINS sworn.

On the 6th of May, the prisoner by the name William Leslie , applied to me at the Ticket Office, and claimed wages as William Leslie for the ship Yarmouth, I told him the ship was paid off, he went to the Pay Office, and Mr. Slade sent him back with a memorandum, thus

"Q. The entry in the Experiment."

Court. Are you sure that is the man? - That is the man that applied to me I am sure, he did not bring back the certificate to me; he gave me this certificate, I did not ask him if it was his name, I supposed his name was William Leslie .

THOMAS STEBBING sworn.

I am a clerk in the Ticket Office, the prisoner applied to me on the 19th of this month, he came with that certificate from the Pay Office; on looking into the Experiment's books, I found William Leslie came from the Yarmouth, and appeared dead on the Experiment's books, I acquainted Mr. Hunter, he desired the prisoner to be stopped; he immediately ran down stairs and begged for mercy, he said his name was not William Leslie, but William Mackey .

CAPTAIN PARRY sworn.

I commanded the Yarmouth, I granted the certificate from what the prisoner told me, I did not know William Leslie , I concluded the prisoner was him.

Did he apply to you as William Leslie ? - Yes.

JAMES RIDDLE sworn.

Do you know the prisoner? - No.

Did you know William Leslie ? - Extremely well.

Is that him! - No.

Are you sure of that? - I am sure of that, I belonged to the Yarmouth with him.

Court. There were two other Leslie's on board, were not there? - Yes, I knew one of them that is William Leslie , he was with me in the Suffolk.

You cannot say but this may be one of the other Leslie's? - There were two William Leslie 's, and one George.

Court to Stebbing. Relate particularly when this man was stopped, what he said? - He begged for mercy, and hoped they would not hang him this time; he said William Burke , who was waiting about the office, told him of this.

Court. Was any promise or threat made use of? - No, Sir, I am sure of that.

Who else was present?

Mr. Collins. I was present, I heard no such promise, it was entirely of himself he

owned it immediately, he was not asked by any body.

PRISONER's DEFENCE.

I know nothing of it, I did not know my trial would have come on so soon, or else I should have had a witness to my character.

NOT GUILTY .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-68

586. JOHN PAUL was indicted for feloniously stealing on the 12th of April last, one hempen boat-rope, value 10 s. the property of John Phillips .

GUILTY .

Whipped .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-69

587. JOHN HILL was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 9th day of May , one linen handkerchief, value 6 d. the property of Thomas Barge .

THOMAS BARGE sworn.

Coming down Snow Hill, I lost my handkerchief, on the 9th of May, I felt the prisoner take my handkerchief, I turned round and took hold of him, and I saw him drop it out of his right hand, when I tried to stop him, he ran away, I cried stop thief.

Richard Lee , and - Alexander apprehended the prisoner.

Prisoner. I did not take it.

GUILTY .

Transported for seven years .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-70

588. HUMPHRY DAVIS was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 22d day of May , one deal box, value 6 d. two cloth coats, value 10 s. two cloth waistcoats, value 5 s. two pair of breeches, value 5 s. two pair of stockings, value 2 s. the property of James Stuart .

The prisoner was employed to carry a box of cloaths, and he went off with it, and was taken soon after with some of the things.

GUILTY .

Transported for seven years .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-71

589. FRANCIS FIELDER otherwise JONES , was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 13th day of May , one Bath beaver cloak, value 5 s. the property of Richard Bright .

GUILTY .

To be privately whipped , and confined to hard labour six months in the House of Correction .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-72

590. JOSEPH MACGINNIS (aged 12) was indicted for stealing, on the 29th of April last, one linen handkerchief, value 4 d. the property of Jeremiah Booth .

GUILTY .

Privately Whipped .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-73

591. JANE PHILLIPS was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 24th day of May , 16 s. in monies numbered , the property of Solomon Samuel .

This was an attempt to take the Prosecutor's money, which his activity prevented.

NOT GUILTY .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-74

592. JAMES BRADLEY was indicted for stealing, on the 11th of May , one linen handkerchief, value 1 s. the property of John Hughes .

JOHN HUGHES sworn.

I lost my handkerchief on the 11th of May, the next witness saw it taken, I did not perceive any body take it; I followed the prisoner, and saw him drop my handkerchief; he was taken directly.

JOHN SUTTON sworn.

I saw the prisoner pick the prosecutor's pocket, and I told him of it.

Prisoner. I have nothing to say.

The prisoner called two witnesses to his character.

GUILTY .

Transported for seven years .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-75

593. MARY, wife of JOHN LAWRENCE , was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 21st day of April last, one pair of silver salt spoons, value 3 s. five silver table spoons, value 30 s. two silver tea spoons, value 2 s. one pair of tea tongs, value 3 s. a silk gown, value 15 s. two muslin gowns, value 20 s. one muslin petticoat, value 20 s. one pair of stone buckles, value 2 s. a shagreen case, value 2 d. a gold locket, value 2 s. two gold mourning rings, value 4 s. two silk cloaks, value 5 s. one camblet cloak, value 1 s. two linen table cloths, value 2 s. the property of Lillias Warden ; one silk gown, value 10 s. and one muslin apron, value 2 s. the property of Elizabeth Delayne ; one satin petticoat, value 3 s. one cotton gown, value 3 s. and one dimity petticoat, value 2 s. the property of Ann Pearson , in the dwelling house of the said Lillias Warden .

LILLIAS WARDEN sworn.

I missed my things, and found them at the pawnbroker's on the 22d; Mrs. Pearson missed some things, she lives in the house with me; the prisoner was my servant two years and a half.

ANN PEARSON sworn.

I missed a gown which I wanted to put on, on the 21st of April, I enquired of the prisoner for it, she told me it was up stairs, I was going up stairs to see for it and she prevented me, saying she would go up herself for it, but did not; the next morning I went to see for it myself, but did not find it, and when I came to look, I missed another gown and two petticoats, that caused a great confusion in the house, and then we missed the other things; I came down and could not find the prisoner, but when she returned she was called up stairs, and she owned then that the things were at the pawnbroker's; she owned to a part, but not to them all.

Court. Was any thing said to induce her to make a full confession? - I believe not any thing.

Did they tell her she should have favour shewn her? - Elizabeth Devayne called her up, but what she said to her I cannot say.

ELIZABETH DEVAYNE sworn.

I called up the prisoner; I missed my gown, she said it was in my room, when I came to look I missed a striped silk gown of my own; I rung the bell for her, she came up soon after, I asked her what was become of my gown, she said it was below stairs; I asked her what business she had to take it below, she then began to equivocate, and could not tell where it was, at last she said it was pawned.

What did you say to her to prevail on her to tell where it was? - Nothing; I said I hope you have not taken any of your mistress's things; she said she had pawned a great many things, but she did not tell me what: I am sure I made her no promise; she took me to the pawnbroker, to James Ashborne 's, and Ann Pearson went with me.

Court. Were the things taken at one time or at different times? - At different times.

JAMES ASHBORNE sworn.

I am a pawnbroker in the Strand; I had these things from the prisoner from the 13th of January to the 21st of April.

Court. There was nothing to any large amount pledged at any one time I suppose? - No, Sir, not higher than fifteen shillings.

(The things deposed to belonging to the different owners.)

Prisoner. I have nothing to say.

Prosecutor. My Lord, I wish to speak for her, she always behaved very well to me before this, she was a very good servant for two years and a half, she had a very good character before, and had been fourteen years in one house.

GUILTY .

Court to Prisoner. You may think yourself very fortunate, that from some circumstances which the tenderness of the law in favour of life has enabled me to distinguish in this indictment, so as not to render it capital, your life is saved; but your crime is certainly of a very aggravated nature, especially as a servant living in a family, and plundering every thing that came to your hands; this entirely destroys all the comfort and security of private families, and renders it difficult to know whom we can trust: it is therefore necessary that examples should be made; it was the wish of your master (not knowing that the tenderness of the law would do it) to save your life; but I should think myself wanting in justice if I carried the favour of the Court any further, and no punishment short of death is too much for your offence; the sentence of the law upon you therefore is, that you be

Transported to America for seven years .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury, before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-76

594. SARAH SCOTT and ANN HANNAWAY were indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 26th day of April last, two silk gowns, value 40 s. one linen gown, value 5 s. one silk slip, value 3 s. three dimity petticoats, value 10 s. four silk cloaks, value 32 s. a dimity cloak, value 2 s. four children's silk cloaks, value 2 s. one cloth coat, value 17 s. a pair of cotton breeches, value 3 s. one cotton bedgown, value 1 s. two silk handkerchiefs, value 1 s. one muslin apron, value 1 s. one linen towel, value 3 d. one pair of stuff breeches, value 1 s. one breadth of silk, value 2 s. one child's coat, value 1 s. one dimity waistcoat, value 3 s. one pair of silk cuffs, value 1 s. and three half guineas, value 31 s. 6 d. the property of Thomas Putney , in his dwelling house .

THOMAS PUTNEY sworn.

I live in Boswell-court, Gloucester-street ; on the 26th of April I heard a noise on the stairs, I found my door open and things gone, I suppose it had been opened with a picklock key; I pursued the prisoners with Mr. Evans, and in Gloucester-street we saw the prisoner Scott, who was got into a coach, and the other had run away; I ran after her, and left Evans with Scott; she struggled a little, she had none of the clothes: Scott had these things in her lap in the coach; this gown I think I could know any where.

Court. What is the value of it? - Twenty shillings; here is another gown worth about five shillings; here is another gown I am sure of; here is a slip, and the rest of the things I believe to be mine.

GRIFFITH EVANS sworn.

I live in Boswell-court, between four and five on the 26th of April, I saw these two women come out of the prosecutor's house, and out of Scott's apron hung a bit of a new pair of jean or cotton breeches; the prisoners looked like two basket women; I thought they had robbed somebody, and I followed them into Devonshire-street; then I ran to the prosecutor, and we went and took them; I am sure they are the same people, one of them was got into a coach, and I took her out, and the things were in her apron.

PRISONER SCOTT's DEFENCE.

A man gave them to me, I know him by sight.

PRISONER HANNAWAY'S DEFENCE.

There was a man with the prisoner.

Court to Jury. The prosecutor cannot swear positively to a considerable part of the things.

BOTH GUILTY, 39 s.

To be each privately whipped , and confined six months in the House of Correction .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury, before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-77

595. JOHN STANLEY and JOHN MEARS were indicted, together with ISAAC CASH , who is sick, for feloniously assaulting William Heartley on the King's highway, on the 18th of May , and putting him in fear and danger of his life, and feloniously taking from his person and against his will, one iron key, value 2 d. three guineas, value 3 l. 3 s. three half-crowns, value 7 s. 6 d. and 6 s. in monies numbered , his property.

The witnesses examined apart at the request of the prisoners.

WILLIAM HEARTLEY sworn.

Examined by Mr. Sylvester, Council for the Prosecution.

Give an account of this robbery. - I was coming towards Islington from Ball's Pond in a phaeton, and we were stopped by three footpads, two of them had hangers; I did not immediately stop, and they made a feint blow at me; I told them not to use me ill, as I was very willing to give them what I had; two of them got into the phaeton.

Court. Which two? - The two prisoners, they had both cutlasses, I cannot say whether the other man had a cutlass or not.

Prisoner. You swore before the Justice that only one man had a cutlass. - One stood at the horses heads, they swore at us a good deal, and told us to pull our hats over our eyes that we might not see them, it was just day-light, the two men that were in the phaeton demanded our money, upon which I pulled out my purse which contained two guineas, three or four half crowns, and six shillings, I gave it to one of them in the phaeton; they took also from my waistcoat pocket one guinea and a key.

How came you to have a guinea in your waistcoat pocket? - We were rather apprehensive, and I dispersed my money and hid it and my watch; they damned my eyes, and asked me where it was; the man that was robbing the other gentleman cried out, damn his eyes, Jack, cut him down, for he sees us; to the best of my knowledge the prisoners were two of the men.

Can you swear to either of them? - I cannot swear to either of the prisoners, not clearly, but I think they are the two men that were in the phaeton; by their dress and by their aprons, I believe them to be the same by their red waistcoats: I have no other reason to think so but by their dress and their aprons.

How soon were they taken after? - About two hours after: the other man was dressed in rather darkish clothes, with an apron on; the man who robbed me has rather a particular voice, and I knew the voice instantly, and he had a pale face; he went to make a blow at me and I fell back, and the boy at the head of the horses had an apron on; Mears was the person that robbed me.

CAPTAIN TRYON sworn.

I was coming to town with Mr. Heartley, passing Ball's Pond three men jumped out into the highway, apparently behind a post.

Court. Was it light or dark? - It was after nine.

What sort of night? - It was a very foggy night.

Then it was darkish? - Yes; one went to the horse's heads, the other two came into the carriage, the man who came on my

side pulled my hat over my eyes, and asked me for my money and watch.

Court. You must confine yourself now to the robbery of Mr Heartley: do you know the persons of either of the prisoners? - I do not positively swear to either of them; I observed the man that was next me had an apron on, I did not see him at Bow-street till several days after.

Mr. Silvester. My Lord, here is M'Manus who took the prisoners two hours after, he found some money on them, and aprons on them.

Court to Jury. This last gentleman cannot swear to them at all, and the other gentleman only swears to them from their dress, and having aprons on; he says one of them had a pale face, and a particular voice.

Jury. Was the key found? - No, nor the purse.

BOTH NOT GUILTY .

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury before Mr. Justice WILLES.

596. The said JOHN STANLEY and JOHN MEARS were again indicted for feloniously assaulting William Tryon , on the King's highway, on the 18th day of May, and putting him in fear, and feloniously taking from his person and against his will one linen handkerchief, value 1 s. and one guinea, value 1 l. 1 s. the monies of the said William.

There being no other evidence than that on the last trial, the prisoners were

BOTH ACQUITTED .

Court. As to the prisoner Cash, as soon as he is better he may be bailed, and the recognizance of these gentlemen with respect to him discharged.

Reference Number: t17840526-78

597. WILLIAM NORTHEY and SARAH NORTHEY (his wife ) were indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 8th day of May , forty-one yards and three-quarters of thread lace edging, value 30 s. the property of Thomas Flint , privily in his shop .

THOMAS FLINT sworn.

The prisoners frequently came to my shop to buy ribbons and lace, and on the 8th of May, between three and four in the afternoon, they came together; my boy told me they had taken a card of lace; I let them go out of the shop, and I sent a servant to follow him, nothing was found on the woman, the lace was found in the man's coat pocket, there were forty-one yards and three-quarters, the card was marked with my mark; from the boy's description the man did not intermeddle; he said if he had it, it was more than he knew, and when it was found on him, he said it was very hard he should suffer, for it was more than he knew.

SAMUEL BLAKE sworn.

I am upon liking to Mr. Flint, the prisoners came in, I was in the shop, they bought at first some trollee lace, and paid a few shillings, they said they would be glad to see some thread edgings, the woman took out a card out of the box, and she said she would let it lay till she came to a card that she liked better, I soon after missed that card, and I told my master before they went out of the shop, I saw the woman take it in her hand, and she seemed to put it under her stays, by her manner of shrinking herself up; it was the woman I saw, and not the man.

THOMAS ROBINSON sworn.

I am a constable, I was sent for, I have the lace.

Court to Prosecutor. Where is the man that followed the prisoners? - He does not live with me, I could not find him.

Are you sure the people that were brought back, were the people that came to your shop? - Yes, we know them very well, they came frequently to our shop.

(The lace deposed to.)

PRISONER WILLIAM'S DEFENCE.

I am a man that travel the country, and get my livelihood by making all kinds of net work, and I came to London to buy thread to make this lace with, and I came to this gentleman's shop, and I bought twenty yards and an half of ribbon at fourpence halfpenny. I never asked to look at any lace at all or edging, and I bought three gross of shirt buttons, and some laces for stays, my wife bought some lace, she had some halfpence and was counting them, the young man tied up what we had bought in a handkerchief, and he took away the box, and left this card of lace on the counter, my wife was in a hurry, and said, William, you are going to leave the goods that you have bought, I took it and put it in my pocket; when we got about ten or twelve yards, the gentleman beckoned us back, we went back directly, we were searched, I told them I had nothing about me, I put it carelessly in my pocket when my wife spoke, for I thought it what I had bought, and I was going to tie it in the handkerchief; I offered afterwards to pay for it, for I never was in prison an hour in my life, in the country I could have had plenty of friends.

Court to Blake. You served the prisoners? - Yes, I did.

Did you tie up the things that they bought? - I did not.

Did any of your other shop-people? - Not that I know of.

What things did they buy? - A few yards of trollee lace, and two yards of edging, and I wound them on a card, and laid them on the counter.

Did you observe their taking up what they had bought? - No, I did not, while I was cutting off the edging I saw the woman leaning over the counter, and put her other hand, she seemed to hit her husband's elbow; this was after they bought the lace.

How long did they stay in the shop after they took up this card? - But a very short time, just while they could pay me for this lace, the lace was not there when they were gone out; as to counting the halfpence, their was no such thing.

Court to Prisoner William. Is there any evidence to shew that this woman is your wife? - Here is my certificate.

(The Certificate handed up.)

Court to Prosecutor. Did you know any thing of them before? - No, only their coming to the shop; we have a good many of these hawking people that hawk about the country, and we generally look very sharp after them, for we are suspicious of them; there was an uncle of the man's came to make intercession for them, he said they had been married a twelvemonth, he begged to let them off; I said I was determined to make an example of them, as I suffer daily.

Court to Jury. With respect to the prisoner Sarah, she has produced a certificate of marriage, which though it appears to be a genuine one, would not be legal evidence, unless somebody had proved the handwriting of the party; but in the indictment she is stated to be the wife of William Northey ; therefore upon this indictment, without any evidence, we must take her to be his wife, and you know that where a felony is committed by a married woman, in the presence of her husband, she ought to be acquitted, and if both are present at the commission of the fact, and privy to it, in that case it is not necessary that there should be any actual proof that the husband was the principal party, and the wife acting under his influence, if he is present and privy, the law presumes her acting under his influence, though she may be the hand that commits the felony: But if you are of opinion that the wife stole it altogether without the knowledge or privity of her husband, and he knew nothing at all of it, then his being present will neither affect him, nor excuse her; and upon that supposition, if you can be satisfied he knew nothing of the fact at all, you should find the woman guilty, and acquit the man: If you are doubtful whether either of them stole this, you should acquit them both.

WILLIAM NORTHEY , NOT GUILTY .

SARAH NORTHEY , GUILTY. Of stealing, but not privily .

To be privately whipped , and confined to hard labour six months in the House of Correction .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-79

598. WILLIAM PARKER was indicted for stealing, on the 14th of May , one linen gown, value 5 s. one stuff bed-gown, value 6 d. three linen aprons, value 2 s. three linen half handkerchiefs, value 1 s. and one pair of stuff shoes, value 2 s. the property of Hannah Griffiths .

HANNAH GRIFFITHS sworn.

I am servant at an eating house , I lost the things mentioned in the indictment, I was inticed away by this young man, in the way of marrying me, I lost these things in Princes-street, Leather-lane .

How long have you left your service, since you lost your clothes? - I left my place about 10 o'clock on Thursday, I lost them on Friday the 14th.

Did you go to bed together? - Yes, Sir, he got up in the morning and was to come home to breakfast.

How long had you been acquainted with him, before you went together? - A month.

What country woman are you? - Shropshire.

How long have you been in London? - About three years.

Have you been in several services? - Yes, I live at the eating-house, he returned again to breakfast, and he brought a note along with him, when he came to breakfast, and told me he had some money to receive on that note at the Royal Exchange, I took the note and went, and could find no such person.

How came you acquainted with this man? - He lived at the publick house, and used to bring beer to our house.

When was you to have been married? - On Sunday in church.

What countryman is the prisoner? - I do not know.

WILLIAM CATCHPOLE sworn.

I am one of the six Marshalmen of the City of London; on the 19th of this month, I went down with search a warrant to search the house of one John Alford , who keeps an old iron shop in Chick-lane, in which I found the property which the young woman has deposed to.

Court to Prosecutrix. You left the things in the room? - Yes, I went with the note to receive the money that he sent me after, and when I returned about four o'clock, the things were all gone, he had left the key with the people of the house, somebody sent for me, and when I went it was him, he sent for me a day or two after he had done it, he had some things up in my room and he told me to go and bring the things out, the gentlewoman in the lodgings would not let me go out and I stopped a bit, and he came himself, he would not own to them, but insisted on having an officer, there was an officer fetched and he went to Bridewell, and he confessed afterwards in prison where he had sold them, which was at this iron shop in Chick-lane, that was the occasion of the finding the things.

(Catchpole produces the things, except the stuff bed-gown and the shoes.)

(The things deposed to.)

Prisoner. I have been about five years at sea, and I had been at home about six weeks when I first got acquainted with that - !

MARY DAVIS sworn.

I am sister to the prosecutrix, she has been in London three years, I have been married about 11 years.

Was your sister a virtuous girl as you believe, when she came to town? - I believe she was.

How came she to be seduced? - I do not know, she sent for me, I went the next

morning, and going down to Hatton Garden I met my sister crying, says I, what is the matter with you, says she, I durst not tell you, says I, for what reason, says she, I have lost all my clothes, I am robbed and durst not tell you how, a young man got my clothes and promised to marry me, and this morning he sent me with a false note; when I was at Hicks's-Hall, the young man confessed he sold the clothes for 4 s.

Were any promises made to him? - No.

PRISONER's DEFENCE.

I am quite a stranger to that woman, I came home about six weeks ago, and I got acquainted with this young woman, she asked me to take her away from her lodgings, we were together two or three days, she had been connected with twenty different people before ever I knew her, when our money was gone she gave me these things to sell, I belonged to the Punch schooner, I met her in the street, and after I sold the things I gave her two and threepence of the money, I came to an acquaintance in Pelican-court, they said to me you have robbed the girl, I went immediately to the house, and the man knocked me down and used me very ill, I said I would go before the Justice, the Justice said if I would let him know where the things were sold he would let me go, I told him where they were; it was in the street that I met her, and I parted with her there; she lived on my money while it lasted, I never saw the sister.

Court to Mary Davis . Your sister lived at an eating-house? - Yes; I never heard any thing to the prejudice of her character before now; my husband is a shoe-maker.

Were there any promises made to him when he confessed? - I did not hear any.

Prisoner. The prosecutrix's master told me she was a common woman.

Jury to Griffiths. Did he give you any of that money he sold the things for? - No.

Jury. Did the woman of the house where you lived know that he had taken your things? - No, Sir, she did not tell me so.

Court. I should be very glad to know from the girl's master what her character was; though she has been very frail and weak, yet I should think it a very bad seduction; I wish the master of the girl may be asked, for her character will alter my idea of the affair with respect to the punishment.

(The master called.)

Court. How long has the prosecutrix lived with you? - Near three months, and she lived with me before four or five or six months; then she went to her friends; she was remarkably honest, she is a thoughtless, simple girl, but I never saw the least want of propriety in her behaviour. I told the prisoner he would make her a common woman, I never told him she was so: if I was not provided I would take her again.

Court. I wish you would recommend her to a place.

GUILTY .

Transported for seven years .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury, before Mr. Justice WILLES.

Reference Number: t17840526-80

599. JOSEPH MORREL and WILLIAM CADY were indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 10th of May , one large washing copper kettle, value 10 s. the property of Elizabeth Fortuam .

The witnesses examined apart at the request of the prisoners.

The Prosecutrix deposed that she missed her copper the 10th of May, and saw it two hours afterwards.

JOHN RANDALL sworn.

I arose in the morning early, and found the prisoner Morrell with a bag on his shoulders, and a little further I saw that gentleman the prisoner Cady, with a bag on his shoulders, as soon as he observed us he directly wriggled the bag from his shoulders and pretended to go against the wall, and when he found we followed him, he run away, and I cried out stop thief! I and my son took Morrell, Mr. Lou and another took the other, and we conducted them to the cage belonging to the church; the bags that were on his shoulders I took off with one hand, and I collared him with the other, and the other gentleman took the bag that Cady dropped, we carried them before the Justice and examined the contents of the bags, there was a copper in each, in an old apron, the copper belonging to the prosecutrix was in the possession of the prisoner Morrell (The copper produced and deposed to) here is a piece at the bottom that is patched; after we had taken that gentleman to the watch-house, the beadle searched that young man, and took out a pair of stockings out of his pocket, a knife and pair of small spring steelyards, at the Justices the prisoner Morrell said he found them; he made no confession, but he had a pair of stockings on his legs that belonged to Mrs. Trimmer.

Mr. Chetwood Counsel for the Prisoner. How far was it that you saw him from this house of Mrs. Fortuam's? - I suppose 150 yards as nigh as I can guess.

Was not it half a mile? - No nor a quarter.

Was not he in the King's highway? - No, in no King's highway, he was in a field, he made no resistance.

To prosecutrix. Are you sure of the copper? - I am sure of it, I have lived in the place these ten years, I never was in this Court before.

Prisoner Morrell. I desire to know what time they were robbed? - I cannot tell.

Robert Ware and Samuel Lou deposed to the same effect.

PRISONER MORRELL's DEFENCE.

I was walking that morning, and I met the prisoner Cady by the workhouse in Whitechapel, walking for his health, I went with him, and going along the road we saw these things laying at the foot of Whitchapel Mount.

WILLIAM CADY 's DEFENCE.

We found these bags, and he took one and I the other; I saw these four gentlemen come up, which I am sorry to put the stile upon, as I thought I took them to be the four thieves.

The prisoner Morrell called three witnesses to his character.

BOTH GUILTY Of stealing to the value of 10 d.

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury before Mr. Baron PERRYN .

600. The said JOSEPH MORRELL and WILLIAM CADY were again indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 10th of May , one washing copper kettle, value 10 s. two pair of worsted stockings, value 1 s. and one check apron, value 2 s. the property of John Trimmer .

ELIZABETH TRIMMER sworn.

On the 10th of May I lost my washing copper, and the other things in the indictment, the prisoner Morrell had a pair of the stockings on, and the other prisoner had the other pair in his pocket.

(The stockings deposed to.)

JOHN RANDALL sworn.

This is the other copper that the other man had, which was on the back of Cady.

(The copper deposed to by Mrs. Trimmer.)

Mr. Chetwood. Is there any patch upon it? - Nothing of the kind.

Was that copper fixed in brick-work? - Yes.

Has it been since applied to that brickwork to see if it fitted? - No, it has been at the Justices ever since.

What did the prisoners say? - Nothing particular.

BOTH GUILTY .

Transported for seven years .

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury, before Mr. Baron PERRYN .

Reference Number: t17840526-81

601. SOLOMON SPENCER was indicted for stealing, on the 3d day of May , one linen handkerchief, value 2 s. the property of Samuel Sheen .

NOT GUILTY .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. ROSE.

Reference Number: t17840526-82

602. JOHN DEAN was indicted for stealing, on the 5th of May , one quart pewter pot, value 1 s. and a pint pot, value 10 d. the property of Alexander Clegg .

GUILTY .

Whipped .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. ROSE.

Reference Number: t17840526-83

603. GEORGE MATTHEWS and JOHN MATTHEWS were indicted for stealing, on the 25th day of April last, twenty-eight pounds of loaf sugar, value 20 s. and sixty-eight pounds of lump sugar, value 30 s. the property of Richard Butt .

RICHARD BUTT sworn.

I am a sugar refiner , I have several times lost sugar, and about April last I lost several quantities of sugar; we missed eight loaves out of one parcel, four out of another, and two lumps out of another; the two lumps were found on the prisoners, and two

loaves, the loaves were particularly marked: the prisoner George was just discharged from my service.

JOHN GREEN sworn.

I am a watchman in Bishopsgate-street, my brother watchman Brown told me two men had gone by loaded, and he thought were gone for a fresh load, this was about a quarter of a mile from Mr. Butt's; I went with him, and found the prisoners coming fresh loaded; I took hold of the prisoner John, and asked him what he had with him, he said he had found it, he carried it on his head; he turned round and seemed as if he would strike me, the two prisoners were then taken and brought with the bundle into the watch-house; George flung his bundle away, I saw him throw it away at the corner; I found in the bundle that John had two large lumps of sugar.

What was in George's bundle? - Two small loaves I think they call them.

(The lumps of sugar produced.)

Court to Butt. Do you know them to be your's? - I swore to them by the mark, but they have been carried about so much, that the mark is rubbed out.

Mr. Sylvester, Prisoner's Council. Shew us the mark. - They were marked with chalk, and marked upon the face of the goods equal the same, they were sold but not delivered.

How many loaves did you make? - A good many.

How many did you sell? - I sold them all; the sugar is mine, I know it by the quality and clearness; (the other sugar produced) they are marked No. 1.

Mr. Sylvester. What countryman are you? - A German.

In England you never saw any body mark No. 1, before? - Yes, I have.

How do you distinguish your mark from another person's mark? - We make it by a tool we work with.

And every sugar-baker works with the same tool? - They have different tools.

Thank you for your information! but it is by the same sort of tools? - I cannot say that I have seen any of others that have been marked No. 1.

They all mark their sugar with some instrument? why it is not difficult in Germany to answer that question? - No.

Then why do not you answer it in England? - They may mark with a tool.

Did not your master mark with a tool? - Very like so.

Then you do not know; do you mean to say that no other sugar-baker in this City of London, marks the sugar any other way than with a tool? - I cannot tell.

How did your master mark his sugar? - Of various marks.

He used to mark them No. 1, did not he? - I cannot remember, he may.

Will you swear he did not? - I will not take upon me to swear that.

Do not you know that he did mark with No. 1? - I will not swear that, sometimes we began with one number, and sometimes with another.

How many loaves have you marked No. 1? - As many as there are in a day's work.

How many may be made in a day? - Why a hundred and upwards; these were all sold to one man.

Now the boiling before that how many did you make of No. 1, then? - I cannot tell.

Court. Is your marking of No. 1, a particular baking? - A particular day's work.

Which day do you begin with? - Sometimes with No. 1, and sometimes 2; we have no particular day of making them in the week; sometimes we go as high as ten or twelve.

Court. Have you any other means of knowing these sugar loaves to be your's but by their being marked No. 1; how can you tell that these are not the sugar-loaves that you sold to your friend and correspondent? - By the marks and the make I know the goods.

Court. What was the mark on the side that was rubbed out? - It was a mark on the sugar

that was marked with a nail, I cannot perceive it here.

Mr. Sylvester. Nothing else besides the mark with a nail? - I never saw any.

Court. How many loaves have you sold marked No. 1? - They were sold to Mr. Naylor, in Bread-street, but none of them had been delivered; there were eighty-four.

How many of the eighty-four were wanting? - Two of them.

How many sugar-loaves had you delivered, marked No. 1, within these six months? - I do not know, I cannot tell.

Mr. Sylvester. Speak within a few hundreds? - I cannot tell any thing about the matter.

Court. When did you make these loaves of sugar marked No. 1, which you sold to Mr. Naylor? - About six weeks or more before this happened.

How soon had you manufactured any before those that were sold to Mr. Naylor? - I cannot tell.

Were they marked with No. 1, or not? - I cannot remember.

JOHN HARVEY sworn.

I am constable for Bishopsgate, the watchman brought these loaves of sugar into the watch-house; I did not observe any particular marks on the papers then, only a scratch on the bottom of the loaf of sugar, and there was some chalk on the paper.

Butt. My Lord, that mark is off now.

Court to Jury. The question is, how far there is sufficient evidence given to identify this sugar; that is the whole of the question, I wish you would talk to one another about it, and I will sum it up to you, and put the prisoners on their defence, if you think the mark No. 1, was sufficient to identify the sugar.

Court to Prosecutor. Have you valued this sugar? - No.

Jury. Have you the samples that you shewed them by? - I have not brought them here.

Prisoner George. We went and took a walk in the morning in the City-road, and my brother saw a bundle lay, and he called me.

MICHAEL BROWN sworn.

I am a watchman, I informed Green of these people; I saw William pass and re-pass twice, and I saw John pass twice, he had a little bundle once under his coat, but I could not tell what it was; but the second time I do not know whether he had any thing or no, besides his own property.

Mr. Sylvester. Did you know him before? - Never saw him before.

Darkish? - No.

Between light and dark? - At three in the morning it was day-light.

The Prisoners called six witnesses, who gave them a very good character.

Court to Prosecutor. What length of time did you miss the sugar before the prisoners were taken up? - They were in the house on the Saturday, and on the Monday morning this was missed.

GEORGE MATTHEWS , JOHN MATTHEWS ,

GUILTY .

Each to be imprisoned in Newgate two years .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. Justice WILLES.

Reference Number: t17840526-84

604. JANE BILLARD was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 26th day of March last, one pair of sheets, value 10 s. two pillows, value 4 s. two linen pillow cases, value 2 s. one bolster, value 4 s. the property of John Porteous , being in a lodging room in his dwelling house, let by contract by him to her, and to be used with the lodging aforesaid , against the statute.

The witnesses examined apart at the request of the prisoner.

JOHN PORTEOUS sworn.

I let this gentlewoman the room furnished the day before Christmas Day; she continued

in the place till the 26th of March, she went away without warning. On the Monday after I opened the room and missed the things; the things were found at the pawnbroker's.

Mr. Akerman. My Lord, the prisoner cannot speak English.

Prisoner. I understand some English, but cannot speak English.

Prisoner. I understand some English, but cannot speak proper.

John Lightfoot , servant to Mr. Payne, a pawnbroker, produced a bolster, two pillows, and a pair of pillow cases, which he took in of the prisoner between the 3d of January and the 4th of March.

John Layton produced some other things, which were taken in by a man that is gone away.

(The prosecutor deposed to the things brought by Lightfoot.)

Prosecutor. She confessed before the Justice they were the things she took from my place; I did not think of that before.

Did he tell her it would be better for her to tell the truth? - He did.

Jury. Did she speak in English before the Justice? - Yes, broken English, but we could understand what she said.

PRISONER's DEFENCE.

I took this room the day before Christmas, I did not pay him exactly, and last week he come up to my room, and bid me look for another; I say I will pay you very well; the wall was very bad, and the two pair of stairs wanted to be repaired: I have been very ill in the place, I catched cold; I had no work, I did it through necessity, I did not intend to rob this place; I told him I would look for a room as soon as possible; I owed his wife a shilling, and the day after I brought it her. I come from Paris, and I have been these twelve years in England; I keep my poverty from my friends, that is all I can say.

NOT GUILTY .

Tried by the London Jury, before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-85

605. JONATHAN HUGHES was indicted for stealing, on the 30th day of April , one large wooden cask, value 7 s. the property of Richard Harrison and Richard Munday .

GUILTY 10 d.

Privately Whipped .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-86

606. JOSEPH ENGLISH and SAMUEL DUFF were indicted for stealing, on the 19th of April , one large Cheshire cheese, value 16 s. the property of Richard Price , Esq ; and one other cheese, value 3 s. the property of Joseph Cornish .

JOSEPH ENGLISH , NOT GUILTY .

SAMUEL DUFF , GUILTY .

Privately Whipped .

Tried by the London Jury, before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-87

607. WILLIAM MOUNTAIN was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 23d of May , one pair of leather boots, value 1 s. one cloak, value 1 s. one linen petticoat, value 3 s. the property of Tabitha Hirst .

Margaret Keele saw the prisoner in the prosecutrix's house, with the boots and a bundle which had dropped, and which contained the cloak and petticoat; and James Maidwell saw him drop the boots.

GUILTY .

Whipped .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-88

608. SAMUEL BENNERE was indicted for feloniously assaulting Mary, the wife of William Lewis , on the 22d day of April last, in a certain field and open place

near the King's highway, and then and there in a forcible and violent manner, unlawfully, maliciously, and feloniously demanding the money of the said William, from the said Mary, with a felonious intent the money of the said William, from the person of the said Mary, then and there feloniously to steal .

MARY LEWIS sworn.

On the 22d of April, at twelve in the day, I was in a lane called Bow-fair Field, behind the boarding-school, and the prisoner passed me, I went after him, and when he came to the middle of the lane, he stopped and said, give me your money; I said I had none; he had a knife which he took out of his pocket, an oldish knife, he said if I did not give it to him, he would cut my throat; I stepped back, and I trod on my gown till I fell down; I said if you do not go away, my man is on the other side of the gardens, and I cried out, John, and murder! and he ran away, and they came out and followed him.

Court. He did not take any thing from you? - No, he did not offer to take any, whether he wanted me to give it him or no, I cannot say.

JAMES DORREN sworn.

I heard the prosecutrix cry murder! and I ran to her assistance and took him; I did not see him till I came into the main road, she had described him to me, and I asked William Ray whether such a person was gone by, and he said yes; when I took him he said he did not touch her at all, or offer to meddle with her, only that she cried murder, and he ran away; when I brought him to my master's garden he admitted he was the person.

WILLIAM RAY sworn.

I was coming from Mile-end, and I saw the prisoner come over Bow-fair Field, and a few minutes after, James Dorren came and asked me, and I directed him.

Court to Prosecutrix. Are you quite sure this is the same man? - Yes.

PRISONER's DEFENCE.

I never saw the woman before with my eyes.

GUILTY .

Transported for seven years .

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-89

609. JAMES DEALEY was indicted for feloniously stealing on the 18th day of May , one wooden trunk, value 12 d. one cloth great coat, value 10 s. one cloth coat, value 20 s. one velvet waistcoat, value 4 s. one pair of jean breeches, value 5 s. one linen shirt, value 4 s. one dimity waistcoat, value 5 s. one silk neckcloth, value 12 d. one muslin neck-cloth, value 12 d. one stock, value 6 d. one silver stock buckle, value 2 s. one pair of silk stockings, value 2 s. and one pair of worsted stockings, value 6 d. the property of Joseph Shilling .

JOSEPH SHILLING sworn.

The prisoner came to my house at Portsmouth on the 16th of April, and asked me for a lodging, he owed me nineteen pounds, and I brought him up to town with me, and we came to the Angel behind St. Clement's, I left my trunk there and I took the prisoner with me to the coffee-house in the Strand, and we could not see his captain, and the prisoner said he wanted to ease himself, and he went away, and came to the Angel to take my trunk, and marched off with it; I staid there about ten minutes, I returned back to my lodgings and found my things were gone, I found some of them out, I thought I should find him down in Wapping, I went to St. Catherine's, and they persuaded me to go to the Justice and get a warrant, which I did, the prisoner happened to come into the house the Saturday following, the 22d of May, he was stopped and brought before me, so he told me he had left the trunk at one Mr. Ready's, a publican, and as he owed Mr. Ready four pounds or five pounds, he had stopped it; Ready took the things and pawned them.

RICHARD READY sworn.

I live in Cable-street, the prisoner came to my house last Tuesday was a week, about three o'clock, and brought a trunk about fourteen inches long, he came in a coach to me there, and he ordered the coachman to bring in the trunk, and it was laid upon the table, it was broke open behind, and he put on a pair of clean stockings, he said his mother had given him money, and he bought some clothes, he owed me four pounds two shillings, he said he bought the clothes second hand, he gave me the trunk to take care of; on the Wednesday morning he came to me for the clothes, he said he wanted to sell them; I refused to let him have them without he paid me; on the Thursday morning he came to me, and said he was going to receive his money, and if I would lend him a shilling, I might keep the clothes; accordingly when the prosecutor came, I told him I had pawned all the things, I pawned them at Mr. Author's, the prisoner said several times the things I pawned were his own property, I never knew him rob any body before, and I have known him a twelvemonth.

Prisoner. A man gave me the trunk opposite St. Paul's, to carry down to this gentleman's lodging; ask him if there was not a sailor came next day and owned the clothes? - Yes, but the prisoner told me afterwards that, that man only came on a false pretence to get the clothes away from me.

THOMAS DAVIS sworn.

I live at the Angel behind St. Clement's, the prisoner came by our Portsmouth coach on the Tuesday morning, and the prosecutor with him, they delivered the things at the bar, they came in for a pot of beer, and were gone about an hour, and the prisoner came and asked for them, and the landlord delivered them into his hands, he asked if any thing was to pay.

Richard Humphreys , the master of the tap confirmed the above account.

Thomas Author , the pawnbroker produced part of the things which were pledged by the mother-in-law of Mr. Ready.

ELEANOR M'DONALD sworn.

I pledged the things that were given me by the request of the prisoner, he was present.

(A coat deposed to.)

WILLIAM WHITEWAY sworn.

I apprehended the prisoner, and went with a search warrant to Ready's house.

GUILTY .

Transported for seven years .

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury, before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-90

610. RICHARD MOSS was indicted for feloniously assaulting John Dewell , on the King's highway, on the 24th of May , and putting him in fear, and feloniously taking from his person, and against his will, 6 s. in monies numbered , his monies.

JOHN DEWELL sworn.

The prisoner came up to me on Monday night last, a little after nine, on Hounslow Heath, on the side of the road, and he gave me a kick on the side of the ribs, two more were with him, I had been asleep, and was just awaked, I had been hard at work, he asked me what I lay there for, with that he caught hold of my arm, and pulled me up and said, where are you going? you shall go home, and they dragged me along, and pushed me along, they said they would have me home, for they were going that way.

Court. Was you in liquor? - No, not then, I was a little before, but no great deal, they dragged me along the space of a quarter of a mile, and then they dragged me up a lane, and this man put his hand in my pocket, and took my money out of my pocket; I caught his hand in my pocket.

Did he say any thing? - No, only jostled and hugged me.

Under what pretence was it? - I suppose the pretence was to rob me, they pretended to carry me home.

He did not ask any money from you? - No.

Nor make use of any threatening? - No, when he had taken my money out I said, this will not do, then the other took hold of me and searched my breeches pocket; in half an hour I saw him again, I found them at the publick house, I said they had just robbed me, and out they came, I knew the men very well, one of them run away, I never saw them before.

JOSEPH DOWDING sworn.

The prisoner is a stranger, I never saw him but once before that night, and I believe it was in the course of the day; last Monday night about ten, the prisoner and two men came into my house and called for a pint of beer, and drinking of the third pint I heard somebody call Joe, Joe, at the door; I went, and it was this Dewell, says he, are there three strange people in your house? I said yes; he said they have robbed me, where is a constable? As we were talking the men came out, and took a small circle round us, they did not come immediately before us, we immediately drew towards them, John looked at them, says he, these are the people that robbed me, he gave a snatch at one of them, but he missed his hand, and he ran away from him, and he ran I suppose about a hundred yards, and I heard a scuffle, and I thought he had got him, but when I came up to him he had only tumbled down, and the man was run off; he then says, that is the man that has robbed me, that took the money out of my pocket, and he left me to go for an officer, and before the officer came the other ran away; then they took this man to the Justice's; he was searched at the Justice's, we did not think of searching him before.

Court. Was Dewell sober at this time? - He was not drunk, he was very sensible.

Upon your oath was he quite sober? - I did not perceive any thing deficient in him I give you my word, to the best of my knowledge he was sober.

Answer the question? - I think he was sober then, what he had been I know nothing about.

Did the prisoner say any thing after he was taken? - A very trifle indeed.

What was that trifle? - Nothing particular that I know of.

Can you recollect what it was? - He said, says he, master I will not run away from you; says I, young man, it is of no use.

He did not attempt to run away? - No.

Did he say whether he was innocent or guilty? - No.

PRISONER's DEFENCE.

The time we were drinking in at this landlord's house, before the beer was drank out, this John Dewell came up and called the landlord out and asked him if there were some strange men in the house, and two men slipped out, and the prosecutor followed them, and when he came up again, says he, damn them, they are gone, but here is one of them: I came from Stroud in Berkshire, I never was in London twice before.

Court to Jury. Gentlemen, in the first place, with respect to the capital part of the charge, a robbery on the highway, which is taking money or goods from the person of a man by force or fear, against his consent, and the essence of the crime consists either in violence to the person, or putting in fear; now it does not appear that the money taken from the man at this time was taken with that degree of force which the law seems to require to constitute an highway robbery; there was no putting in fear, no weapon used, but whilst they were pulling him along, under pretence of taking care of him, this man slipped his hand into his pocket, and he found his hand in his pocket, if you believe that the money was taken at first, in the manner he describes, it was not by fear, but by having his arm over him, and there does not seem a sufficient degree of force to constitute a highway robbery. If you are satisfied therefore that he stole the money,

I think it would be too much to find him guilty of the capital part.

NOT GUILTY .

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury, before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-91

611. JOHN ARCHER was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 28th of April last, two large coach glasses, value 40 s. the property of the Reverend Charles Tarrant , D. D. privately in his coach house .

JOHN JONES sworn.

I am coachman to Dr. Tarrant, I came in with the chariot about twelve at night, the 27th of April last, the stable was at the Red-lion, in Argyle-street , I left the stable at half after one, I put the carriage under the gate-way in the yard, we do not put it in the coach house because the yard is a close yard, the door was fastened and I saw the boy going up to bed; and the next morning when I came at half after six the glasses of the chariot were gone, and the strings of the glasses were a part left in the carriage, but my master desired me to inform the Court he could not spare the glasses, he has sent the strings; the prisoner was taken by the watchman, I saw him the next day about eleven, before Justice Hyde.

PHILIP WELCH sworn.

I stopped the prisoner at past four in the morning, near Red-lion-street, he had a pair of coach-glasses in this bag, I called to him twice and he would not stop, I asked him where he was going with it, he said to the gentleman's, I took him to the watch-house, we went about a quarter of an hour after to Red-lion-yard, as we saw two men lurking about there at night, and we found the tassels belonging to the chariot in the chariot, they fitted the strings that were to the glasses which the prisoner had, (The straps and tassels produced) Jones the coachman took off these strings in my presence, and I took them into my possession.

(The strings and the tassels handed up.)

EDWARD VISE sworn.

I was in Holborn when the prisoner was stopped, he called upon me for assistance, and I went with him to the watch-house, we searched two or three coach houses, and we went into this coach house and the doors of the chariot were open, and the tassels lay there; he said he was going to sell them to a coachmaker.

PRISONER's DEFENCE.

I have nothing further to say than that I know nothing of the robbery, I never committed it, Welch told me right or wrong it was immaterial, I should be hanged, I said I hoped not, I asked him if he had the law in his own hands, he said damn the law, I should have enough by and by.

Court. Gentlemen of the Jury, this indictment is so framed as to make it a capital offence, why it was so framed after hearing the evidence, I am at a loss to conceive; for the prisoner might as well have been indicted under any other statute in the statute book as this, there is not the smallest foundation whatever for that part of the charge which makes the capital part of the indictment, for these coach-glasses were not stolen in any place belonging to Dr. Tarrant, nor were they stolen in any coach-house, but they were stolen from under a gate-way in a yard; you will therefore reject that part of the case and consider the evidence, you are to judge on comparing these strings, whether you are satisfied they are the same, I looked at them myself, and they do very strongly appear to be separated one from the other.

GUILTY .

Transported for seven years .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-92

612. THOMAS THORPE was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 1st of May , one cloth jacket, value 5 s. one linen check shirt, value 1 s. a pair of linen trowsers, value 1 s. a pair of worsted stockings, value 6 d. a pair of leather shoes, value 2 s. the property of Robert Barnes .

ROBERT BARNES sworn.

The prisoner is a particular acquaintance of mine, and I was drinking with him one evening about nine, at the Black-horse, on the first of May, I said I was going to lay out of my lodgings that night, and I parted from him; the next day I went home to my lodgings and I missed my things, I went and found the prisoner in the New Road, and I took him immediately, and I told him he had taken these things of mine, and he owned it; he had my shoes and shirt on, and trowsers in his pocket, he told me he had made away with the rest, that he had pawned them or sold them.

Did you make him any promises of favour if he would tell you the truth? - No, I did not, I never found any of the other things, I lost the other things that are mentioned in the indictment, the constable took charge of the man, and I found the shoes upon him, that is all I know.

(The shirt and trowsers deposed to.)

Court to Prosecutor. Did you mention to him that these things were your's? - Yes.

Did he acknowledge it? - Yes.

PRISONER's DEFENCE.

I was drinking with him that evening, he told me I was welcome, he would lend them to me, he and my wife got intimate together and he deluded her away, on the 24th of April, I caught her and him together, and she in his room, on Tuesday I could find no tidings of them, and at eleven at night on Saturday I found her concealed in his room, I looked for them all day on Monday and Tuesday, and could hear nothing of them, when he lodged along with me, he used to wear my things and I his, so I made bold to put on a shirt, and I was bringing it back to his lodgings when he took me, he said before the Justice when I was fully committed, if I would give it from under my hand not to trouble him, he would let me go.

Court. How came you to make away with the other things? - They had distressed me, and I did it for want.

Court to Prosecutor. Why is not your landlord here who saw this man as you say come to these lodgings? - The woman was at home, I did not ask her to come, I asked the Justice whether I had witnesses enough of it, and he said yes.

You have heard what the prisoner has said about your going away with his wife and about your wearing his things? - Yes, when I lodged along with him, I wore his things.

Prisoner. I have witnesses to my character.

Jury. What way was the prisoner going when you met him? - He was going to my lodging.

Court. That turns out a very material question in the way in which it is answered, though it might not have been so material if it had turned out the other way, perhaps this may save the trouble of going on with this matter.

NOT GUILTY .

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury, before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-93

613. THOMAS BRADLEY was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 17th of April , one silver watch, value 20 s. one base metal key, value 1 d. the property of James Collins .

JAMES COLLINS sworn.

About the 9th or 10th of April on a Saturday, I am not sure to the day of the month, but I am sure to the day of the week, I saw a pawnbroker's shop in Crown-court, the corner of Princes-street, and I wanted sixpence upon my watch to buy my dinner, when I came to the door the man

that took my watch from me stood at the pawnbroker's door, I asked him if that was a pawnbroker's shop, and he said yes, I asked him if he belonged to the shop, and he said yes, so he asked me if I wanted money, I told him I wanted sixpence for my dinner, and that I worked near, I did not chuse to ask my master as Saturday night was so near, he asked me what I had got to pawn, I had my watch in my hand and he snatched it out of my hand, and said stop ten minutes I will bring you the money out, I stopped about ten minutes, and he never came to me out of that door, and I began to be doubtful of my watch, then I went in and he was not there.

Did you ever get your watch again? - No.

Where did you find this man again? - On the Saturday night following I took him in Leicester-fields, I knew him to be the same man, and the pawnbroker's man was with me.

What did he say for himself? - He beat me very bad in the face, and began to call me scoundrel, he gave me one black eye, I took him myself and brought him to Litchfield-street, he was all of a shudder, he was easily took: I heard the watch was pawned in Shoe-lane, I saw it there, and described it before it was shewn me in every particular.

What did the prisoner say about it? - After he was examined he owned it to me that he had the watch, and it was pawned for twelve shillings, and he offered me a great coat to make it up, and to pay for my loss of time.

Mr. Chetwood Counsel for the Prisoner. What was your purpose at the pawnbroker's? - I went there to leave something for sixpence.

Had you ever been in there or at any other pawnbroker's before? - No, Sir, never.

Upon your oath did you or did you not express reluctance or unwillingness to go into a pawnbroker's shop? - No, Sir.

Had you determined what to pawn, to raise a little money? - I did not care whether it was my watch or my handkerchief.

You say your watch was snatched? - Yes.

Did you or did you not, desire the prisoner to pawn it for you? - No, Sir, I did not.

Did you never declare to the prisoner himself that you had so desired it? - No.

Did you see him go into the pawnbroker's? - Yes.

If you had not given him the watch to pawn, how came you not to go after him, did not he carry in your watch to the pawnbroker's by your own consent? - No Sir, he snatched it out of my hand.

Court. If he had given the watch to the man to have pawned, and the man had gone off with it, I am very clear that would have been a felony.

Mr. Chetwood. I mean to shew the difference in his evidence, now and when he was at the Justice's, he said he belonged to the pawnbroker's shop, he had a coat under his arm.

Did not he tell you he was going to pawn his coat? - No.

Was you desired to stop at the door, or to go to the public house? - To the public house, a man went past and the prisoner said go to the public house with that man and have a pint of beer.

Then you never declared that you gave him the watch to pawn? - No, Sir, he snatched it out of my hand.

JOHN LANE sworn.

On the 17th of April, a woman came and pledged a watch with me for 12 s. I cannot say the day of the week, she pledged it in the name of Mary Harris , she always pledged in that name with us, I knew her before, her name is Mary Hart , it was in the day time, but I cannot tell the hour.

Court to Prosecutor. What time was it that you met this man in Leicester-fields and took him up? - On Saturday night.

MARY HART sworn.

Where did you get the watch that you

pledged at the pawnbroker's? - The prisoner brought it to me to pledge for him, I had not it above five minutes, he told me it was not his, but a person was waiting for him at the public house.

Was the watch that you pledged, the same that the prisoner brought you? - Yes.

Court to Pawnbroker. Is this the watch that this woman pledged? - Yes.

(The watch produced.)

PRISONER's DEFENCE.

My Lord, this man gave me the watch as I was going to pawn my coat, he asked me where I was going, I told him to receive some money, he asked me to pawn his watch, and he took it out and gave it me, I went and stopped some time there, he said he would go to the public house and wait, when I came out I went to the public house to enquire for him, he was not there, and not finding him, I took the watch to that woman the very same day to pawn, he took me the Saturday following, I offered to make him every restitution, I had no intention of defrauding him.

Court to Mrs. Hart. How long have you known the prisoner? - I have known him several years, and never knew any harm of him before.

FOR THE PRISONER.

The Prisoner's witnesses examined separate.

ROBERT HOGG sworn.

I live in Queen-street, Soho-square, No. 12, I am a master jeweller, and a housekeeper, I have known him sixteen or seventeen years, I have kept a house there near twenty years, he always bore a good character, I knew him when he lived with Mr. Robinson, a merchant and jeweller, I have known him trusted with 10,000 pounds worth of jewels, I never heard any thing amiss of his character.

Court to Hogg. Did you keep any shop? - No, Sir, I am a working jeweller, I have a private shop.

You say you have lived there near twenty years? - Yes, Sir, the merchant that he lived with, Mr. Robinson of Gerrard-street, he is dead, he has trusted him with jewels to bring me to the value of 10,000 l. what I speak of is twelve years ago.

Do you keep the whole house? - Yes. I keep the whole house.

Are you married or single? - I am married.

WILLIAM ANDERSON sworn.

Do you know any thing of this transaction? - Yes.

Had you ever any conversation with the prosecutor upon this? - No, I met the prisoner in April last, I cannot be particular to the day, it was of a Saturday in Covent Garden.

Do you recollect what Saturday it was in April? - I think it was about the 17th of April, and after asking him how he did and so forth.

Court. Any conversation between you and the prisoner is no evidence. - We walked together as far as Crown-court in Princes-street, Soho, and he and I stopped speaking together at the Pawnbroker's door, and the prosecutor came up, and said to him, are you a going to pawn any thing, he said yes, I am going to pawn my coat; in consequence of this, I saw the prosecutor take the watch out of his own pocket and give it into the hands of the prisoner, he introduced himself by saying, if you are going to pawn your coat, I wish you would pawn my watch for me, I do not like to pawn it myself, in consequence of this I saw the prosecutor give the watch to the prisoner to pawn.

Court. And you say upon your oath, you saw him give the watch to the prisoner to pawn? - I did.

Upon what day was it? - It was on the Saturday, and I think it was about the 17th of last April, to the best of my recollection, I cannot be particular to the day of the month.

Did you see what became of the prisoner afterwards? - I waited till the prisoner came out, and he said to me, do you know where the man is, I said no, I was looking

at the opposite shop; the prisoner said to me, I have not pawned this man's watch, and I wish to give it him again; after this I took my leave of the prisoner, and wished him a good day, and went about my business and he about his.

What became of the man after he had given the prisoner the watch? - I do not know, I saw him give him the watch to pawn, I turned my head to look at some stockings, and I saw no more of him.

The prosecutor was a stranger to you and the prisoner? - I never saw him before in my life.

Did the prisoner and he seem to have any acquaintance? - So far as I should judge I should think they had not.

What did he say about it now as near as you can recollect? - I recollect nothing further than what I have said before.

Did the prosecutor say any thing that led you to think they were acquainted? - No, I took them to be entire strangers.

Did the prosecutor tell the prisoner his name, or where he lived? - Not in my hearing.

Then the prosecutor came up to the prisoner, who was an entire stranger to him, and gave him his watch to pawn, without having any direction where he lived? - I heard no direction given, I saw the prosecutor give the prisoner the watch.

Who was to receive the money for the watch when it was pawned? - That I do not know, I saw him give him the watch to pawn.

That is the point you came here to swear to? - I thought the prosecutor said for me.

How was he to get the money? - That I do not know.

What reason have you to believe that this was on the 17th of April? - I made a remark of it in my pocket book of the state of the poll.

Then you have no doubt it was the 17th of April? - I think there could be no doubt of it, I was told by information it was the 17th of April in the Garden, and I made a memorandum of it in my pocket book; it was a pocket book that writes with a slate pencil, and as the day's poll was over, a few days after I rubbed it out.

You give a very good reason for knowing the day; then you have no doubt it was the 17th of April, or the day the people called the 17th of April? - I might be mistaken in the day, but I think there is not the least doubt it was that day.

Do you happen to recollect what the state of the poll was that day? - I do not.

You are sure it was not a week earlier than the 17th? - I am perfectly sure of that; I met a person that knew the prisoner four or five days after, and he told me he was taken up in consequence of pawning a watch for a man.

You heard within a week after? - Yes, within a week after, I am sure of that, and the person said the prisoner desired him if he met me, knowing me, to desire me to come to him, to say what I knew of the transaction, that is all I know.

Court to Officer. This witness must not go out of Court till the Jury have given their verdict.

Jury. You did not hear how long the prisoner had been in custody? - I cannot say I did.

Court to Prosecutor. The time you met with the prisoner in Leicester-fields, when he was taken, was it the same Saturday on which you lost your watch, or the Saturday week? - The Saturday week.

You are sure of that? - I am quite sure; it was on Saturday the 10th of April I lost my watch, and the Saturday week I met the prisoner; the story that has been told by this man is not true, there are two or three of them have been after me to make it up, and a man at Hick's-hall has offered me the watch, and to have it mended, and a good supper.

Mr. Chetwood. As to the time, it could be ascertained with precision, by sending to the pawnbroker.

Court. That may be necessary hereafter, but the prosecutor swears positively that the prisoner was not taken up on the same day, and it is in evidence from the other pawnbroker

that the watch was pledged on the 17th.

Mr. Chetwood. My Lord, if the other pawnbroker was sent for it would appear clearly.

To Prosecutor. Was the coat pledged on the same day that you lost your watch? - Yes, Sir, directly as he went into the shop.

What is the name of the pawnbroker at the corner of Crown-court? - Priestman.

Prisoner. The coat was pledged for four shillings, in the name of Johnson; I believe it might be Thomas Johnson , but I am not sure.

Court to Jury. Gentlemen, I think public justice is very much concerned that this matter should be fully investigated; I am sending for the pawnbroker, the prisoner shall sit down, and in the mean time you will try another prisoner.

(The two pawnbrokers books sent for, and as soon as they were brought the trial went on.)

Court to Prisoner. Have you any other evidence to give to the Court after the pawnbroker's man is examined? - Here is one.

GEORGE BANFIELD sworn.

I live in Duke's-court Drury-lane, No. 14.

Court. I advise you to be cautious before I examine you, for I have ordered the witnesses on each side, for the prosecutor and the prisoner, to be detained in Court; on which ever side the belief of the Jury turns against, I shall probably direct a prosecution for perjury. - The prisoner came to me and asked me if I would have a coat that was in pawn, and I was to redeem the coat and buy it, and I went to the pawnbroker's where the coat was, and was stopped till the prosecutor came in, and then he came in, and said this is not the man that had the watch of me; says I was you robbed of a watch; no, says he, I gave it to a man to pawn, and he ran away with the money; I said you must be a stupid man, he said he never saw him before, upon which I gave him my address.

JOSEPH HEWLETT sworn.

I am servant to Mr. Priestman.

Do you know the person of the man at the bar? - No, I do not.

Do you remember a coat pledged at your shop in the name of Johnson? - Yes, I do.

Have you any entry in your books that enables you to speak with certainty on what day it was pledged? - Here is the book.

Court. Let me look at the book, (looks at it) I do not see any entry in this book of Saturday the 10th of April, how happens that here is Friday the 9th of April, and Monday the 12th? have you ever a whole day, especially on a Saturday in which nothing is pledged at your shop? - No.

Then find the entry of the 10th of April. - It was Good Friday, we do not keep the shop above an hour, so it was put Friday instead of Saturday.

How came that? - We did no business on Friday, so it passed for Saturday.

Court. Let me look at it again; have you any mark where the Saturday's entry begins; here is Mr. Johnson on that day, gold seal 7 s. 6 d. - That is another person, that gentleman comes to us to this day.

Here is another Mr. Johnson, sixteen prints, was that the person? - No, it was not.

Do you know the person of the prisoner? - I do not.

Do you know whether he was the man of the name of Johnson? - I stood by the person that took it in, that wrote the ticket to put on it, he wrote that, he did not write any duplicate, and he is as far as Northumberland; I know it was a tallish man, but I cannot tell the person.

Court to Lane. Look at your book and see when the watch was pledged.

Prisoner. Was there a duplicate on the coat as the prosecutor swore? - There was none.

(Lane's book handed up and read.)

Court. The 17th of April, here is the ticket of the watch, and the woman had the duplicate.

When was the watch found with you? - The Monday or Tuesday following.

Court to Collins. You said when you took the prisoner in Leicester-fields the pawnbroker's man was with you? - Yes, Hewlett was with me.

Is that true? - Yes.

Now when was it? - On the Saturday night following.

It was not the same Saturday that the coat was pledged? - No, it was not.

Do you know of any thing about the watch after the prisoner was taken? - No, I am sure it was the Saturday week after the coat was pledged.

Prisoner. What did the prosecutor say to you when he went in to enquire for his watch? - He said he had been drinking with the man at the public house, and wanted some money, and had nothing to leave but his watch, that he only wanted to borrow sixpence, and that he met this man at the door; he came in a great hurry, and said, has there been a man to pawn a watch for sixpence; so the man told the whole story that he had lost his watch, he said he gave it him.

How long did the man that pawned the coat stay in the shop? - Not two minutes; I think he went out at the other door through into Princes-street.

Jury. Did Collins tell you he took the man for a person belonging to the shop? - Yes, he did.

Jury to Collins. What trade are you? - A smith, I worked the whole week, I kept about a quarter of a day on Monday in the afternoon.

Was this the Easter week that you pledged the watch? - I cannot recollect that.

Court. Gentlemen of the Jury, this trial has turned out of more consequence than it might at first appear to be of; if the prosecutor gave the watch to the prisoner to pawn for him, and he went away with the money, that is as much a felony as if he snatched it from him; and no possible reason can be assigned for the prosecutor's going away after he had given him the watch to pledge; some very extraordinary accident must have interfered, to shew why the prisoner came out of the pawnbroker's without pledging it, and then he goes a mile off, and pledges it by another hand at another pawnbroker's: you will decide for yourselves, and your verdict will decide my opinion of the witness Anderson.

GUILTY .

Transported for seven years .

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Court. Let Anderson be committed to Newgate.

Anderson. It is very hard, my Lord, I spoke no more than the truth.

Reference Number: t17840526-94

614. GEORGE SPITTLE , (aged fourteen) was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 30th of April , eight linen shirts, value 20 s. two shifts, value 10 s. the property of Joseph Pugh .

Mary Pearce met the prisoner in the passage with these things over his arm, and run after him, and saw him drop them in the street.

The prisoner called three witnesses, who gave him a good character.

GUILTY .

Whipped , and restored to his father.

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury before Mr. ROSE.

Reference Number: t17840526-95

615. WILLIAM THOMPSON was indicted for stealing, on the 7th of May , one shift, value 2 s. and one table cloth, value 3 s. the property of John Kelly .

John Orange saw the prisoner running with some things, near the prosecutor's

house, and stopped him; and Mr. Kelly deposed to the things.

Prisoner. I bought the things in Back-lane of a person who is not here.

GUILTY .

Transported for seven years .

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury before Mr. ROSE.

Reference Number: t17840526-96

616. BENJAMIN WRIGHT and ROBERT MORGAN were indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 20th of May , one silk handkerchief, value 2 s. the property of a certain person unknown.

THOMAS DOUGLAS sworn:

On the 20th of May, between one and two, I was at the Cooper's-arms, in Chick-lane , drinking a pint of beer, and saw the two prisoners follow a gentleman by the window; I immediately went out and watched them about a dozen yards, I saw the prisoner Wright take the handkerchief out of the gentleman's pocket, I would have followed the gentleman, but I was afraid, for there was another gang of them; five minutes after they came by the window again, I knew them and we took them in Smithfield, we followed them into the public house again, and we took this handkerchief from Wright, under his arm, between his skin and his shirt, the other only followed him.

Was he in company with him? - He was.

Could he see him do it? - He could.

Did he continue in company with him? - He did.

ROBERT WALKER sworn.

I went with the prosecutor and another person, and took the prisoner.

SAMUEL JACKSON sworn.

I took him with the handkerchief under his arm, they were both together.

PRISONER MORGAN's DEFENCE.

I can tell where I had been, and who is my master; my master's name is Gordon, in Petty France, he is a plaisterer, I had been at work in Brook-street; I know nothing of that young man.

BOTH GUILTY .

Transported for seven years .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-97

617. BARWICK HOMES and JOHN MARSHALL were indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 26th of April last, four pair of satin shoes, embroidered with gold and silver, value 30 s. and one pair of cloth shoes, value 4 s. the property of James Davis .

JAMES DAVIS sworn.

I am a shoe-maker , on the 26th of April my house was burnt down, and I lost these shoes.

The witnesses examined apart at the request of the prisoners.

WILLIAM DAVY sworn.

On Wednesday night the 12th of May, a young fellow, one George Morley , came to me, and said he thought there were some shoes at a place belonging to Mr. Davis; I went with him, and the shoes were tied up in this handkerchief, I opened them, and took care of them, and the next morning I went and took the woman that had them; I have had the shoes ever since, ( the shoes produced) I found the shoes in a fruiterer's shop in Brook's-market, up one pair of stairs, the woman's name is Lamb where I took the shoes from; one Elizabeth Cohen had left them there, I know nothing of her.

ELIZABETH COHEN sworn.

One night I was in bed about ten o'clock, somebody knocked at my door, I asked who it was; it was about a fortnight before I

was taken up; I was sent for to the Lebeck's Head to buy these shoes, there were seven pair, I bought five pair and the woman of the house bought two pair; I gave a guinea in gold, six shillings in silver, and twopence half-penny for the good of the house, I bought them of a man whom she called by the name of Barwick, I never saw the other lad till I saw him at the Justice's.

Court. How comes he here?

Prosecutor. By his own confession, he came to Justice Blackborough, and said he was the person that took them, he said he took the nineteen pair; he was committed on his own confession.

Court to Cohen. How came you to be sent for to buy these shoes? - Because I keep a shop, I never bought any thing of the kind before in my life; I did not know they were stolen, or else I would not have bought them; I did not go till the next morning, she knew me to be a dealer, I buy and sell clothes.

Mr. Davis. I cannot tell the particulars of his confession, it was reduced into writing; he said he came to the shop, that they were given to him; he came voluntarily and confessed it the next day after the other was taken up; he said he sold fourteen pair to a woman for twenty-seven shillings.

(The confession read.)

"The voluntary confession of John Marshall ."

"Dated May 12, 1784."

"That he took from the house of James Davis , in Holborn, shoe-maker, when the house was on fire, nineteen pair of shoes of different sorts; and sold on the same night at half past nine o'clock, to one Elizabeth Cohen , fourteen pair of the said shoes, for one pound seven shillings, and sold five pair to a Jew in the street for ten shillings."

Court to Cohen. By this confession that has been read you bought them of Marshall? - I bought them of Barwick, I never bought any shoes of the other, I never saw him before that I know of.

PRISONER HOLMES'S DEFENCE.

I never was in the woman's house, nor never bought any shoes that night, and here is the woman that will take her oath that I was not; this other prisoner is my brother-in-law.

PRISONER MARSHALL'S DEFENCE.

I was going along Gray's-inn-lane, through Brookss-market, and I saw there nineteen pair of shoes tied up in a red silk handkerchief, they were all one sort, I took and opened them, and sold some to her for twenty-seven shillings, I sold the other five pair to the Jew, I said at Justice Blackborough's that I found them in Gray's-inn-lane under a gateway; I told the clerk he was wrong in it.

Prisoner Holmes. This woman said the second day at the Justice's, that my brother was the man that sold the shoes.

SARAH MOSS sworn.

I carried Holmes's linen home at eleven o'clock in the morning and he was at home.

The Prisoners called two witnesses to their character.

BOTH NOT GUILTY .

Tried by the London Jury, before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-98

618. JOHN CHIPCHASE was indicted for feloniously stealing on the 26th of May , sixty yards of carpet, value 6 l. the property of James Baxter , in his dwelling house .

JAMES BAXTER sworn.

I lost the carpet on Wednesday the 26th of May, about nine in the evening I missed it from my shop window, which is in Piccadilly , I saw the carpet at the Black Bear gateway after it was thrown down, the prisoner had been a servant of mine for many months, the prisoner was brought back in custody, when I saw the carpet I charged him with the fact, and he begged for mercy

that I would not hurt him, the carpet stood on my window inside.

Court. You are sure it was in the inside? - Yes.

(The carpet deposed to.)

ELIZABETH BLUNDELL sworn.

I live next door to Mr. Baxter, I stood at my own bar, and I saw the prisoner pull the carpet out of Mr. Baxter's window, with intent to lay it on his shoulder, and another man helped him with it on his shoulder, I believe it was about eight in the evening of the 26th of May, my bar window juts out, I can see each way.

Does the window project? - Yes.

Was the carpet withinside or without? - It was level to the front of the house.

How do you know it was the prisoner? - I know the prisoner perfectly well, but I did not know at that time it was him till they brought him back again.

Then how do you know now that it was the prisoner? - When I saw him taking it away, I rapped at the window, thinking that might prevent him taking it, and I went to call Mr. Baxter's servants, and when I returned back, I saw a man in the gateway with the carpet on his shoulders, during which time he had been out of my sight, the carpet was on his shoulders when I saw him enter the yard.

Did you follow him into that Bear-yard? - No.

Did you see any more of him? - No.

When you saw him with the carpet on his shoulders did you then know it was the prisoner? - No.

How do you know then that the man that was brought back was the same man that you saw take the carpet? - I cannot tell that, there is a gentleman that should be here, that saw him drop the carpet.

But you yourself cannot swear that the man that was brought back was the same man that you saw take the carpet? - No.

Court to Prosecutor. When you first went into the Black Bear yard, the carpet was laying there, where was the prisoner then? - My man had got hold of him.

RICHARD WOOLEY sworn.

On Wednesday the 26th of May. I was up stairs in my own apartment between seven and eight, I cannot be positive to the time, and my father called me down, and desired me to look sharp about the shop windows, he thought they were after our windows, I looked out and saw three chaps standing at the corner of the Castle gateway, one of which was the prisoner at the bar.

Are you sure of that? - Positive of it, I then called my father and asked him if that was the person he meant, he said it was, the prisoner was dressed the same as he is now, they then went away towards the Haymarket, I stepped out on the pavement and watched them, one of them left the other man and went towards the Hay-market, the man stopped opposite to Mr. Baxter's shop, and the prisoner was standing in a stooping position, as if he was pulling something, then the other lifted the carpet upon his shoulders.

Did you see the carpet lifted on his shoulders? - I saw that myself, he was going away with it on his left shoulder, I pursued him, he that helped him up with it crossed the way, and the prisoner turned up the Black Bear yard with it, about thirty yards from Mr. Baxter's house, about three parts up this yard, there is a part rather narrower than the other and darker, when I came about three yards off him, I saw him let the carpet fall and run away, he tumbled over it, the prisoner was not out of my sight, only at the turning of the corner out of the gateway, that was after he got the carpet, that was only for a moment of time, I got sight of him directly, I might be six or eight yards behind him, I have no doubt at all but that was the same person.

Did you know him before? - I never saw him before.

Whereabouts in Mr. Baxter's shop window was the carpet standing? - It is an open window, it stood upon the stool-board, as soon as I came back I observed the situation of the other carpets, and I observed that

they were all within where the shutters went.

Because in some shops there is a board that projects beyond the window of the shop? - I pursued him, and turning the corner of Sherrard-street, I called stop thief, and a man stopped him, I instantly came up with the prisoner and laid hold of him, and told him he must come along with me, at the corner of the yard Mr. Baxter came up to him and laid hold of him.

PRISONER's DEFENCE.

Last Tuesday evening after I had done work, I went to see my mother as I usually did, she desired me to go to the White Horse Cellar, to see if my uncle was come to town, as I was coming back a man asked me to earn a shilling, he said he wanted me to carry that carpet, and he put it on my shoulders, he went down the Black Bear yard, and I went after him, I am innocent of it.

The prisoner called two witnesses to his character.

GUILTY. Of stealing to the value of 39 s.

Transported for seven years .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-99

619. JOHN WELCH was indicted for stealing on the 14th of May , one pair of linen sheets, value 49 s. the property of John George Goldfrap , in his dwelling house .

JOHN FIELD sworn.

I am between fourteen and fifteen, I know the nature of an oath, the sheets belonged to my master John George Goldfrap , he is a Captain , I am his servant boy, I have lived with him three quarters of a year, the prisoner was my fellow servant and slept with me, the prisoner came up stairs half undressed on Friday three weeks, between six and seven, I asked him where he had been, I was in sleep when he went down, but I was awake when he came in again, he always called me up when he got up, and he said he had been to the necessary; then he dressed himself and went down, he had then all on but his coat, and his shoes were not buckled; when I went down the back part of the shutters were open, where the drawers were that had the linen in, and I went into the yard, and while I was in the yard he went out, I did not see him take any thing out, but I heard the door shut; when my master and mistress got up he did not come home, and my master said he would turn him away, we never heard any thing of him till he was taken up, we were sent for to the office in Litchfield-street about eleven o'clock, when I saw him at the office he was in custody.

Was there any thing produced when you were there at the office? - No, he told me himself that he had taken away my master's sheets to pawn.

How came he to tell you that? - I do not know.

Mr. Garrow. Whose house does Mr. Goldfrap lodge at? - At No. 8, he has taken it at three months, all the house.

Does nobody else live in it? - No.

These are ready furnished lodgings? - No, my master has taken all the house.

And furnished it himself? - No, Sir, it is a ready furnished house.

Does no person who belongs to the house, nor any servant belonging to them live in the house? - No.

The remainder of this Trial in the next Part, which will be published in a few days.

Reference Number: t17840526-99

THE WHOLE PROCEEDINGS ON THE KING's Commission of the Peace, Oyer and Terminer, and Gaol Delivery for the CITY of LONDON; AND ALSO The Gaol Delivery for the County of Middlesex; HELD AT JUSTICE HALL in the OLD BAILEY, On Wednesday the 26th of MAY, 1784, and the following Days;

Being the FIFTH SESSION in the Mayoralty of The Right Hon. ROBERT PECKHAM , Esq; LORD MAYOR OF THE CITY OF LONDON.

TAKEN IN SHORT HAND BY E. HODGSON, PROFESSOR OF SHORT-HAND; And Published by Authority.

NUMBER V. PART VIII.

LONDON:

Printed for E. HODGSON (the Proprietor) And Sold by J. WALMSLAY, No. 35, Chancery Lane, and S. BLADON, No. 13, Pater-noster Row.

MDCCLXXXIV.

[PRICE SIX-PENCE.]

THE WHOLE PROCEEDINGS UPON THE

KING's Commission of the Peace, Oyer and Terminer, and Gaol Delivery for the CITY of LONDON, &c.

Continuation of th e Trial of John Welch .

WILLIAM DERVIN sworn.

On the 14th of May, about seven in the morning, the prisoner came to me with a pair of sheets, I am a pawnbroker, he wanted to pledge them for twenty-five shillings, he said they belonged to one Mr. Chamberford, I asked his name, he said his name was William Warren , I asked him where he lived, he said it was nothing to me, I asked him several other questions, and he gave me very odd answers, he asked me if I would take them in, he asked me if I would chuse to stop them, and he then attempted to run away, I jumped over the counter and collared him, and took him to the Rotation-office in Litchfield-street.

Court. Are they new sheets? - They have never been used I believe.

ELIZABETH FRANCIS sworn.

(Deposes to the sheets.)

They are my master's property, he has the whole house.

Does any part of the family of the person he took it from live in the house? - Nobody but his family, they are his property, they are marked J. G. No. 4, and a dot over the letters.

The prisoner called two witnesses to his character.

GUILTY Of stealing to the value of 39 s.

Transported for seven years .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-100

620. ALEXANDER ELDER was indicted for burglariously and feloniously breaking and entering the dwelling house of John Malpas , on the 28th of April last, and burglariously stealing therein, two cotton gowns, value 20 s. and one silk cloak, value 5 s. the property of Hannah Richards .

Mr. Keys, Counsel for the Prosecution.

HANNAH RICHARDS sworn.

I lodge at John Malpas 's; Margaret Nowland lodges with me: I left my room on the 28th of April, a little after nine; I

double locked my door, and put my hand against it to be sure it was locked, and I am sure it was locked; I returned in about half an hour, and there was a great croud about the door, and the prisoner was amongst them, he was taken up into my room, and I came up to see if any thing was gone, and I found the room door had been broken open, and he took out my gowns out of his pocket, a cloak and a large brown bag, the things were left in my room, I have had them ever since.

(The things deposed to.)

Mr. Garrow, Prisoner's Counsel. Who are you? - I am a servant.

Who to? - Sir John Honeywood , I had not been there but nine or ten days, I came to London on the 29th of February.

How did you employ your time? - I went out to ironing, I lodge with Mrs. Nowland.

You said the door of the room was broke, how was it broke? - It was open, I locked it when I went out, I think it was broke open.

Court. Was any part of the door broke? - No.

Mr. Garrow. Who desired you to come here and say it was broke open? - Nobody.

You cannot tell who opened it? - No, the gowns were in the rooms when I went out.

There are a good many lodgers in the house? - I cannot say.

As full as a rabbit warren? - I cannot say.

Give a guess how many, twenty or thirty? - I never asked any questions about the lodgers.

Mr. Keys. Was the bolt of the door put back? - It was put back.

Court. Who keeps the key of the outward door of the house? - Mr. Malpas.

JOHN NOWLAND sworn.

Court. How old are you? - I was fourteen the first of last month.

Mr. Keys. Do you know the nature of an oath? - No.

Do you know for what purpose you come here? - To speak the truth, and tell what I saw.

What will happen to you if you speak false? - I will not speak any more than the truth.

Mr. Garrow. But if you should tell a lie, do you know what will be the consequence? - No, Sir.

Do you know that any mischief will happen to you? - No, Sir.

Have you never heard what is the consequence of false swearing? - No.

Court. I do not think he ought to be examined.

PRISONER's DEFENCE.

I had been at Marybone, and coming home several people were running by, and a little boy said that is he, and they took hold of me, I had nothing but my own property, I had a waistcoat in my pocket I went up stairs, the room was full of people, and they said they had found the things.

Court. Then you deny the fact of their being taken out of your pocket? - Entirely; I have had friends here every day.

GUILTY. Of stealing, but not of breaking and entering the dwelling house .

To be whipped , and confined to hard labour twelve months in the House of Correction .

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-101

621. JOHN KEY was indicted for stealing, on the 24th of April last, one linen handkerchief, value 2 s. the property of Ralph Price .

- PRICE brother to Ralph Price saw the prisoner pick his brother's pocket on Snow Hill, and drop the handkerchief after he pursued and took him, and never lost sight of him

GUILTY Transported for seven years .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. ROSE.

Reference Number: t17840526-102

622. MARY DAVIS was indicted for stealing on the 25th of April last, a pair of leather shoes, value 7 s. the property of Thomas Bullock Harvey .

NOT GUILTY .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. ROSE.

Reference Number: t17840526-103

623. CHARLES GOSSETT was indicted for stealing on the 29th of April , one Marseilles waistcoat, value 6 s. the property of John Williams .

GUILTY .

To be privately whipped .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. ROSE.

Reference Number: t17840526-104

624. RICHARD SANDERS and ANDREW HACKMAN were indicted for stealing on the 1st of May, one copper pot, value 5 s. two wicker baskets, value 1 d. nine china plates, value 3 s. three cups, value 2 d. three saucers, value 1 d. one tea kettle, value 6 d. two tin saucepans, value 6 d. five soup plates, value 4 d. one iron frying pan, value 6 d. one clothes brush, value 6 d. and one pair of bellows, value 3 d. the property of James Herring .

The prisoners were stopped by the watchmen with the property on them, which was deposed to.

BOTH GUILTY .

Each to be transported for seven years .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury, before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-105

625. MOSES PIKE was indicted for stealing, on the 7th of May , forty-one wooden deals, value 5 l. the property of Andrew Graham and John Count , in a certain barge on the navigable River of Thames .

ANDREW GRAHAM sworn.

I intrusted some deals to Mr. Sainsbury.

- SAINSBURY sworn.

Examined by Mr. Chetwood, Council for the Prosecution.

I was intrusted with some deals by Mr. Graham, and I brought them up in a lighter on the 5th of May, and I was afraid she would sink, and I put forty-one into the long-boat, and brought them to Limehouse-dock along side the barge; she lay in Limehouse-dock aground in the evening of the 5th of May, and a little after three in the morning I went to look after her, and I found the boat was gone, and I found it at Ratcliffe-cross empty; a man on the wharf informed me that the watchman was carrying some deals up to Ratcliffe watchouse; I went there and saw fifteen deals set up in the Narrow-street; the watchman had carried the other up to the watch-house.

Court. Do you know them? - Yes, I marked them with chalk; I am sure to the deals, there were five I had put marks on, and nine of them were numbered.

Mr. Peat, Prisoner's Council. They were marked with white chalk? - Yes, but I can easily distinguish them and swear to them.

WILLIAM CARTWRIGHT sworn.

I am a watchman at Ratcliffe, I know the prisoner, I saw him going along with a deal on his shoulder to the back door of his house, and there were some in a narrow place; he was stopped on suspicion, and carried to the watch-house with the deal.

Were they piled up against the wall? - The were some on one side and some on the other, they were put down on the ground, between the water-side and his house: we saw Mr. Sainsbury the next morning.

Did you shew him the very deal you had taken off that man's shoulder? - It was marked with three notches on one side, and one on the other, with a knife.

Sainsbury. I saw the cross the chalk mark.

PRISONER's DEFENCE.

My Lord, I live in Queen-street, and have lived there five years; the Saturday

night before this happened my yard had been robbed, my fowls and things were taken away, and they accused the watchman. I went along three parts of this alley, and there lay that deal, I took it up and carried it in, and the watchman took me.

The prisoner called three witnesses who gave him a very good character.

Court to Jury. This is made capital by a particular act of Parliament taking away the benefit of Clergy from such as shall steal to the value of 40 s. on the navigable River of Thames, &c. you know the exactness of the law requires, that every fact to constitute that which is precisely stated in the indictment, must be supported by evidence, and this evidence does not support the description of being upon the navigable River of Thames, therefore he must be acquitted of the capital part of the indictment.

GUILTY Of stealing .

Transported for seven years .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-106

626. RICHARD BRIGGS was indicted for stealing, on the 11th of May , six large hempen sacks, value 6 s. and twelve bushels of rye, value 24 s. the property of John Milward .

GUILTY .

Whipped .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-107

627. ELIZABETH BROWN was indicted for stealing, on the 3d of May , one cotton gown, value 4 s. one child's dimity cloak, value 12 d. and one man's shirt, value 2 s. the property of Daniel Bailey .

DANIEL BAILEY sworn.

About half after six, on the 28th of May, I sent my wife out to get me something to drink, I was in bed, and when she was gone I heard a person come in and go into the yard; nobody was in my apartment but myself, there were other lodgers up stairs.

ANN BAILEY sworn.

When I returned and was in the doorway, I saw the prisoner in the yard, the child's cloak was pinned to a gown, and the woman had half of the gown upon her shoulder, and the half part she was opening, it was pinned to the line to dry, and a shirt was unpinned, and the cloak; the shirt was not taken off the line, but the cloak was chucked into the necessary, within the door; I pinned the cloak and gown on myself: I asked the prisoner what she wanted.

PRISONER's DEFENCE.

I went into the yard, I asked leave of her lodger; the prosecutrix is a good for nothing hussey, she tells a thing that is as false as the child that is in her arms.

Court to Jury. With respect to the gown and the shirt, it is only an attempt to steal, but with respect to the cloak, if you are satisfied that was pinned to the gown, and could not fall off by accident, there was a sufficient removal to constitute a felony.

NOT GUILTY .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-108

628. DAVID RICHARDS was indicted for stealing, on the 5th day of May , one linen table cloth, value 15 s. three pair of cotton stockings, value 3 s. one muslin half handkerchief, value 3 s. three muslin neckcloths, value 3 s. one child's shirt, value 6 d. two bibs, value 6 d. one towel, value 3 d. and one bed quilt, value 20 s. the property of James Finney .

CHARLES CHINNERY sworn.

On the 5th of May, in the morning, just after three o'clock, I was in Tottenham-court-road,

and from information I went to a door of a coal vault, where some houses were building in John-street, and I found the prisoner there packing up some linen in a bed quilt, I took him, he endeavoured to escape and the things, we had a tustle, and then he pulled some small articles from his pockets and dropped them, after I had secured him we took the things and went to the watch-house along with the prisoner, the things were carried down to the Rotation Office in Litchfield-street; after we secured the prisoner we found another bundle in the same vault buried under some rubbish, they were carried to the watch-house, and they were then given to the prosecutor, being wet, by the Justice, we first marked them.

Mr. Garrow, Council for the prisoner. You went back and found a second parcel of things buried under some rubbish? - Yes.

Was it considerably buried? - No, so as to be out of sight.

You searched the prisoner? - Yes, we found a knife, a picklock key, and a stock-lock key in his pocket.

Did you try these keys that you found upon him with the place from whence these things were taken? - I never did, they were not tried as I know of.

What sort of place is it? - It is a garden from under a carpenter's shop.

Was there not a dog there? - Yes, there was a dog by the vault, and he met me, he was a very large and a very fierce dog, that dog has been in the place where these things were said to be stolen several years.

Could he get over the wall or not? - I do not know whether he could or not, it may be seven or eight feet.

Is there a dog in England that can take such a jump? - I do not know.

Perhaps he may? - Very likely he may.

The Jury will judge of your credit after that; was that door open? - It was fast.

What account did the prisoner give respecting these things before the magistrate and you? - He told me he only went in there to rest himself, he had been out upon the parole, he said he had been rambling about.

So you call rambling about, the parole, what idea do you annex to parole, there is something very curious in it I dare say? - I cannot rightly tell.

Court. There was no door to the vault? - None at all.

How far from the entrance of the vault was the dog? - About six yards.

What was the dog doing? - At the first of his seeing me he made up towards me, he came as from the vault door, I did not see him in the vault.

THOMAS DORREN sworn.

Coming home from work along John-street, a great dog jumped at me, the dog was down in the bottom of the vault, and as I was walking along the dog followed me, but could not get up.

How high was the wall? - Seven or eight feet, but the boys had made a way down.

Which way did the dog get up? - He could not get up at all, I never saw nothing but the dog.

Mr. Garrow. This dog is a very important person, my Lord, I assure you.

PHILIP QUINTIN sworn.

I was going my rounds at half past three o'clock, and I heard a cry watch! watch! I ran across the road, coming into John-street I saw the patrol have hold of the prisoner by the collar, I jumped off the paving, and the coachman was close to the prisoner, I took hold of him, the prisoner said, three or four buggers of you shall not; I took the piece in my hand and gave him a blow, the watchman took up the linen, I came back and jumped down, and found another parcel hid under the straw and rubbish, I carried it to the watch-house.

Mr. Garrow. Did you see the dog? - Yes, the dog did not fly at me.

What time in the morning was it? - Between three and four.

What day was it? - On Wednesday morning, the 5th of May.

It was pretty dark, I take it. - Not very clear, it was a cloudy morning.

Court to Prosecutor. Where was this linen before it was stolen? - It was in a yard inclosed with a wall of about seven or eight feet high, with a door to it where we carry out our goods backwards, that leads to a waste piece of ground, I am a carpenter.

How is that door fastened? - With a very strong lock on the inside, which locks into an iron staple, the key-hole goes through, there is no bolt on the inside.

Do you know any thing about this dog they have been talking about? - I bred him, I have had him about six years, the wall is about seven feet high, he is a very fierce dog, I am never in any danger when I let him loose; and every night about ten he is let loose.

Do you recollect whether that dog was in the yard the night before? - Yes.

Where is the key of that door that goes into the waste ground kept? - I think that night it was by the door, either hung up or laid down; there is a hole where cocks and hens go out, and I believe the dog got out there; I think it was big enough, and I saw some hair on it, and he met me in the yard at five o'clock, and that struck me how it was possible for him to get into my premises again.

Who usually locks the door? - Sometimes my servant, and sometimes my eldest boy who is about eleven: I cannot positively declare whether I did not take the key off the nail. When I saw the things I knew them.

How many people have you employed about your yard? - I have had two lately, but one constant these two years.

They of course are familiar with the dog? - Yes.

Your man had access to the key on all occasions? - Yes; I never saw the prisoner before.

Had he any acquaintance with the dog? - No.

MARY SHADE sworn.

I live opposite Mr. Finney; on Wednesday the 5th of May about a quarter after three I was looking out of my window, and I saw a man come over the prosecutor's wall with a bundle in his arms, I saw him rise by degrees, and he stept on the wall, I could hear the step of men, he pushed into the second vault, and there was a coachman came under the window, and asked the patrol where the watchman was; he seemed to have a drab coloured coat on, and they took him to the watch-house; afterwards I saw a large dog run thirty or forty times to these coal vaults in agony as if he wanted his master, and then I saw him go down a hole where the cocks and hens go, and hard set he was to get into that hole.

Mr. Garrow. So you conjectured that his agony was about his master? - Yes.

Who are you? - I am a married woman, my husband is a brick-maker, I work at tayloring, I have nothing but what I work for.

How did it chance that you was looking out of window at this time of morning? - My husband went to Kingstand the overnight after a job of work, and he did not come home, and I was afraid something had happened.

PRISONER's DEFENCE.

I was locked out, I went to the Pilgrim in Holborn, and called for a pint of beer, and I fell asleep, they said I must not keep them up, I went strolling up this place, and I went to lay down, and I saw a check apron with these things in it, and I was looking at them and the patrol came round and saw me, or else I was going to give information of them.

Jury to Slade. Do you know the person of the man at all that you saw get over the wall? - No.

What sort of a man was it? - I cannot say what sort of a person, only that he had a kind of a drab coloured coat.

The prisoner called one witness to his character, and said he was an ivory turner.

Prisoner. All the shopkeepers in London know me in the ivory way.

Mr. Garrow. I know several people did attend, and several have spoke to me about him.

GUILTY .

Transported for seven years .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-109

629. SUSANNAH WATTS was indicted for stealing, on the 22d of May, one silver watch, value 3 l. one shagreen case, value 3 d. and one pair of brass money scales, value 5 s. and three brass weights, value 6 d. the property of Christopher Taylor .

There was no evidence to affect the prisoner.

NOT GUILTY .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-110

630. DANIEL LOVE and JOHN COX were indicted for stealing, on the 25th of May , fifty-six pounds weight of lead, value 5 s. belonging to - Bliss , Esq . and then and there affixed to a certain building , against the statute.

BOTH NOT GUILTY .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-111

631. ELIZABETH MULLENS and ELIZABETH HARDING were indicted for stealing, on the 23d of April , one handkerchief, value 6 d. one guinea, value 21 s. and two half guineas, value 21 s. and 2 s. in monies numbered , the property of William Ollive .

BOTH NOT GUILTY .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-112

632. JOHN NEALE was indicted for stealing, on the 27th of May , one watch, with the inside case made of gold, and the outside case of shagreen, value 10 l. a gold chain, value 40 s. two stone seals set in gold, value 40 s. and one gold watch key, value 10 s. the property of Paul Orchard , Esq .

PAUL ORCHARD , Esq; sworn.

Coming out of the Pantheon on Thursday night about eleven, there was a vast crowd, and I saw this man as I was going on with two ladies, whom I was conducting to their carriages, and I was on my guard, and I saw him stop and look at my watch chain; one of the ladies, Lady Egremont, I handed into her carriage, and Mrs. Orchard was a good deal frightened, and I handed her into my chair, and that moment I felt a twitch at my watch, and I saw the prisoner take my watch, and the instant I seized him I saw him dropping it; I stooped to take it up, but there were a great many people more: I took the fellow by the throat, says I, I have lost my watch, but I will secure the villain; I gave him into the charge of a soldier that was there, and desired he would conduct him to the constable; he was carried to the round-house: I swore positively then to the man as I do now, there was nobody near me; I pitched upon him that moment, and I am sure it dropped from his hand and no other.

PRISONER's DEFENCE.

I never saw the watch, nor never touched it, I came up from Wapping, I was at work on board a ship, my brother lived in Welbeck-street, Marybone, and the gentleman challenged me.

GUILTY .

Transported for seven years .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-113

633. EDWARD WHITE was indicted for stealing, on the 5th of May , two plants called jurinams, value 5 s. and one shrub called a sweet-briar, value 1 s. the property of James Duff , Earl of Fife , then

and there standing and growing in a certain inclosed ground belonging to the said Earl of Fife.

ABRAHAM SYMES sworn.

I am servant to the Earl of Fife; on the 5th of May, at half past nine, I saw the prisoner standing behind the farm of the green-house plants, it was an inclosed garden, I went to shut up the frame. I asked who was there three times, he made no answer, and attempted to go over the wall by the water, he threw himself over the wall, and run very fast, I caught him by Whitehall stairs: three of the pots were stripped, and there were missing two jurinams and one sweet-briar, I saw them three hours before that.

Court. Is not it common for the family to cut them? - No.

Were the pots full before? - Yes.

Were the pots gone with the things? - Yes.

PRISONER's DEFENCE.

I was coming from my work, and I came by the centry, and this gentleman's servant saw me, and he hallooed to the centry to stop me, and they took me to the watch-house, I had nothing with me, I never was in the garden in my life.

Court. What was the value of the plants? - Six shillings.

Court to Jury. In this case the value is material, for the act under which this indictment is framed is, for the cultivation and better preservation of trees, roots, and plants, and that enacts, that if any person shall dig up, cut up, &c. to the value of five shillings, they shall be guilty of felony; so that there is no felony at all if the value is less than five shillings.

NOT GUILTY .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-114

634. WILLIAM FRAZIER was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 5th day of May , fourteen bushels of coals, value 10 s . the property of John Hurford , John Marshall , and William Stone .

JOHN MARSHALL sworn.

The coals are my property.

Mr. Garrow, Prisoner's Council. When were these things supposed to be lost? - Either on the 4th or fifth of May.

Did the late Mr. Hurford ostensibly and to the world appear to be your partner? - No, Sir.

WILLIAM NICHOLLS sworn.

On the 5th of May I was on board a ship at Blackwall, I was walking the deck, and I saw a barge go by, and I observed two men, and I looked at the prisoner, who was with the lighter, I thought him neither waterman or lighterman; I observed at the stern of the barge a small yawl, and saw a pair of oars and a piece of canvas, and a bag in her; we went down, and I saw a man step into the barge from No. 172, laying at the upper part of the shelf by Bow-creek, and he stuck his shovel in the mud, says I to the prisoner, young man, how came you to steal them coals; he said, Sir, I hope you will overlook it, it is nothing to what they do do in common; says I, I cannot overlook it, I am determined to suppress thieving if I can; says I, what do you do with these coals after you have got them; says he, I go to Greenwich and Deptford, and sell them at ten pence a bushel, and carry them out myself; I took him into custody, and carried him before the Justice; one John Nicholls , the lighterman, we cannot find.

Mr. Garrow. Who was he? - He was a lighterman to Mr. Marshall, the prisoner is no waterman's boy, he is not a boy employed on the River Thames.

Did not the prisoner tell you that Nicholls gave him these coals for rowing in? - No, Sir, never, he gave four shillings for the coals to Nicholls by his own confession.

Court. Then there is an end of it.

Court to Prisoner. Although there is no evidence here to affect you, do not fancy that what you have done is innocent.

NOT GUILTY .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-115

635. JOHN TATE was indicted for stealing, on the 2d of May , one linen handkerchief, value 2 s. the property of Henry Beswick .

The prosecutor coming down Chick-lane, was informed the prisoner had his handkerchief; and William Whiteway saw the prisoner and five or six more, and the prisoner said, damn me, now is the time, and he hopped over with his crutch and picked the prosecutor's pocket; Whiteway caught the prisoner, and he said, damn your bloody eyes, you will suffer for this, and used very bad expressions.

GUILTY .

Transported for seven years .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-116

636. WILLIAM PERRY and JAMES BELLAMY were indicted for stealing, on the 6th of May , one wooden cask, value 2 s. and forty gallons of train oil, value 3 l. the property of George Brown and Thomas Davis .

BOTH GUILTY .

Each to be privately whipped , and imprisoned in Newgate one month .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-117

637. JAMES WINGROVE was indicted for feloniously assaulting William Grove the elder , on the King's highway, on the 9th of May , and putting him in fear and danger of his life, and taking from his person and against his will 2 s. in monies numbered , his monies.

The witnesses examined apart at the request of Mr. Garrow, Prisoner's Council.

WILLIAM GROVE , the elder, sworn.

I was robbed last Saturday three weeks at night, I am sure of that, I was going home with my cart from Hounslow to Hamworth, I live at Shepperton-green; it was about eleven at night, I cannot say justly, but as nigh as I can guess; James Wingrove stopped me on the road, I knew him when he was apprentice.

Court. Then you knew his person perfectly well? - Not just that minute.

Then we will say that a man stopped you on the Hamworth road, about three miles from Hounslow? - I was not quite off the Heath.

Did he overtake you or meet you? - He came achwart the road, met me like, there were three men on horse-back; this James Wingrove clapped a pistol to my breast and demanded my money.

Were you walking or in the cart? - I was sat down in my cart, he damned me, and said make haste, I told him I was lame, I would make all the haste I could; I gave him two shillings, he asked me if that was all I had, I told him I had a few half pence in my waistcoat pocket; then he put his hand over to my left-hand breeches pocket, and he asked me what I had there, I told him I had some parcels of writings, which would do him no good, and he did not take them; he then went away from me.

How were the other two men employed at this time? - They stood at a distance off, they all three rode off together.

What sort of a night was it? - A very clear night.

Was it moon-light? - No, it was not, but the sky was very clear indeed.

You say you did not at the first know that that was the person? - I did not at first in my fright, but I know it was he that robbed me very well, I knew him very well

when we took him, that was the man I know that had my money.

Did you know him at the time of the robbery? - I knew I could know him again.

But you did not know who it was at the time? - No, I did not know then, I was frightened.

How soon after was he taken? - A quarter of an hour was the outside.

Was any body else taken but him? - No, the others rode away.

How was he taken? - Two other men that had been robbed came up and followed him, and told us to follow, and we did; they took this Wingrove, and the others rode away and left us.

Did you see him taken? - Yes, I helped to take him.

What did you pursue with your cart? - Yes, we had not above a mile to go, and we gallopped the cart as fast as we could.

And did you in your cart overtake him on horseback? - They had stopped him, and knocked him off his horse, the other men had, we carried him two miles in the cart afterwards, they would make me carry him.

Mr. Garrow, Prisoner's Council. Are these two gentlemen here, Mr. Grove? - No.

How does that happen? - I do not know.

If they are not here they are not entitled to any of the reward you know? - I do not know.

How long had he been knocked down before you came? - Just that moment.

Which way did they ride after they stopped you? - They rode away for Feltham.

So they rode on so leisurely? - No, No, they did not ride so leisurely.

Who were these two men, let us hear a little about them? - They are not here, they live at Sunbury, one is Humphries and the other Marchant.

What business are they, are not they a sort of moon light men? - It was not moonlight.

Are not they a couple of smugglers? - They may as far as I know.

They go for that they say? - I do not know.

So they told you they had been robbed? - Yes.

Did they attend at the Justice's the next day? - Yes.

Did they give any charge against Mr. Wingrove? - I do not know what you mean by charges.

I believe you do, you are pretty well used to charges; did these two smugglers of your's give any charge against this prisoner? - They are no smugglers of mine.

They are friends of your's? - They are no friends of mine.

Then these two fellows, did they make any charge against Mr. Wingrove for robbing them? - Yes, they did make a charge.

Do not shuffle, Master Grove? - I do not know what you say.

I will make you know directly; upon your oath did not these two men attend the next day at Mr. Taylor's, and say that Wingrove was not one of the men that robbed them? - He is the man that robbed me, I will tell you the truth, he was the man that robbed me, I did not hear them say that he was not the man.

Upon your oath did not they say it? - No, they did not say it, I never heard them say it, that he was not the man that robbed them, I can swear that very safely, I never heard them say any such word as he was not the man.

What did they say about the robbery? - They said he was one of the men in the company.

Is that true that they said he robbed them? - They said he was one in the company.

That they swore? - Yes.

Was he committed for robbing them? - No, he was committed for robbing me.

That is pretty singular you know? - I do not understand the law, I never was in it before.

Who were the two men that robbed you a little while ago? - I never was robbed before.

No, Mr. Grove! - Yes, I have been robbed, but I do not know who they were, and pilfered and too much robbed.

Who were those two men that robbed you? - I do not know.

Have you never said that you knew them? - No, I know nothing about them.

Have you never said that you had been robbed some time ago by two men, that you have never prosecuted them, that they were good friends, and that if you called on them at any time, you could have a guinea of them? - You know, Sir, that is wrong; no, no, Sir, I did not say that I could have money when I pleased, I did not say that I was good friends with the people that robbed me, I swear that I never did say that; they wanted me to screen this here man, and said they would be friends to me; his brother and another man came to me several times.

Court. Did you never say so? - No, never in my life, I never said such a word.

Did you never say such a word? - No.

Mr. Garrow. I will put it now most unequivocally to you, and ask you upon your oath, whether you have never said to Mr. James Clarke by name, that you had been robbed some time since by two men, whom you have not prosecuted, who lived at Brentford; that they were good friends, and that if you called on them at any time, you could have a guinea of them? - No, never in my life; no, no, they mistook, they came to me and wanted me not -

I ask you a plain question; have you ever said that that I have stated to you? - No.

You never have? - No.

You know the Cock at Stains? - Yes, very well.

What conversation have you had about Wingrove there? - I do not know any more than this stick.

You know that it is not every day that one gets forty pounds for hanging a man; had you no conversation at the Cock at Stains about the reward for conviction? - You ask a hundred questions, I will answer you what I know; no, not about no reward, I have been there, and there they have been asking me about it, that is, we drank together, and I said to him, as I might say to you, I do not know any thing about it; I did not say any such thing, I never said any thing about any reward, that I can say, I have said nothing about no reward.

You remember being at Clerkenwell-green last week? - Yes.

Do you remember having any conversation with any body there upon this subject? - No, no more than any body may speak, and I may speak.

What have you said? - I do not know.

You are sure it was of a Saturday night you was robbed? - Yes I am sure.

Did you see the other two men when you came up to the prisoner? - No.

He was the first man that you came up with? - No, no.

Had you passed any man before you came to him? - I passed no man.

He presented his pistol to you? - Are, he did at first.

Did you find any pistol upon him? - No.

Did you find him in company with any other two men? - He was in company then with two men, but when he was taken, they were rode away.

Was he the same man that took the canvas bag from your son? - Yes.

Did you find that bag upon him? - I did not search him.

Was not he searched in your presence? - I saw no bag, I believe there was no bag found upon him, I do not know that there was.

Do you know there was not? - I believe there was not, I do not know.

It was May-day? - Yes.

It was the day the people dance round the may-poles? - Let them dance if they would, I was lame, I could not dance, I saw chimney-sweepers dance.

What, that day? - Very like it might.

Did you or did you not? - I might.

Did you see the milk people going about? - I saw all folks going about.

What makes you recollect it was May-day? - I told you it was last Saturday three weeks ago.

How do you recollect it was May-day? - I do not know whether it was May-day,

I had been in town that day, I had been twice in town before.

What is your business? - Boss-maker and broom-maker.

Was you as drunk that night as you are now, how much have you been drinking to-day? - I might drink a pint with my victuals, I will not swear any thing about it.

How much gin? - I drank no gin.

What other spirits? - I do not love any other spirits, so you are not right there now.

Did you go to the place where this man was knocked down the next morning? - Yes I did, to find his pistol or something or another, I found nothing.

Did you find your two shillings? - I wish I had.

Forty pounds is better than two shillings? - No, I do not know that it is, upon a wrong cause.

When you came up to him you knew it was James Wingrove ? - I know he was the man that robbed me.

Did you know, I say, whether it was James Wingrove ? - I know it was the man that robbed me.

Court. That is not an answer, what did you say? - I did not know that it was him, I soon found out it was James Wingrove , I found it out going along upon the road.

When did you first find it was James Wingrove ? - I would not believe it was him at first.

Court. Did he first tell you his name was James Wingrove ? - No, he did not, he told me he knew us, and I said, I know you too, then I knew him when he was carrying along the road, I would not believe it was James Wingrove , because though I thought he was, I was not quite sure he was; he said he was James Wingrove , and I could hardly believe him.

What did you say when you went before Mr. Taylor the magistrate? - I said how that was the man that robbed me.

Before you went there, had you told any body you did not know him? - No, I can swear that v ery safely.

In the course of the day that you went before the magistrate did you? - No, that I did not say any such thing, I never said any such thing.

Did you always say that you had lost two shillings? - Yes, I said I did not know whether it was a shilling and a guinea at first, till I came to look at my money.

Was not it your doubt whether it was not a halfpenny? - No, it was not.

Had you a guinea in your pocket to lose? - No.

Then how could you doubt it if you had not a guinea to lose? - No.

How could you doubt it? - Not till I looked over my money.

Court. Had you a guinea in your bag that day? - Yes, I had, I did not know justly, till I came to consult where I had taken money.

Then you never did tell any body, that you did not know what you had lost, or that you did not know if it was a halfpenny? - I never said that.

WILLIAM GROVE , the younger, sworn.

I am son to William Grove , the elder, I was with my father when he was robbed, it was last Saturday night three weeks.

Where? - In Hamworth parish, just as you go off the Heath.

What time of night was it? - Nigh about eleven o'clock.

How many men robbed you? - One.

Did he meet you or overtake you? - He overtook us.

Was he on horseback? - On horseback, I was upon a horse driving the team, and my father was in the cart; the man on horseback overtook me, he asked me where that road went to, I told him, and he asked me how far it was to Chertsey, and I told him about six miles, and he asked me what money I had, he took hold of my horse's bridle, and put a pistol up to my cheek, and I told him I had none; he said I had, and I said I had nothing but a note in my pocket, and I took it out.

Did he do any thing to your father? -

He then went away from me and went to my father.

What did he say or do to your father? - He asked him for his money.

What did your father say? - He told him he had but two shillings in his pocket, and he took it and went away.

What did he do with the pistol after he robbed you? - I do not know, I never saw any more of it after he put it to my check.

Did he take any thing from you? - Yes, Sir, a note in a purse.

What note was it? - It was of no account, it was only a bill of parcels of some cheese which I had in my cart.

Was it a moon-light night? - It was not dark, but it was not moon-light.

After he had left you and left your father which way did he ride? - He rode to the back part of the cart, away from me behind.

He rode the opposite way then to what you were going? - Yes.

I suppose you were frightened at the pistol, that made you let one man rob you? - I do not know I was frightened, it was an ugly tool to be frightened with; there were two more with him.

How came you to forget that till now? - I have mentioned it now.

How happened you did not mention it before? - This is the man that robbed me; I mentioned it to Mr. Taylor, the Justice, that there were two more men.

How did these two men employ themselves while the other was robbing you? - One stood at the tail of the cart, and the other stood at the head of the fore horse.

Did the man at the tail of the cart do or say any thing while this man was robbing you both? - No, Sir, nothing at all.

Stood looking on? - Yes; this man ordered the man that stood foremost to go and take what my father had, but he did not take it, and the other went round immediately and took it himself.

Who was this man that robbed you? - James Wingrove .

Did you know that at the time? - No, Sir, I did not, in the morning I knew it was him, we took him directly afterwards.

Then you did not know it that night? - No, Sir, I heard the people say so.

Who said so? - I do not know their names.

Did your father tell you that night that it was James Wingrove ? - No.

Nor any body else? - No.

Was he the first that told you the next morning it was James Wingrove ? - No.

Then in fact you only heard the name of the man that was in custody was James Wingrove ? - Yes.

Your father knew no more about it than you did? - I knew him no otherwise.

Did your father know him any otherwise? - I do not know; he was taken in a quarter of an hour by Mr. Humfreys and Mr. Marchant; they all three came by me again, and followed the cart, and got before me.

All three? - They were all together when they came by me again.

Were they together when this man was taken? - Yes.

Did the other two make any resistance? - I was not there just at the present.

If they were all together when this man was taken, what became of the other two? - They made their escape.

Then this man was not found alone, the other two had not rode off and left him in the lurch? - No.

Then the first thing your father said to him was, that he had but two shillings in his pocket? - Yes.

He told them that before he took the money? - Yes, he told them he was but a poor man, and had but two shillings.

Mr. Garrow. How many horses had you in the team? - I had two drawing the cart, and one I rode.

Had these people passed you the second time before Humfreys and the other gentleman came up? - Humfreys came by me before this.

I suppose the reason they got off sooner than you, you was heavy laden? - I gallopped

as hard as I could, and the cart too.

It was a cart with a tail? - Yes, about ten hundred weight.

Was you with your father when he was robbed some short time ago? - No, not as I know on.

Did you never tell any body it was Sunday night? - No.

Did you never say it was on May-day? - No.

Did you never say it was the 9th? - No.

What coloured clothes are you to have out of the reward of forty pounds? - I am to have no clothes.

Did not your father promise you a suit of new clothes if you would stick to him? - I never heard any such word.

Who told you it would be better to have two indictments against this man, in case one should fail? - Nobody.

Mr. Garrow. Go and sit down by your father, and do not either of you go out of Court.

PRISONER's DEFENCE.

I never saw them at all till they came up to me, when the people had knocked me off my horse; and these people came up to me, and this man stamped on my head, and said he would butcher me, and said damn his eyes, kill him.

FRANCIS NASMITH sworn.

I am a watch-maker at Staines; I was present when these people went to be examined, and I heard a man come up to the prosecutor and ask him what he was robbed of; and he said it might be a guinea, or a shilling, or it might be two halfpence, he was not sure; and he said he did not know that that was the man: he said he was robbed, but he was not positive that that was the man that robbed him.

JAMES CLARKE sworn.

I am a printer by trade, I live in Oxford-street; last Sunday was a fortnight Richard Wingrove came to me, and in consequence of his information I saw Groves, and we entered into conversation respecting the robbery, and during that conversation he informed me that this was not the first time that he had been robbed; that he had been robbed by two men whom he knew, he said these two men were great master carpenters, and lived at Brentford, and he could go to them at any time, be well entertained, and have two or three guineas: if I was dying, them are the words. I never knew any thing amiss of the prisoner; I always understood him as an honest man.

FREDERICK DISMERRITT , Esq; sworn.

I am son of Colonel Dismerritt , the prisoner was a servant of our's at the time this robbery was said to be committed; about a week before he said he was going to Windfor to see his wife and family; he has two children at Windsor, and one with his mother; he was a true, faithful, honest servant with us; he was entrusted with every thing, even the keys to go to my father's bureau.

Mr. Garrow. After this, my Lord, I shall not go further; I only did it to set the character of this man right; I do not do it to meet this indictment.

SUSAN FLETCHER sworn.

I live at Uxbridge, I chare at Colonel Dismerrit 's, I heard old Groves say last Friday, that he had taken a highwayman, and there was forty pounds depending, and that he would prosecute him.

NOT GUILTY .

Mr. Garrow. I have two applications to make to the Court; one, that the constable may restore the prisoner's watch, and the other, that these two witnesses, the father and son, may be both committed to Newgate; I think it my duty to ask this, as it is a very foul perjury, and I will undertake to prosecute them at my own expence.

Court. Let Groves the elder and younger be both committed to Newgate till they find sureties.

Groves the Elder. This is very hard, my Lord, to lose my money and go to prison too.

638. The said JAMES WINGROVE was again indicted for feloniously assaulting William Grove the younger , on the King's highway, on the 9th day of May last, and putting him in fear and danger of his life, and feloniously taking from his person and against his will one canvas bag, value 1 d. his property.

There being no further evidence, the prisoner was ACQUITTED .

Mr. Garrow. My Lord, we decline for the present prosecuting these men for perjury, and I am humbly to pray for a copy of the indictment.

Court to William Grove the elder and younger. The conduct of each of you in this cause has been extremely reprehensible, the best light in which your conduct can stand is, that of rashly charging a man in a case where there is a reward; and you may think yourselves very fortunate that the prisoner and his friends decline an immediate prosecution for perjury; therefore, I shall not order you to be detained, but leave the prisoner to take such remedy as his Council shall advise; and if it is applied for, I shall order a copy of the indictment.

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-118

639. JOHN MESSENGER and EDWARD SECKERY were indicted for that they, with one James Barron , and divers other persons, to the number of three hundred, and more on the 30th day of April last with force and arms, unlawfully, riotously, and tumultuously, did assemble together, to the disturbance of the public peace, and with force and arms feloniously, unlawfully, and with force, did begin to demolish and pull down a certain dwelling house of one Dominick Adlum against the statute .

A Second Count for again assembling together, and beginning to demolish and pull down a certain other dwelling house of and belonging to the said Dominick.

- YOUNG sworn.

On the 30th of April about ten at night, I was going up Bridge's-street, and I saw a great mob, and heard a noise in White Hart-yard , I went there, and I saw the prisoner Seckery with a great stick in his hand, whether it was wooden or iron I cannot tell; with it he was beating away against the door of the house which is called the Jerusalem, which Mr. Adlum keeps, some ladies came up to him and asked him to come away, and at the end of White Hart-yard, I and Roberts laid hold of him, he was then coming out of the mob, he had thrown down the stick, he hallooed out here, here, here, they are taking me; we took him to the watch-house, I saw him striking with a bar against the door which was broke in, and against the fanlight over the door.

Mr. Peat Counsel for the Prisoners. At what hour did you see the prisoner? - It was then about ten.

Was you there before you saw him? - No.

- ROBERTS sworn.

I saw Seckery with several others, knocking with a bar, be it iron or wood, against the door and windows, the one pair of stairs windows were totally demolished, the furniture was broke.

Court. You were with the last witness? - Yes.

How came you to see so much more than he did? - The mob assembled, and they were crying out Fox for ever, and we drew our cutlasses and took him to Covent Garden watch-house, and they would not let us in; I saw the furniture broke, the parlour windows, frames and glass totally demolished.

Was that done before you brought the prisoner away or after? - It appeared to be done before.

All your companion saw, was beating against the door and the fanlight; relate particularly what you saw? - I saw the windows totally broke, and boys picking up the glass to throw against the one pair of stairs.

Did you see that before you took the prisoner into custody? - Yes, and the windows were totally out, and the street door open.

Upon your oath Sir, are you sure that at that time you saw any part of the window totally out? - Upon my oath, it was all entirely out.

What when you took that prisoner? - Yes, and the street door was broke to pieces, and the fanlight was broke to pieces, I rather suspected it was an iron bar.

Do you know any thing of the cause of this? - I heard a gentleman met with a young girl, and went to have something to drink.

Was that told you as the cause of this, the common course of a gentleman taking a girl there? - Yes, as I understood, and that she was either a relation of the gentleman, or of some friend of his; I went into the house, there were some Covent Garden constables there, and I enquired the cause.

I once more ask you upon your oath, whether you saw any part of the window frame broke to pieces? - I saw the window entirely broke to pieces, and the door likewise.

Mr. Peat. You belong to the office too? - Yes.

How long have you known the owner of the house, this Mr. Adlum? - I have seen him before.

Have you and he had frequent conversations since upon this business? - I do not know whether I have seen the man once or twice before the bill was preferred.

Do you say it was the prisoner Seckery that beat out the window? - He was assisting with several others, he was breaking the window, he was one that assisted in breaking the window and the door; I did not see Seckery in the house.

Upon your oath, how often have you seen the prosecutor since this accident happened? - I believe about two or three times before we found the bill.

Has any promise been made you relative to this business? - I never received a farthing, nor no proposal, nor any promise made to me; I never spoke to the prisoner to the best of my knowledge in my life.

Court to Young. You gave an account of all you saw? - I gave an account of all I saw Seckery do.

You know you are upon your oath; did you see any part of the window frame beat out? - I saw a deal of wood that was laying on the ground at the time.

Did you observe where that wood could have come from? - The window at the front of the parlour I did observe at the time.

Why did not you tell us that? - I only related what I saw the prisoner do.

Do you know any thing of the cause of this? - Only what I heard.

Mr. Peat to Prosecutor. You are the master of this convenient house in White Hart-yard? - I was then.

What money have you received at any time as a compensation for the damage that was supposed to be done by that young man, or some other person, to your house? - None, not a farthing.

Recollect yourself; I have a croud of witnesses that can prove the fact. - I received money for my consent to admit them to bail, I did not receive it on any other account.

The prisoner Seckery called five witnesses, who gave him a very good character.

Court to Jury. In point of law, the mere breaking open a door, or breaking a glass window, is certainly not within the meaning of this statute; God forbid that that which is punishable in another way, by civil action for breach of the peace, should be construed into a felony: in order to come within the meaning of this act of Parliament, it is necessary there should be something

which manifests a serious intention to demolish and pull down the house; the words of the act are,

"demolish and pull

"down, or begin to demolish and pull

"down, any dwelling house," and as to the meaning of the latter words, if the house was half pulled down, it would be a doubt if these words had reference to the other half: and it must be such an act as clearly manifests, that this is a damage to the house itself, to the freehold of the house, and not the breaking of the door or window; but it has been held, that the breaking of the window frames is that kind of beginning of the demolition of the house within the statute, and of that there was not a single syllable said at first. If you are clearly satisfied, that before this boy was taken away the house was began to be pulled down, you will find him guilty; if you think it went no farther than Young first described, you will acquit him.

JOHN MESENGER , EDWARD SECKERY ,

NOT GUILTY .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-119

640. EDWARD TURNER was indicted for feloniously assaulting Richard Croxton on the King's highway, on the 27th of May , and putting him in fear, and taking from his person and against his will, one silver watch, value 3 l. and 5 s. in monies numbered , his property.

Richard Croxton deposed, that going along Kingsland-road , about half past nine at night of the 27th of May, he suspected two men that were before him, and he ran and fell down, and they came over him and robbed him; they had a weapon, but could not say what weapon, and did not know either of the men; as soon as they were gone, he got up, and cried stop thief! and presently after the prisoner was taken in a field; he was searched, but nothing of the prosecutor's found upon him.

John Beslatt and his brother apprehended the prisoner, who was running with another man, and before they took him, he said to the other man, damn my eyes, if we do not cut across those fields, we shall be hobbled, one of them fell down twice and dropped a bayonet, and he was taken; he denied the affair, till some gentlemen said he had better confess, and then he said -

Court. I must not hear what he said after that.

The prisoner called six witnesses, who gave him a very good character.

NOT GUILTY .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-120

641. ISAAC CASH was indicted (with John Stanley and John Mears ) for feloniously assaulting William Heartley on the King's highway, on the 18th of May , and putting him in fear, and feloniously taking from his person and against his will, one iron key, value 2 d. three guineas, value 3 l. 3 s. three half crowns, value 7 s. 6 d. and 6 s. in monies numbered , his property.

The prisoner was sick when Stanley and Mears were tried, and they being acquitted, there was no evidence against this prisoner, and he was ACQUITTED .

642. The said ISAAC CASH was again indicted (with the said John Stanley and John Mears ) for feloniously assaulting William Prior , on the King's highway, on the 18th of May , and putting him in fear, and taking from him one linen handkerckief, value 1 s. and one guinea, value 1 l. 1 s. his property.

On this indictment also the prisoner was ACQUITTED .

Reference Number: t17840526-121

643. WILLIAM THOMPSON , otherwise PETER SMITH was indicted for that he on the 5th of May , feloniously did falsly make, forge, and counterfeit, and cause and procure to be falsly made, forged, and counterfeited, a certain bill of exchange, purporting to be drawn by one William Smith , directed to Benjamin Bodington , and Co. payable at five days sight to Peter Smith , or his order, for 18 l. 10 s. 6 d. and accepted by Benjamin Bodington and Co. with intent to defraud Robert Hughes .

A second Count for publishing same with the like intention.

A Third Count for forging an acceptance to the said bill of exchange, purporting to be the acceptance of the said Benjamin Bodington and Co. with the like intention.

A fourth Count for publishing the same with the like intention.

A fifth Count for forging an indorsement on the said bill of exchange in the name of the said Peter Smith , with the like intention.

A sixth Count for publishing the same with the like intention.

ROBERT HUGHES sworn.

I am a slop-seller in Broad-street Radcliffe-cross, the prisoner at the bar came to my shop on the 5th of May about two in the afternoon, he asked me what was become of the next door neighbour, finding the house empty, and he enquired after some other neighbours; being in a sailor's dress, I asked him where he came from, he said from Plymouth; I asked him what he wanted; he said have you got any broad cloth; I said do you want to buy clothes; he said yes; he pitched on a colour, I sent for a taylor to measure him, he shewed me the bill at that time, and said he was just come from Plymouth, and that he had been at Boddington's that morning, and had it accepted; he told me likewise, that he served his time with one Captain Payne , whom I knew very well; he said he had been on board his ship, and he knew a person of the name of Fox; he said he lodged the corner of Dean-street, at one Mr. Turner's, after the taylor had measured him for the clothes, I said, young man, you are a stranger to me, you must leave me some money; he says, I will leave you the bill; I looked at it, and says I, it is not accepted, you said, you had had it accepted; yes, says he it is, and he turned the back of the bill, where it is written, London, May the 5th, 1784, accepted Benjamin Bodington and Co. says he give me a pen and ink, and I will indorse it, he had a pen and ink given him, and he wrote his name Peter Smith ; I then left him in the shop, and thought I would go and make enquiry where he said he was acquainted; I went to see for Captain Payne , I came from thence, and I went to Hanke's, the Waterman's, to enquire after him; I went to the public house, the people told me he did not lodge there, but he had been there and dined, and they looked for him to come back again, when I came back, the things were all tied up in a handkerchief, and my servant gave me the bill of parcels, and the things; I then said to him, I rather doubt this bill; he said he would go with me to Mr. Bodington's, I took the handkerchief and the bill of parcels packed up as it is now, I did not look into it, but went away with it, he went with me to his lodgings, as he went with me to Mr. Bodington's he wanted to stop by the way, and to drink; when we came there, he says, by God I will not go in with you, now I see you mistrust me, yes, says I, you shall go, I said, I shall have you to look for when I come out again; a man who said he was a ticket porter, said he would go for me, I sent him into Mr. Bodington's, the prisoner was present, and the man came back, and said, you must go to No. 15; he then went with me to the compting house, and I shewed the bill to a gentleman there that was one of the clerks, he looked at it, and said it was a bad bill: the prisoner was present; the prisoner made some frivolous saying, but the words I cannot particularly say, the clerk desired I would stop, and he would call one of the gentlemen out, and he called Mr. Betsworth, one of the partners,

he was rather angry, and he said, he was a rogue and a villain, and insisted on my charging him with an officer; when he was at our house, he had put on a silk shag waistcoat, and I told him in Mr. Bodington's yard, you know you have not paid me for the things, give me it again; he did so, except a pair of white cotton stockings and a pair of silver sleeve buttons; we came out into Mark-lane, an officer was at hand, and we took him to the counter that night: the prisoner sent me two letters from the Compter, soliciting me to see him.

Court. Do you know his hand writing? - Not for certain.

(The bill of Exchange produced.)

Have you had it ever since? - Yes, except one or two days that it was in Mr. Johnson's hands, I wrote my name on it first, I am sure that is the bill of exchange I had from the prisoner.

(Read.)

"No. 130, Exchange 18 l. 10 s. 6 d.

Plymouth, April 15, 1784.

Gentlemen, at five days sight please to pay Peter Smith , or his order, wages due, as per advice, for, Gentlemen, your most obedient humble servant, William Smith , Captain."

Directed

"To Mess. Bodington and Co. Merchants, in Mark-lane, London: Accepted, Benjamin Boddington and Co." under it wrote

" Peter Smith ."

Prisoner. Whether I presented that bill to him on any demand, or whether the goods that were packed up, were on account of that bill? - They certainly were packed up on the credit of the bill.

Court to Hughes. Are you sure that he told you that he had been at Mr. Bodington's to get it accepted that morning? - I made a minute soon after.

Court. Look at your note to refresh your memory upon that point. - (Looks at his note book.) It is so here.

Then you are clear both from your recollection and the minute you made at the time, that he said he had been at Mr. Bodington's to get it accepted that morning? - Yes.

JOSEPH LEE GOODWIN sworn.

I am clerk to Mess. Bodingtons, the firm of the house is Benjamin and Thomas Bodington and Betsworth; I was not present any part of the transaction, I only attend from the house to say that the acceptance on the bill is not the hand writing of any of the partners belonging to that house.

Have any of the clerks of the house ever used to accept bills for the house? - No, Sir, they do not.

Is that the hand writing of any clerk in the house? - It is not like the hand writing of any clerk in the house.

How many persons are there in the house? - Henry Jackson , myself, and a young man of the name of Crippen; it is certainly not like the hand writing of any of the three.

The remainder of this Trial in the next Part which will be published in a few Days.

Reference Number: t17840526-121

THE WHOLE PROCEEDINGS ON THE KING's Commission of the Peace, Oyer and Terminer, and Gaol Delivery for the CITY of LONDON; AND ALSO The Gaol Delivery for the County of Middlesex; HELD AT JUSTICE HALL in the OLD BAILEY, On Wednesday the 26th of MAY, 1784, and the following Days;

Being the FIFTH SESSION in the Mayoralty of The Right Hon. ROBERT PECKHAM , Esq; LORD MAYOR OF THE CITY OF LONDON.

TAKEN IN SHORT HAND BY E. HODGSON, PROFESSOR OF SHORT-HAND; And Published by Authority.

NUMBER V. PART IX.

LONDON:

Printed for E. HODGSON (the Proprietor) And Sold by J. WALMSLAY, No. 35, Chancery Lane, and S. BLADON, No. 13, Pater-noster Row.

MDCCLXXXIV.

[PRICE SIX-PENCE.]

THE WHOLE PROCEEDINGS UPON THE

KING's Commission of the Peace, Oyer and Terminer, and Gaol Delivery for the CITY of LONDON, &c.

Continuation of the Trial of William Thompson .

HENRY CLARK sworn.

I am apprentice to Mr. Hughes; when the prisoner came into my master's shop, I was not in the way, but was called to fetch the man to measure him for a suit of clothes, the man came, and his measure was taken; after his measure was taken, my master asked him to leave some earnest towards his clothes, and he told him he would leave the note, which my master seemed agreeable to; he then called for a pen and ink, in order to indorse it, and he signed Peter Smith , in my presence, on the back of the note; after he had indorsed the note, my master went to enquire after him; before he indorsed the note, he put on a shag waistcoat, and after my master was gone, he looked out some other clothes, and told me to make a bill of these things which he looked out in the name of William Thompson ; after I wrote it, he took the pen out of my hand, and he signed William Thompson at the bottom of it; says he, do you know what I do that for, that is as much as to say I will pay the bill; after my master came in, he told him it was a little odd that the bill should be accepted on the back; the prisoner said there was no room on the front; my master said it required very little room to write a bill, accepted; and then asked him who accepted it, and the prisoner at the bar said Mr. Bodington himself accepted it.

Court. Are you sure of that? - Yes, Sir; my master told him he should be glad if he would go with him to Mr. Bodington's, and they both went directly, they did not stop three minutes.

Court. Then this conversation about the acceptance was after your master came back? - Yes.

Prisoner. I have no questions to ask him.

Court to Prisoner. The charge now against you is, forging an acceptance in the name of Benjamin Bodington , and for uttering and publishing that acceptance as true, knowing it to be forged; what have you to say in your own defence.

PRISONER's DEFENCE.

I am innocent; on the 5th of May very early, between seven and eight, going over London bridge, I promiscuously found this piece of paper, and I thought it was of consequence; then the indorsement, or the acceptance was on the back; I read the bill,

and found it in the name of Bodington, in whose employ I formerly failed in my infant years, with Captain Shepherd ; I was then in distress, I went down to Ratcliffe-cross, to enquire for one Mr. Elme, on going to this house, I enquired for this gentleman, the gentleman told me he was not there; I ordered some things and told him he should be paid, I said I had a bill in my pocket, but did not know whether it was a true one or not, I told him I believed it was good for it had been accepted that morning seemingly, by the date; I did not acquaint him I had been at Mr. Bodington's; he went out, the young man was making out a bill of parcels, that gentleman came in; I went with him to Mr. Bodington's accordingly: had I drawn this bill, or forged it, or known it to be forged, I must have had a little regard for my life to have gone to this gentleman; I went in before this gentleman, I told them at Mr. Bodington's I found the bill; if the gentleman can say to the reverse, I leave it to your Lordship.

Court to Hughes. Did he go into Mr. Bodington's before you? - I cannot say.

Did he say at Mr. Bodington's, at the compting-house, that he had found the bill? - No, he said before the Lord Mayor that he found it in the cart-way.

Prisoner. I have no witnesses at this present period; I am a poor person in London, I have served from the commencement of this present war; I have a poor mother, and she is sick: Captain Paine and Captain Crook , or the Honourable William Walgrave , or my Lord Charles Fitzgerald , know me.

Court. Have you sent to any of these gentlemen to let them know your situation? - I have, my Lord.

Court to Jury. This may be a genuine bill of a man called William Smith , drawn by a William Smith and Co. and there is no evidence what the real name of the prisoner is, and his real name may be Peter Smith ; but the evidence applies to the third and fourth counts, for forging the acceptance, or for uttering that acceptance knowing it to be forged, and the evidence seems to apply to the last of these.

GUILTY , Death .

Tried by the Second Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-122

644. WILLIAM STEWART was indicted for burglariously and feloniously breaking and entering the dwelling house of Edward Roberts , Esq ; on the 23d of January last, about the hour of one in the night, and stealing therein one garnet stock buckle, set in silver, value 40 s. two gold rings, called intaglios, value 40 s. one silver teapot, value 4 l. three silver table spoons, value 20 s. twelve silver tea spoons, value 18 s. two silver salt spoons, value 2 s. three table cloths, value 4 l. six pair of silk stockings, value 40 s. one linen stock, value 1 s. his property; four pair of cotton stockings, value 6 s. five shifts, value 6 s. four aprons, value 6 s. three caps, value 3 s. one muslin handkerchief, value 3 s. one flannel petticoat, value 2 s. and 2 l. 6 s. in monies numbered, the property of Lucy Clarke , spinster ; and one cane, covered with leather, value 2 s. the property of Richard Fowler , in the said dwelling house .

And SARAH SKITTLE was indicted for feloniously receiving four pair of silk stockings, value 30 s. and one linen table cloth, value 6 s. parcel of the said goods, knowing them to have been stolen .

Four pair of silk stockings were found by Macmanus in the pocket of the prisoner Sarah, at the apartment of the prisoner William, in St. Ann's-lane, Westminster, three months after this burglary; and in the drawer in the bed room was found a piece of table cloth, and another pair of stockings, and a kitchen cloth was on the table in the room, and a book with a letter of thanks from Mr. Fox to the prisoner Stewart in it.

M'Donald found on a woman of the name of Hammond, two pieces of table

cloth; some pick-lock keys and pistols were also found, and a stick loaded with lead.

Mrs. Hammond deposed, that the pieces of table cloth were brought to her by the prisoner Sarah, on a quarrel with Stewart, to take care of, in April last, and the house was broke open the 23d of January.

(The silk stockings were deposed to by Mr. Roberts, and the pieces of table cloth and the cotton stockings were deposed to by Lucy Clarke .)

Mary Capon deposed, that the prisoner Sarah bought and sold old clothes at Rag-fair, and that she was with her at Rag-fair about a fortnight before she was apprehended; that she bought a good many things, petticoats, gowns, shifts, and shirts, and six pair of white silk stockings, one pair of cotton, and five table cloths, for thirty shillings, she kept the stockings to wear herself, and had not parted with the table cloths; that several pairs of the stockings were darned in the feet; and believed the stockings deposed to by Mr. Roberts to be them.

Alice Audsley also deposed, that she saw her purchase these things for thirty shillings, and gave both the prisoners a good character.

Mary Hardy also deposed she saw the prisoner Sarah purchase these things for thirty shillings, and she asked her to be a partner in the adventure, which she declined, thinking them too dear.

The Prisoner Stewart called five witnesses, who gave him a good character.

WILLIAM STEWART , SARAH SKITTLE ,

NOT GUILTY .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. Baron PERRYN .

Reference Number: t17840526-123

645. SARAH JONES , otherwise HART , ALICE WILKES , LUCY WILSON , and SARAH BROWN , were indicted for feloniously assaulting John Creed , in the dwelling house of Isaac Jones , on the 13th of April last, and putting him in fear and feloniously taking from his person and against his will, one linen handkerchief, value 1 s. eighty guineas, value 84 l. two half crowns, value 5 s. one shilling, and two sixpences , his property.

The Prosecutor deposed, that on the 13th of April, about half an hour after nightfall, he was walking along Shire-lane, and was called to by the prisoner Jones, to come in and drink a glass of wine, she having something to say to him of particular consequence; that he went in first inside the door of his own accord, peaceable and quiet, and then recollecting he had this money about him, in his right-hand coat pocket, he went out again, and said he would not stay; she desired him to go up stairs, and said he should be safe, for it was as honest a house as any in the world; then when he got a little the outside of the door, she took him by the breast, and pulled him in again, and the door was shut. The prosecutor then went up stairs, and sat down, and in two minutes six or seven women and one man seized his person, some of them took him by the legs, some by the hands, and took the money out of his pocket; they held him fast, and he saw the money go; he had received it at the Bank that day or the day before; it was in four different papers, twenty guineas in each paper, and tied up in a handkerchief; the prosecutor was quite positive the prisoners were four of the people, he knew them before: when he saw his money taking out of the room, he called out, stop thief! and the man came up to him, and said we shall have it amongst us, but if you do not prosecute us, you shall have it in the morning; they put out the candle as soon as he saw the money go, and the man threatened to kill him, and these two circumstances he forgot before the magistrate. The prosecutor run down stairs directly after, and went out of the house and went in again; two of the women stood outside the door, and pushed him in again,

and he went into the parlour where the prisoner Wilson was, and she advised him to go with her that night to the Talbot-inn, and sleep there, and she would put him in a method to get his money again; he went with her, and staid all night, but did not sleep much, and in the morning she told him he might go and hang himself, he would never get a penny of the money; he gave information before a magistrate in a day or two after; he did not give information before, because he thought to get his money in another way; he saw the prisoners again the next day at the same house, to try to get his money again; he waited there till night, and there were three women there that told him they would bring him the money, one of them was the prisoner Wilson, and the prosecutor gave these three women half a guinea a piece; he waited there all day, and then they told him there was no such thing; every one was drunk, and then he swore he would give information against them directly, which he did as soon as he could, but did not know how to go about it; the next day he went to the mansion-house, and was directed to Bow-street: he said he was as sober as he was at this time of examination.

The Court desired to see the information, which was handed up, and upon asking the prosecutor when he gave that information, he repeatedly said it was two or three days after, whereas it was not till the 20th; and he believed he did not then say a word of the door being shut, but said they picked his pocket. The prosecutor deposed on his cross-examination, that he pawned his watch the morning after he slept with Lucy Wilson at the Talbot, to give her half a guinea; and dined with some of the robbers the day after the robbery, by appointment, on fresh salmon.

The information given by the prosecutor before the magistrate was read. The prosecutor said he was bred an attorney, but had been some time abroad; and after taking some time to recollect where he lodged, he said it was at No. 185, in Fleet-street, at Mr. Smith's, a baker.

Thomas Mansfield , the constable, deposed that he apprehended the prisoners, they said they were not the persons that committed the robbery, but Jones said before the magistrate, she knew who did; he had the warrants for apprehending them the 16th of April at night; Jones, the man, made his escape. The deponent never knew there was a reward for a highway robbery.

ALL FOUR NOT GUILTY .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury, before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-124

646. SAMUEL PEYTON was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 3d of May , in the dwelling house of Jerome Knapp , Esq ; 47 l. 5 s. 6 d. in monies numbered, his property, and one canvas bag, value 1 d. one red leather case, value 1 d. and 31 l. 14 s. 6 d. in monies numbered, the property of James Hill ; and a bill of exchange for 22 l. dated the 3d of April, 1784, the property of the said Jerome Knapp , and then due and unsatisfied .

A Second Count, laying it to be the dwelling house of the Master and Four Wardens of the fraternity of the art or mystery of Haberdashers in the City of London.

James Hill deposed, that he is clerk to Mr. Knapp, and that whilst he was in the Committee-room, his desk in the office was broke open and robbed of the property mentioned in the indictment.

Thomas Berry (Mr. Pardoe's coachman) remembered seeing the prisoner on the spot, and observing his waistcoat, which was green, and a gold lace on it; a green coat, nankeen breeches, silk stockings, and a round hat, and his hair tied; the deponent saw the prisoner come in and go out; he was there about ten minutes, and the deponent heard the office door open almost directly; thinks nobody else went in but

the prisoner; is sure the prisoner is the person he saw, though he should not have taken notice of him, but for the peculiarity of his waistcoat; saw him again in custody that night in the same dress.

James Phillips (the footman) confirmed the above evidence.

Mrs. Knapp and Miss Knapp saw the prisoner in the yard from the parlour window, he must have come by the office but they could not see the office door from that window.

Henry Gilbody , the under beadle of the Company, also saw the prisoner go out.

John Lebar and Robert Gregory apprehended the prisoner, in consequence of this description, the same evening, and there was found on him two gold watches and nineteen guineas; he was dressed as beforementioned.

The Prisoner said he was at home at his father's house from eleven till four on that 3d of May, and offered to call his mother to prove it, but being reminded by the Court of the number of witnesses that had already swore he was on that spot at the time, the prisoner's Council (Mr. Chetwood) declined calling any witnesses.

NOT GUILTY .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

(See Trial 534 of this Sessions, this prisoner tried for another robbery, and sentenced to be transported for seven years.)

Reference Number: t17840526-125

647. WILLIAM GARDNER was indicted for stealing, on the 7th day of May , twenty pounds weight of moist sugar, value 12 s. and seven pounds weight of currants, value 3 s. the property of Henry Pring .

Edward Field saw the prisoner take the things out of the waggon.

Prisoner. I was in great necessity, I am fifty-five miles from home, and have six children, I am sixty-three years of age.

GUILTY .

Whipped , and passed to his parish.

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-126

648. HANNAH ROBERTSON was indicted for stealing, on the 7th of May , one silver watch, value 3 l. the property of John Brown .

NOT GUILTY .

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-127

649. WILLIAM HOBBS was indicted, for that he, on the 5th day of May , unlawfully, willingly, knowingly, and feloniously, did procure one James M'Guire to personate and falsly assume the name and character of William Mullin , a person entitled to certain allowance money, called short allowance money, amounting to the sum of 1 l. 18 s. for the service of the said William Mullin , on board the ship called the Vigilant, in order to receive the same, against the form of the statute .

A Second Count, for procuring a certain person, to the Jurors unknown, to receive the same.

The prisoner came in company with M'Guire, and witnessed the receipt, but there was no proof of his procuring him to assume the name and character of Mullens, and when the prisoner was apprehended, he said he was persuaded to accompany M'Guire.

NOT GUILTY .

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-128

650. BENJAMIN WOLFE was indicted for feloniously stealing, on the 28th of April last, three bags of cotton, containing three hundred pounds weight of cotton, value 10 l. the property of Jacob Loram , then and there being in a certain lighter called the Mary, on the navigable River of Thames .

It appearing from the evidence of Lewis Bortman , that these goods were carried to the prisoner's house, who was at home at the time they were landed: he was acquitted of the charge of stealing.

NOT GUILTY .

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-129

651. JOHN BARNES was indicted for stealing, on the 7th day of May , one gold watch, value 20 l. one steel chain, value 10 s. three stone seals set in gold, value 3 l. one gold key, value 2 s. one gold hook, value 2 s. the property of James Harris .

NOT GUILTY .

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-130

652. HANNAH JONES was indicted for stealing, on the 4th of May, one hundred yards of satin, value 15 l. five yards of silk, value 10 s. six silk damask window curtains, value 6 l. two morine curtains, value 20 s. twenty yards of green baize, value 40 s. six yards of canvas, value 12 d. twenty yards of tinsel fringe, value 4 s. ten tinsel tassels, value 3 s. the property of William Taylor , Esq .

A Second Count, laying them to be the property of George Grant , James Sutton , and others.

NOT GUILTY .

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-131

653. WILLIAM ELLOR was indicted for feloniously forging, on the 8th day of May , a certain order for payment of money, with the name Elizabeth Wery signed thereto, purporting to be signed by her as the wife of Francis Wery , deceased, to Anthony Songer and Bartholomew Songer , by the name of Messrs. Songer, requesting them to send her ten pounds ; which said order was in the words and figures following, that is to say:-

"Please to send ten

"pounds by bearer, as I am so ill I cannot

"wait upon you. Elizabeth Wery ." With intent to defraud the said Anthony and Alexander.

A second Count, for uttering the same, knowing it to be forged, with the like intention.

Court. How do you make this an order for the payment of money; it may be obtaining money by false pretences.

Mr. Sylvester, Council for the Prosecution. The case of Mitchell in Foster, which was,

"I desire you will let the bearer have such

"a sum, and I will see all paid," that, my Lord, was held to be an order for the payment of money.

Court. That was an order from a person having a right to give the order, and was a positive order; I understood the Act or Parliament to mean such an order for payment of money, as the party giving it, if genuine, has a right to make; but a letter requesting the payment of money, is quite a different thing, it is not a compulsory order.

Mr. Sylvester. I apprehend the question is, whether this is not a sufficient authority for them to pay the money to the person that goes to receive it.

Court. Then any letter whatever requesting the payment of money, will be an order for the payment of money.

Mr. Sylvester. Suppose I send to my banker, Sir, I shall be much obliged to you to pay Mr. Johnson five pounds, and you will oblige your humble servant, John Sylvester ; I apprehend the question will be, whether this gentlewoman had an authority to draw on this gentleman, for in law we know of no technical forms.

Court. This is a letter, in the form of a letter, directed as a letter, asking it as a favour to send ten pounds by the bearer; if I write a letter to you as a friend, desiring you to lend me fifty pounds, and you send it by the bearer, you will not hold that to be an order for the payment of money.

Mr. Sylvester. If the Court will detain him for the fraud, we undertake to prosecute him for that, and I do not wish to press this.

NOT GUILTY .

Tried by the London Jury, before Mr. RECORDER.

654. The said WILLIAM ELLOR was again indicted for feloniously forging, on the 22d of April last, a certain other order for payment of money, with the name Elizabeth Wery thereto subscribed, directed to Anthony and Bartholomew Songer , in the words and figures following:-

"Sir,

"I should esteem it as a favour, if you

"would oblige me at this time, I have been

"so ill that I have kept my bed three

"weeks, or would have come myself; the

"sum of money I shall desire you to send

"is ten pounds," with intention to defraud the said Anthony and Bartholomew.

A Second Count, for uttering the same knowing it to be forged, with the like intention.

This being a case of the same kind, the prisoner was

ACQUITTED .

Reference Number: t17840526-132

656. JOSEPH DUNBAR was indicted for that he, on the 4th day of December last, falsly and feloniously did forge, make and counterfeit, and cause and procure to be falsly made, forged and counterfeited, and willingly act and assist in the false making, forging and counterfeiting a certain note purporting to be a bank note, with the name John Boult thereto subscribed, dated the 4th of December, 1783, signed John Boult for the Governor and Company of the Bank of England, for the payment of the sum of 10 l. which said note so falsly made, forged and counterfeited , is as follows, to wit,

"1783

"No. 102, I promise to pay Mr. James

"Moore, or bearer, on demand, the sum

"of sixty pounds. London, 4th December,

"1783, for the Governor and Company

"of the Bank of England, John

"Boult," with intention to defraud - Bryan .

A Second Count for forging a note in form of a bank note, with the like intention.

A third Count the same as the first, with intention to defraud the Governor and Company of the Bank of England .

A fourth Count the same as the second, with the like intention.

A fifth Count calling it a promisory note, with intention to defraud - Bryan.

A sixth Count with intention to defraud the Bank.

The witnesses on both sides ordered to withdraw, except the Gentlemen belonging to the Bank.

Mr. Fielding opened the indictment; and Mr. Sylvester opened the Case.

Mr. Fielding. My Lord, we now propose to call in Henry Davis , who stands in some degree connected in part of this crime, as he has surrendered and has not been taken up, I purpose to call him first: I am am aware there is a common objection to calling an evidence first, and I dare say, it lives in your Lordship's memory, that I took it once, and you sent up stairs to Mr. Baron Eyre , who said there could be no objection to calling him first, for the order of calling him did not seem to make any question, because if he was not confirmed by other evidence it would go for nothing.

Court. I do not conceive there is any rule to put it out of the power of the Court in any case; in the first place, I do not consider the witness in question to be a witness merely against whom there are imputations on his credit and character, but he is stated

as an accomplice, and the objection to them stands in a sort of middle class, between an objection to the credit and to the competency; it is something more to one, and something less to the other; it does not go to excuse the Jury from hearing that witness at all; on the other hand, it does not leave the Jury at liberty in point of law, if they were inclined to do it, to admit him unaccompanied, he is therefore not competent to give evidence, unless it be attended with other circumstances: under that rule therefore it has always been considered as discretionary; different Judges hold different practices; but I am clearly convinced, that the better way is not to examine the accomplice first; for this reason; the Jury ought not to receive impressions from evidence, of which ultimately they may not be at liberty in point of law to believe; therefore, it being a question that is to decide on his competency, you are not to call a witness first who may be incompetent; and if he is unconfirmed, he is incompetent; therefore, I shall not be disposed, without stronger reasons than I have yet heard, to examine the accomplice first.

Mr. Garrow, one of the Prisoner's Council. My Lord, I am not fond of the Jury hearing what they are afterwards told to forget.

- BRYAN sworn.

Examined by Mr. Fielding.

I believe I need not trouble you with repeated questions, you will be so good to inform the Court all you know relative to this transaction. - At Bruges in Flanders, in January last, two notes, purporting to be Bank of England promissory notes, the one for 30 l. the other for 60 l. were presented to me for negociation; I discovered them to be false ones, and had three people taken into custody at Bruges, one of which, who proved to be the principal, was called John Day , him I took, and in his pocket were one hundred and nine notes, they were of different sums, from one hundred to ten pounds.

Mr. Garrow. I think it right to ask your Lordship, whether the whole this gentleman shall be permitted to say against Dunbar the prisoner, should not be relative to the note in question?

Mr. Morgan, another of the Prisoner's Council. I was going to make the objection, and Mr. Garrow takes it out of my mouth.

Court. If you were to affect the prisoner with the evidence of other notes than that mentioned in the indictment, it would be proper.

Mr. Fielding. I should be the last man in the world to blame the zeal of my young friend, particularly when he is concerned for the prisoner.

Mr. Bryan. The notes amounted together to 2975 l. all of which were, as I firmly believe, forged.

(The note shewn him.)

Was not that taken from the pocket book of Day? - It was not one of the first tendered to me, it was one of those taken from his pocket.

JOHN ACTON sworn.

This note was delivered to me by Mr. Bryan, it has been in my possession ever since.

Mr. Bryan. That note I deliverd to Mr. Acton myself.

Mr. Fielding to Mr. Bryan. Who were in company with Day? - There were two, one named Hall, the Captain of the vessel, the other was called John Priston .

Mr. Morgan. Who was it that offered the two bills to you? - One was by Hall, and the other by Day, he is called John Day there.

Mr. Morgan. Then this man that you have been talking of all along, is Day? - Yes.

JOHN WOODIN sworn.

Mr. Morgan. This man appears to be an accomplice also.

Court. It strikes me that Woodin, who is now called, is not stated to be an accomplice; there is no fact stated that makes it so; a suspicion is thrown upon him by the

evidence of Mr. Bryan, he is taken under suspicious circumstances, under these circumstances let it turn as it will ultimately, we should receive his evidence with caution: but there has not turned out any fact that proves him to be an accomplice; an accomplice must be either antecedently proved, or stated to be an accomplice, or it must come out of his mouth.

Mr. Garrow. We had better abandon our objection, than argue it in the hearing of the witness.

Court. What is your name? - John Woodin .

Examined by Mr. Sylvester.

I went over to Bruges to buy lawns and muslins, I went by the name of Day, we went as smugglers, to smuggle these things into England, and I went in another name for fear of being Exchequered.

What had you to pay for the goods that were to be purchased? - I had 3070 l. in bank notes.

Were any notes taken from you at Bruges by Mr. Bryan? - Yes.

Where did you get these notes from? - I took them of William Newland at Yar-mouth, there being nobody in company but him; there was one came down to Yar-mouth, one Davis was down there with him, but then I did not know him, nor I did not know his name, I knew his person, that is the man I mean that goes by the name of Davis, he went by the name of Pitts; Newland went by the name I think of either Harris or Matthews, or some such thing; it is customary to go by false names: I do not know they ever went in that way before. I was employed by that man, I know no other man; I was to have 250 l. and half the profits of the goods; we computed the profits of that voyage at 500 l. if it was more I was to have half the profits, it was to be made up to me 250 l. I stopped at Newmarket till he came to me, he opened his pocket book and said, here is our beauties; it was Newland that came to me.

Look at that note? - This is what Mr. Bryant had at Bruges.

Mr. Morgan. How do you know that? - Because there is M. B. on it, I cannot tell any more, I do not know a number of any of them.

Did you know any thing about these notes before? - Never.

Mr. Garrow. So your working name is Woodin, and your travelling name is Day? - It was so then.

How old are you? - About thirty-two.

Who are you, and where do you live; what have you been? - I believe it is about seven years since I left off farming, I have been a farmer at Astley in Bedfordshire, and Gaddesden in Herts, and no where else.

Since that you have been a sky farmer, I suppose? - I have been in the victualling since that, and I believe I can have a character from the officer.

What sort of victualling now was it? - I have been in the Victualling-office, I belonged to the cooperage.

How belonged to it, you are not a cooper by trade? - I will tell you as nigh as I can guess.

Do not guess about it, what have you done with yourself for the last seven years? I cannot tell.

But you will tell before you leave that place? - I gained my living very honestly, I never robbed any body in my life.

I shall repeat the question? - I have lived in the victualling about two years, about three years ago.

Now when you left Gaddesden? - I lived at Mr. Whitebread's the brewer upwards of a year.

What became of you in the other time? - I have belonged to the tide in the Excise, in what they call the gluts; I had my order from Commissioner Scott, that was only in the summer.

How did you consume your time in the winter? - Sometimes in one way, sometimes in another.

Let us hear of some of your ways? - I cannot tell you.

If you have done that which you just now said you have not done, I do not want you to tell me that, or any thing that will

hang you; you said now and then you was upon a glut, what did you do with yourself at other times? - I very likely had no employment in the winter.

What did you live upon an estate somewhere? - No.

How did you support yourself? - With what I had.

Then you left the farming with some property in your hands? - What I got in the summer supported me a little in the winter.

What were your wages in the Excise? - A guinea in the week.

How did you leave your farm, was your lease expired; now I believe the landlord could not find enough to pay his rent? - Yes, there was enough.

Was there one shilling more? - Yes, there was.

Will you say there was five pounds more? - Yes, I will say there was a great deal more.

How long at times have you been a smuggler?

Mr. Silvester. That is certainly an improper question.

Mr. Garrow. He has told us already that he is a smuggler.

Court. If he was asked as to any act of smuggling, the question would be contrary to law. - I do not know.

Upon your oath, so short a time as ten years? - I do not know.

Fifteen years out of the thirty-two? - No, Sir, I have not.

The last ten? - No.

Or the last seven? - No.

Fix some time? - I cannot fix a time.

Perhaps I may help you; you was employed for the Excise in the summer, and at smuggling in the winter? - Sometimes I was.

You saw a man at Yarmouth, who called himself Pitts, and another man that called himself Matthews? - Yes.

Was you acquainted with Matthews before? - Yes, I believe about three months.

When did you come acquainted with him? - He came to buy corn of me.

Where did you live at that time? - In Charles-street, Westminster.

Why you did not tell us you was a dealer in corn then, what have you done with yourself the last three years? - Some part of the time I have been in prison.

What unfortunate accident carried you there? - Debt, as many other people do.

Debt only? - Yes.

How long have you been out? - It may be a year and a half.

How was you discharged? - The plaintiff dropped the groats.

What have you done during that year and a half? - I have been out of business, while I went into the corn chandlery way, I have been a corn chandler three months; Newland was one of my first customers.

Did you keep a house in this street? - Yes.

And lived in great credit and repute no doubt? - I do not know, I paid my way there.

With the assistance of the smuggling trade that you carried on during that time? - I did not smuggle during that period, I went to Yarmouth to go over.

And you mean that the Jury should understand you, that Newland, who saw you a pauper turned out of prison, trusted you with these bank notes of 3070 l. and that not in the presence of any one man living but yourself? - Nobody was by.

You understood these bank notes to be genuine bank notes? - Yes.

Did you give him a receipt? - No.

Did you give him a promissory note? - No.

Any other security? - There was a piece of writing I believe that he had the number of those notes that I had.

Did you sign that? - Yes.

Where did you write that upon it? - I cannot swear particularly to it.

Had this list ever been in the possession of Newland since the world began? - There was one list only in Newland's possession; there is two lists, one I had, and one Newland had.

On your oath, was the note that Newland

had, signed by you? - I cannot tell.

That it is pretty singular? - I cannot say.

You knew this was a secret transaction between you and Newland, passing in a parlour, and nobody by, did you give him any acknowledgment that they were in your possession? - Only that paper.

Was that paper signed? - I cannot say that it was.

Did not it strike you as pretty singular? - I do not think it any great matter to be intrusted, he sent Thrusten along with me.

Was he apprehended at Bruges? - Yes.

Did he know you had them? - He knew I was to have them.

Do you mean to say, that you believed at the time you tendered those notes to Mr. Bryant, that they were genuine bank notes? - Yes.

You took Mr. Newland to be the most friendly and kind man in the world to be sure, to put 250 l. in your pocket, and trust you with 3070 l. of his notes? - Yes.

To what amount had he ever dealt with you for corn, for fifty pounds? - I believe it may be.

Will you swear he had ever paid you fifty pounds for corn? - No.

Twenty-five pounds? - No.

Twenty pounds? - I cannot tell.

Ten pounds? - Yes, and more, but he did not pay me, he paid some of the men that belonged to me.

Do you know of his having paid one shilling to any man for corn? - He has to me I believe about ten pounds.

Did you tell this history to any body until you yourself was in custody? - I told Mr. Bryant, but not till I was in custody.

How many of the notes did you offer in payment at the first time to Mr. Bryant? - But one, to the amount of 60 l.

You intended to lay out the whole of 3070 l. in goods, to be brought to England? - I did.

Why did not you tender more notes at first? - I was to have some goods for the remainder, and I was going the day I was taken up for the goods.

Was not the 60 l. so tendered to him, tendered with a view to see whether you could pass the others? - No, it was not, I went to the bankers to change them; I never took a bank note in my life, I wish I had never seen one.

Did you understand the assuming different names at Yarmouth to be for the purpose of concealing a felony, or merely for the purpose of concealing smuggling goods?

Court. I must stop you in that question; a question that can be answered only one way without accusing himself, is not to be put.

(The paper shewn him.)

Woodin. Whether this is the one that Newland had, or that which the other had I cannot say.

Mr. Garrow. This is not signed? - No, it is not, it is my own writing.

JOHN BOULT sworn.

Mr. Morgan objected to this gentleman as a witness.

Mr. Garrow. The objection is to calling any one to the proving the note that has been traced to another man and not to Dunbar, to be a forgery.

Court. There can be no objections to that.

Mr. Sylvester. You are one of the cashiers of the Bank? - Yes.

Is that a bank note? - No, it cannot be a bank note, it is not bank paper.

What is it then? - A forgery.

Court. You have no doubt of that? - No, none at all, it is not like the paper.

Court. I see the number of that note is number 102, without any letter, is that ever the case with a bank note? - Yes, with many thousands.

- PENN sworn.

I am one of the entering clerks belonging to the Bank; this is not my handwriting, it is in the form of a bank note,

but differs widely from it in many respects, the paper being of a thinner consistence, and the words in many places being altered; likewise the in the sixty.

Mr. Morgan. What do you say to the size of the paper? - Pretty like.

In other respects it is as like a bank note as it is like a cow, I suppose? - No, Sir, there is more similarity than that.

WILLIAM BULLOCK sworn.

Examined by Mr. Fielding.

Where do you live? - At Colnbrook; I am a paper-maker.

Look at the prisoner at the bar? - I cannot swear to him; he came down to our mill.

Is that the man that came to your mill? - I am not sure.

Have you a memory at all of the persons that came to your mill? - No, I have not.

Two people came down to the paper-mill? - Yes, they wanted to see the art of our business, we had just done work, and they wanted to try to make a sheet, and one of them made a sheet, and carried it to Mrs. Vaughan's, and there it was dried.

The two people went from the paper-mill to Mrs. Vaughan's? - Yes, she keeps the Punch-bowl, in the mill yard; I saw them go, and drank with them; no person else was in company.

Mr. Morgan. How long did they stay there? - I believe they were there pretty nigh half an hour.

How long are you in the making a sheet of paper completely, so as to render it fit for sale? - We can make it in a moment, but it must be hung up and dried, and seasoned, and glazed, and dressed, and hung up again, and told out.

That will take a week? - Yes, or a fortnight; we have a great many gentle people come to see the business; if my master is there, he will not let them give us any thing.

Court. You encourage gentlemen to make a sheet of paper every now and then? - If they do not offer we ask them.

Mr. Morgan. This is only dipping the mould into the fluid, and in a moment throwing it over the frame; suppose I was to come, must not a man have a good deal of skill and experience before he could do that business? - Yes, yes, a great many goes to try, and it looks as rough as if it was run over with a hurdle; not ten gentlemen out of a hundred ever make a good sheet of paper.

Court. Is there a difference in making different paper of different qualities? - Yes.

What sort would this have been if it was well made? - What we call demy.

Mr. Morgan. What paper is that? - I believe it is what is made the same size as our bank bills; I cannot tell you without the sheet was whole, this has been cut off a larger piece, demy is stouter than this.

ELIZABETH VAUGHAN sworn.

I keep a public house at a place called Pyle, near the paper-mill.

Mr. Fielding. Old fellow, what time did these two people come to the paper-mill? - It was almost a twelvemonth ago.

Mr. Fielding to Mrs. Vaughan. Do you remember the prisoner? (shews him) - I have no knowledge of either of those gentlemen.

Have you seen either of the men to day who came to your house at that time? - I think to the best of my knowledge I have seen one, but I have not a memory of the other, I have no recollection of the other.

Mr. Garrow. You have looked round the Court, and you say you cannot discover now either of the persons that were at your alehouse? - I cannot.

Where was it that you saw this man that told you he had been some time ago at your public house? - I think I saw him at the Rose Tavern, he told me he came in a one horse chaise, and with another man whom he described.

What description did he give of him? - A shortish lusty man.

Do you recollect when that man you saw at the Rose was at your house? - I cannot be particular to that, but it must be within a twelvemonth.

ROBERT RATCLIFFE sworn.

I am a bird-cage maker and wire-worker.

Where do you live? - At Whitechapel; I was applied to by one Henry Davis , to make a mould and frame, nobody was in company with him, nobody came with him at all particular; he came and desired me to come to his house, and in his dining room there was a gentleman gave me orders for that frame.

Should you know him if you saw him again? - I cannot say that I should, I do not know, it was by candle-light, and with the taking notice of the dimensions, I did not take any notice of him at all.

What was the order you received? - A bit of brass wire work, of about eight inches long, and between that there was a great A and two figures in the middle, made very fine, I delivered it to Mr. Davis when I had made it, he paid me for it; he seemed to be a shortish, lustyish gentleman, in a curled wig, done up all in powder.

THOMAS HAYCOCK sworn.

Examined by Mr. Fielding.

I live at the White Raven, Mile-end.

Did you ever see the prisoner before? - Yes.

Tell me where and when? - I can tell you where, but when I cannot say, I saw him at the White Raven, Davis and the prisoner have been in company several times; I know the garden of Davis, it was in the White Raven gardens.

Was there any building in it? - No, no building, only a summer house which Davis kept as a summer house; it was between Michaelmas and Christmas they have frequently come.

ELIZABETH BILBY sworn.

I keep the White Raven; I know the prisoner and Davis, I have seen them together at our house, Davis has a little house near that, and a garden, I have seen them there together twice, I saw nobody in the house besides themselves, I have seen them several times at the White Raven, I served them as I would another customer, I knew nothing of their purpose.

THOMAS GROVES sworn.

Do you know Dunbar? - Yes.

Do you know Davis? - No; I have seen the prisoner and Gibbert together, but what they did I do not know.

Mr. Sylvester. My Lord, now we call Henry Davis .

Court. State first what circumstance you have proved against the prisoner.

Mr. Sylvester. We have proved that two men came together to the paper-maker's.

Court. Of which the prisoner is not proved to be one; if you had proved that frame to have been bespoke by the prisoner, and by clear and unequivocal proof that he was one of the persons who came to the mill, I should then have considered whether I should have let you into the evidence of Davis, but I doubt whether I should then.

Mr. Sylvester. It is my duty to submit it to the Court, and to take the opinion of the Court upon it; the gentlemen of the Bank have no wish themselves in the business, but for the attainment of justice.

Court. I am perfectly clear that the gentlemen of the Bank have no wish but for public justice; it has been proved clearly, that a forgery to a large amount has been committed by somebody, and detected; it became then not only proper, but the duty of the gentlemen who manage the affairs of the Bank to bring these circumstances before a Court of Justice; and it is not their faults if Davis has either made a false discovery, if he has either deceived them in leading them to suppose that he would make a discovery, which he either could not, or did not make; nor if the circumstances have not come out from the recollection of the witnesses as was expected. The prosecution was very proper to be brought here, and it has been conducted as all these prosecutions that I have seen have been, with great fairness and candour; there can be no wish in any body, but that justice should take its usual course; and I have not the smallest doubt or hesitation to declare, no

circumstance has been brought home to the prisoner, so as to let Davis in at all. Gentlemen of the Jury, whether from the real circumstances of the case, or the deficiency of the evidence, or their want of recollection, we have at present no evidence at all before the Court against the prisoner at the bar.

NOT GUILTY .

Tried by the first Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-133

655. STEPHEN TISSINGTON was indicted for that he on the 1st day of May last, falsly and feloniously did forge and counterfeit a certain receipt for money dated the 22d of March, 1784 , purporting to be a receipt of one Joseph Acton for one Samuel Acton , whereby he acknowledged to have received from the prisoner, by the name of Stephen Tissington , fifty pounds on account , and which said receipt is in the words and figures following, that is to say,

"Received, March 22, 1784, of Mr. Tissington, fifty pounds on account, for Samuel Acton , Joseph Acton ," with intention to defraud the said Joseph Acton and Nathaniel Linch , against the statute.

A second count for uttering the same, knowing it to be forged, with the like intention.

A third count for forging the same, with intention to defraud Samuel Acton .

A fourth count for uttering the same, with the like intention.

A fifth count for that he having in his custody and possession a certain paper writing in the words and figures following, (as above) afterwards, to wit on the same day, the same receipt feloniously did alter, and the letters fty did put and add to the word five, whereby the word five so written became fifty, and also the cypher o falsly and feloniously did make, forge and counterfeit, and add to the figure 5, whereby it did signify 50, with intention to defraud Samuel Acton and Nathaniel Lynch .

A sixth count for uttering same with the like intention.

A seventh count for altering same with intention to defraud the said Samuel Acton .

An eighth count for uttering same with the like intention.

JOSEPH ACTON sworn.

Mr. Morgan, Prisoner's Counsel. My Lord, I submit if this witness is the least interested, in a capital case you will not suffer him to be examined; he is the person supposed to have signed a receipt, and he is supposed to act under the authority of his brother.

Court. I suppose they have given a release.

Mr. Morgan. It is not the prosecutor simply that can release him; he says, I have received only five pounds, very likely you my brother may have received fifty pounds, and there may be a fraud in this, you may have inserted the fty after you have written the word five: my client cannot prove that the brother of the prosecutor had an authority to receive the money, but giving credit to the assertion of the said Joseph, because he was the brother, he pays into his hands, as the brother of the prosecutor: my client says, my payment to you is not a payment to your brother without an authority: the money is the prisoner's, and he is accountable to him for forty-five pounds; I therefore say, none but the prisoner can release Joseph Acton .

Mr. Sylvester, Counsel for Prosecution. He pays him as and for his brother, that is an accountable receipt.

Court. The objection shortly is this, I may make the payment to a stranger for your use, that does not bar your action against me; it is evidence against Joseph that he has had the money, and an action for money had and received would lay against him.

Mr. Sylvester. Then Mr. Morgan's objection comes too soon, the question will be whether this money was not paid to the brother knowing that Joseph was a clerk in the house; though they act as clerks, they do not act for their own benefit.

Court. Can you prove by Samuel that he gave him authority: or if they will give you that proof now by the evidence of Samuel, and bar the act of Samuel: however any thing that will bar the act of Samuel will do as well as a release.

Mr. Morgan. I suppose 50 l. was paid to Joseph, and that he paid but five pounds to his brother, and I say the prisoner has a right against Joseph for 45 l.

Court. Samuel's evidence will operate as a bar to any claim from Samuel upon you; I am of opinion, if Samuel will swear that he gave an authority to Joseph, it will be sufficient: but there is another difficulty that occurs, and I will hear you upon it; Samuel at present stands disinterested, because he is entitled to receive the money, if he has not already received it, either from Joseph or the prisoner, but he has released Joseph, therefore, unless the prisoner is convicted, he loses his money, and therefore he certainly is not competent, for if the man is acquitted, he loses the whole of his money.

SAMUEL ACTON sworn.

I live in Drury-lane, I am a distiller , the prisoner is a victualler , he kept the sign of the Plow, at Mile-end, we had dealings together.

Did you empower your brother to wait on the prisoner to receive any money? - Yes, Sir, I did, I sent a letter, dated the 22d of March, pressing the prisoner to send what money he could spare, he was then indebted 56 l. 15 s. and that the receipt of my brother would be acknowledged as a discharge for what he could spare; on the first of May I called on the prisoner, I did not see him immediately on my coming in, I first saw his wife, and asked if he was not in the way, she said he was, and would come into the parlour presently; after some conversation with her, he came in, I soon said to him, Mr. Tissington, you have not had things as usual from me, and not given me orders a long while; he said, it is very true, I buy cheaper elsew here; I said that he should have paid me something more of so large a balance, or that he should have cleared his account; he replied, I fancy you have received a pretty load of cash by your brother; I asked him what he meant by a pretty load, he said fifty pounds; I told him it was impossible, he had only paid five pounds; after some altercation I asked him for the receipt, which on looking at, I found it was altered. He declared he had paid the money, and if my brother had spent the money, he must account for it; I had not, I told him, that from my brother, and if he had received it, he should account for it.

The receipt read (as in the indictment) and shewn to the Court and Jury, having the word fifty altered , and a cypher added to the figure of five.

Acton. I endeavoured to persuade him to confess the alteration, as it was to me clear that he had done it; he persisted that it was the receipt; I told him if argument was in vain, I should take the receipt, but he was at liberty to call in any body, but he did not, I took away the receipt; that is the receipt, it has been in my custody ever since.

Cross examined by Mr. Morgan.

You and I once had some conversation on this business before? - I had no conversation with you.

You and I have? - That conversation was not directed to me.

Then we will have a little now; when the receipt was put into your hands, what did you say? - He said it was a pretty load, it was fifty pounds.

He lent you that voluntarily? - He did.

He gave it into your hands voluntarily? - He did.

Upon your oath was not you in the first place very angry with him, because he had left you, and did not deal with you any longer? - I was not angry.

Recollect did you or did you not object to the receipt being a valid one because it was not upon stamp? - I did not object to that.

You did not make that objection? - I did not.

I again ask you upon your oath if you did not make that objection? - I did not.

No such objection? - No such objection.

What else passed between you? - I will give it over again.

If you please. - When he produced the receipt, it was very evident to me that it was an altered one, and as such it surprised me, when I had received but five pounds; I told him that he had altered it, I put it into my pocket, he said I had no right, I told him I had a right, as it appeared to me to be an altered receipt, and unless he would confess it, I should keep it in my pocket.

Did not he ask you if you wanted to rob him as you had robbed the orphan? - He did not.

No such words? - I do not know who you mean by the orphan.

I judge that he alluded to Mr. Warburton's son; there were two executors appointed by the old man's will, and you got yourself in afterwards.

Mr. Sylvester. Are you going into this history.

Court. He has a right to discredit the witness by any question, the answer to which does not tend to criminate himself.

Mr. Warburton had made a will, and appointed two executors, and executed that will sometime before you was executor? - He had.

Was not Warburton ill, and at the point of death, when you was made executor? - He was.

You attended there on the occasion, did not you? - Yes.

Did not you take an attorney that had never done business for Warburton? was not Mr. Gabell the constant attorney for Mr. Warburton? - He was not.

Did not he prepare the will? - He did not make it in it's first original.

Who did prepare the will? - A Mr. Eames.

And Mr. Pritchard and Mr. Taylor were appointed executors? - They were.

You had a Mr. Stanway with you? - Yes.

Had he before done business for Warburton? - Yes.

How long did Warburton live after you was made executor? - I believe a week.

Why, did he live twenty-four hours after? - Yes, he attempted to write his name to the codicil, as he used to do, he did not write it on account of his il ness, but he said that would do; I took his business.

For which business you was to have given 800 l.? - No such thing, I was to give him whatever it might amount to by fair appraisement, it amounted to between 8 and 900 l.

Did you or not give a bond for that money? - No, not for the whole money that that amounted to.

Did you give a bond for any money to Mr. Warburton? - Not at the time of this being executed; there was a bond given, but Mr. Warburton did not accept it as was intended at the time; Mr. Warburton had no bond from me after I entered into the business.

Then he never had any bond? - He had not but what he returned me as soon as he saw it; he did not accept it; I took the stock at a fair appraisement.

And he returned you the bond before you took it? - He had the money paid him.

Who went first into the room of the deceased after his death, you or the two other executors? - I did not go into the room with the executors at all, I went there as soon as I received intelligence of his death, not into his room where his chest and papers were kept, I went into a common sitting parlour.

Did not you go into a room where the old gentleman had been? - I did not, none but a public room.

Did not you go with two executors; - Not till he was buried, I met the executors there at the time I went, I was not there before the executors.

Is not there a bill in equity now depending against you, calling upon you about this bond I have been enquiring of, by the

two executors; is there not a bill filed in Chancery by the other two executors, upon supposition of this business? - I believe there is a bill, but I have not heard any thing of it.

Do not you know you are under an order to put in an answer? - Mr. Gabell sent to inform me of the business.

Did not the prisoner tell you he followed you up to a room and looked through the door? - Not till after I took the receipt.

Very well then, did not he tell you that he had through the door seen you take the bond? - I do not know that he told me any such thing.

Do not you know that he is the only witness that the executors have to that fact? - I do not know it, I do not know that he could be any witness on the occasion at all; he never told me so, he told me of robbing the orphan, that was nearly all; I asked him what he meant by that; he named Mr. Warburton's son; I told him that I then saw what a bad man he was, that of course I should leave his house, it was in vain to argue with him.

Did not he tell you that he had seen you take the bond? - I do not recollect that he did tell me so, he told me that when I came down with the liquor he had peeped through the key hole, that was all; he told me so at the time I obtained the receipt.

Mr. Stanway came with you, did not he, at the time that the man said he peeped through the door? - Mr. Stanway went as an attorney, I am not positive that he told me so.

I ask you when you took his receipt, if he did not tell you that he saw you through the key hole take the bond? - I am not perfect that he did tell me so, I do not recollect that he did tell me so, it has been rumoured since that he did, which I have heard, but I do not think it was mentioned at the time.

Did not Pritchard talk to you about this bond? - He did, I told Mr. Pritchard the particulars, but not since.

I ask you when Pritchard first spoke to you about this bond, having had intelligence from the prisoner what had been done, whether you did not deny it? - I told Mr. Pritchard there was no such bond in existence.

But did not you deny to him, that there ever had been such a bond? - I do not know that I did.

Did not you tell him that you had not given a bond, but had paid ready money? - I told him that when I came into the business, I paid ready money for it, I said there was no such bond in existence, nor any thing else.

What was you before you went into this business? - I was with a Mr. Kennett, the upholsterer in Bond-street.

In what capacity? - I was clerk to him.

I suppose you saved that 800 l.? - No, I had not.

Did not the prisoner to your certain knowledge the very day that you had got the receipt sue out a warrant for felony against you for stealing the receipt, and send the constables after you, and could not find you? - He certainly did, I took it away on the Saturday between twelve and one.

You had heard that the constables were after you? - When.

That you can best tell? - I did not hear on that day; I heard when I went to Sir Sampson Wright's, I never heard before I went to Sir Sampson, which was about eleven on the Monday morning.

How came he to know that there was a warrant for felony out against you? - It was not taken out before him, I believe it was taken out before Mr. Green.

The prisoner had totally done dealing with you? - He said on account of buying cheaper, he did not say totally done.

No other reason? - No.

Mr. Fielding. When you had got this receipt from him, he having delivered it to you, you said you would keep it, then it was that he mentioned something about the orphan? - It was.

Had he ever mentioned any thing of that sort to you before? - Never.

Mr. Morgan. After you had got the receipt,

you say that a warrant was issued to take you up for a felony? - Yes, for stealing and taking away the receipt.

Did not you know that Tissington had before this time of your taking away the receipt told the executors that he knew of your taking the bond? - I did not know it, he never mentioned it himself, nor did I ever hear it from any body.

JOSEPH ACTON sworn.

You are brother to Samuel Acton ? - Yes.

Mr. Fielding. We have a release here.

- PALMER sworn.

I am a subscribing witness to that release, I saw it executed, that is my name.

Mr. Morgan to Joseph Acton . Have you ever seen that before? - Yes.

Are not you to give that up to your brother as soon as the trial is over? - Yes, Sir.

You are? - I do not know that I need answer that.

Court. You must answer upon oath? - I cannot answer that.

Have you made any agreement with your brother to give it up to him? - Yes.

Explain what you mean? - There was no agreement made to give that up.

Why did you answer yes to the question? - I did not know what he meant by giving up, by making the agreement.

What did you think you answered yes to; what did you understand the question to be? - I did not know what I answered yes to.

Do you answer upon oath to a question you do not understand, so that you may swear either true or false? - I never had it in my possession.

What was it you was to give up to him? - I never had it in my possession.

You shall answer the question; you swore that you were to give something up to your brother after the trial, what was it? - I did not understand him properly.

What was the question you answered to, you did answer? - I understood that I was to have that given to me, and I was to give it him back.

Well, and you said you were to give it back, did not you? - I could not give it him back.

Court to Mr. Sylvester. Do you think it will be of any consequence to examine this man? - Yes.

Court. I shall certainly direct the Jury not to pay the smallest attention to what he says.

Mr. Sylvester. Do you think you are liable to pay your brother any money on it? - No, Sir.

Have you ever had that release in your possession? - No.

Do you suppose you are liable to your brother for this 45 l.? - No.

Mr. Morgan. Then I beg leave to go on again with my cross examination.

Court. I will not suffer this man to be examined; if he will tell me what question he meant to answer yes to, I will admit his evidence; suppose it was not that, what was it? what was the question you supposed Mr. Morgan to put? - I supposed I was to deliver this first of all to my brother.

What was it you was to deliver up first of all? - I do not know.

Court. A receipt is produced which the witness swears he had from the prisoner, which appears upon the face of it to be altered from five to fifty, but it does not appear but it might have been altered since the time that the money was paid; this witness has destroyed his competency, and the prisoner must be acquitted.

NOT GUILTY .

The receipt ordered to be delivered to the prisoner.

N. B. After the prisoner was discharged, the Right Honourable the Lord Mayor addressed the Jury as follows:

Gentlemen of the Jury, although the prisoner is acquitted, I wish to declare to you, that this poor man the prisoner lived servant with me, I believe between nine and ten years, and I do believe him to be as honest a man as ever existed: and I declare,

if I had my hat full of gold, I would give it to the man untold this moment.

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-134

657. CORNELIUS ROSE was indicted, for that he on the 9th day of October last, at the parish of Langston in the County of Southampton , feloniously did make an assault and affray on Richard Morze , then and there being an officer of the Customs within the limits of the port of Portsmouth, then being one of the ports of this kingdom, on board a ship called the Eagle, in due execution of his duty, and with a certain axe which he in both his hands had and held, feloniously did cut off the middle finger of the said Richard Morze , and thereby unlawfully and feloniously did maim him against the form of the statute .

A Second Count for feloniously assaulting the said Richard Morze an officer of the said Customs, on board the said vessel, within the limits of the said port, in the due execution of his duty, and unlawfully and feloniously maiming the said Richard Morze .

A Third Count for feloniously cutting off his middle finger, and thereby maiming him the said Richard Morze being such officer in execution of his duty.

A Fourth Count for assaulting him then being such officer of the Customs, on board the Eagle, within the limits of Portsmouth, and then and there dangerously wounding him in the execution of his duty.

The witnesses examined apart at the request of Mr. Chetwood one of the Prisoner's Counsel.

Mr. Russel opened the indictment, and Mr. Solicitor General opened the case.

RICHARD MORZE sworn.

Examined by Mr. Wilson.

I am an officer of the Customs, I was at Hayling Island on the 9th of October last, with Ward, Coward, and Perry, we were looking out for smugling vessels, and we saw a vessel coming into harbour about eleven at night, we manned our boat and went off immediately as we usually do, we came up to her, she was under way, she was not come to anchor when we came along side.

Did she come to anchor? - She did, we boarded her.

What was the vessel? - We had a suspicion she was a smuggler.

Who was the Master of her? - The prisoner Cornelius Rose , when we went on board we soon after asked for a candle and went to rummage the vessel but not perfectly; we saw several marks of small casks under the ballast which gave us suspicion that the major part of the goods were put into the boat, we went in pursuit of that boat about a quarter of an hour and then our minds altered, and we thought there were goods on board, we went to our watch-house and got some shovels and an iroa-stick to make the rummage perfect, when we came to the vessel the prisoner stood at the side of the vessel with a small ax or hatchet in his hand, and vowed the first man that came on board was a dead man; one Hyde that was on board persuaded him to deliver up the vessel, there were three persons on board which were the prisoner, Hyde, and one passenger whom I do not know, I heard Hyde speak to Captain Rose to deliver the goods, if we would engage not to take the cutter; he withdrew from the side of the ship, and we agreed not to take the cutter; Ward immediately got on board, I followed him as quick as I could, but in my entrance of the vessel I heard Rose say that the goods should not be taken out till the cutter was out of the harbour, which Ward refused; then a scuffle ensued between Ward and the prisoner on board the cutter, I saw the prisoner strike Ward several blows with this ax or hatchet, Hyde was at the helm, and Ward went to take possession of the helm, I made the best of my way to Mr. Ward's assistance; I had a pistol in my hand, on my going up he caught fast hold of my pistol and threw me on my back, I had my pistol in my right hand before me, the prisoner leaned on my stomach as I laid on my back.

The remainder of this Trial in the next Part, which will be published in a few Days,

Reference Number: t17840526-134

THE WHOLE PROCEEDINGS ON THE KING's Commission of the Peace, Oyer and Terminer, and Gaol Delivery for the CITY of LONDON; AND ALSO, The Gaol Delivery for the County of Middlesex; HELD AT JUSTICE HALL in the OLD BAILEY, On Wednesday the 26th of MAY, 1784, and the following Days;

Being the FIFTH SESSION in the Mayoralty of The Right Hon. ROBERT PECKHAM , Esq; LORD MAYOR OF THE CITY OF LONDON.

TAKEN IN SHORT HAND BY E. HODGSON, PROFESSOR OF SHORT-HAND; And Published by Authority.

NUMBER V. PART X.

LONDON:

Printed for E. HODGSON (the Proprietor) And Sold by J. WALMSLAY, No. 35, Chancery Lane, and S. BLADON, No. 13, Pater-noster Row.

MDCCLXXXIV.

[PRICE SIX-PENCE,]

THE WHOLE PROCEEDINGS UPON THE

KING's Commission of the Peace, Oyer and Terminer, and Gaol Delivery for the CITY of LONDON, &c.

Continuation of the Trial of Cornelius Rose .

Court. Where was this? - It was at Langston harbour.

Was it in the harbour or at sea, when you came the second time? - She was under way, going out of the harbour.

Was she within port? - Yes in the real run of the harbour, in the middle of the tide.

Mr. Justice Willes. Was it within the land mark, within the ebbing and flowing? - Yes, the prisoner struck me with the axe and cut my pistol in two, and my finger almost off, I laying on my back saw the axe extended over my head which I expected into my skull every minute, I immediately begged for mercy and I would immediately leave the cutter; he then let me out; we then all took to our boat again, it was hardly high water at that time, and the vessel being under fall, I said pull up near astern now, she shall not go out if I can prevent it, we did so about fifteen yards, and I says to the gentlemen on board, gentlemen I with not to use you ill, but I wish you would quit the helm for we or us (I cannot tell which) are going to fire? and I believe it was Rose the prisoner, that I heard say, Damn your eyes your buggerer fire away for the helm shall not be quitted; upon that we fired several times, I myself and some of our people I cannot justly say who: at length I saw him fall upon deck, I thought he had been killed, he jumped up again and stood on his legs and said, Damn your eyes you buggerer fire away, I am shot proof, you cannot kill me: with that our ammunition was expended, and we have a Fort by the name of Cumberland Fort, so I said, put me on shore at Easton-beach/ I will go and get some help, and I went and called out for help, and got three soldiers into the boat and went off and went on board her again, when we came along side, pretty near I took my hanger and gave it to one of the soldiers with me, and told him to carry it out with a long arm, and if he offers to strike you I said, strike and I will indemnify you, upon which when he saw that, he drew from the side of the vessel, and the soldier took him.

Did he strike you at all with the axe when he had you down? - I do not recollect but one blow, he struck me with the hatchet the second time I was on board, he got hold of my pistol which I did not chuse to quit, and he cut me right athwart here, and cut my p istol in two parts.

Had you fired that pistol before? - No, (The finger produced in spirits in a bottle) my finger bled very much, we went away directly with the vessel out of the harbour for Portsmouth.

Was any thing found on board this vessel? - I was not there, but we took out two casks of brandy of four gallons each.

Mr. Chetwood Prisoner's Counsel. Was this vessel under way when you first saw her? - Yes.

Did she cast anchor before you went on board of her? - No.

Was she coming right into harbo? - Yes.

Have you a watch-house there? - Yes.

That was the direct way to that watch-house? - Yes.

Did you meet with any, the least resistance the first time? - Not any.

Did not they bring you a candle? - I called for a candle, but I cannot say who got the light.

Did not the prisoner accommodate you with a candle? - I cannot tell.

You will not say it was not him? - I cannot say it was or was not.

You did rummage without any interruption? - Yes.

Did you stop the ship? - They did of their own accord, we staid as long as we pleased without molestation, after that we got into our boat to go on shore thinking to find her not far off, we was of opinion the boat was behind.

You saw no boat? - No, Sir, we found no boat.

When you got into you own boat, did not you fire immediately? - No, Sir, not immediately, we went on shore first, and got some shovels in order to search.

Was you perfectly sober when you came back the second time, or the first? - Yes, Sir.

Had not you tasted any brandy whatever? - No brandy whatever.

Had you drank nothing that day? - I cannot tell that, I was as sober as I am now.

Upon you oath had there not been a pistol fired on the people on board? - Not to my knowledge, I know nothing of any being fired, if -

What did you mean by the word if? - I really know nothing of it.

How many pistols were fired? - I cannot say.

Were there twenty do you think? - I cannot say.

Then there might be twenty pistols fired at the man? - I cannot say.

Was not he full in view when you fired at him? - The major part of the time; I know nothing of ever a one being fired before we boarded the second time.

You boarded the second time? - Yes.

You saw a scuffle between the prisoner and Ward? - Yes.

Upon your oath can you recollect who it was that began the scuffle? - I cannot say, there was a man stood between me and him when I got into the vessel, so that I cannot say, I went to his assistance as soon as I saw the blows struck, I cannot tell how many blows passed, I was coming up with the pistol I was pointing it.

Then you was in the act of pointing it at the man's head, not knowing who began the scuffle? - I saw the prisoner strike him, I pointed the pistol against the prisoner.

The prisoner had done nothing against you at that instant? - I went in defence of my brother officer.

How far might the pistol be from his head? - Not a great way.

Within half a foot? - I cannot say.

A foot? - I cannot say.

He meant to disarm you by the blow? - I cannot tell that.

The blow was levelled at the pistol, was not it? - Yes and my hand too.

He did not attempt to cut at your head? - No.

After you got into your boat, whether it was out of resentment or no, I believe you fired a great many pistols at him? - Yes, several.

He did not attempt to fire at you? - I never saw him.

You saw the man fall? - Yes.

You knew he was wounded after? - Yes, or at least he shewed us that his breast was wounded, whether it was before that or no I cannot say.

Do not you know that he intended to prosecute you for firing at him? - I do not know any thing of it.

Did not he tell you so? - I do not remember it.

If you had not been aware of something of that kind, upon your oath would you have thought of prosecuting this man? - Upon my word I know nothing of a prosecution being mentioned, I never heard it.

Court. Government would not have known any thing at all of the business.

Had you given information and attempted to set on foot such a prosecution as this, prior to the time that you heard that the man meant to prosecute you for firing at him? - I never heard of any prosecution being mentioned against us.

Court. That is not an answer.

At the very time that he shewed you his wounds, did not he say he would bring anaction against you? - I never heard him say so.

Court. Why was not the prosecution against the prisoner instituted earlier? - I cannot say.

Mr. Solicitor General. The man escaped a long while.

Mr. Garrow. That did not prevent his being indicted, it is not necessary he should be in custody to be indicted, and your Lordship knows there has been an Admiralty sessions since.

Court. This was a scuffle between two persons, and they had no fire arms, they do not seem to me to come within the description of armed persons that this act of Parliament meant to provide against; and in a capital case as this is, where he meant to give up that property without opposition, and had twenty pistols fired at him, it seems to me to be a hard prosecution. This is not that sort of case that you should prosecute against this man with rigour; I only put it to your own candour, I have nothing to do but to try the cause.

Mr. Solicitor General. My Lord, I beg leave to go through the case.

Court. To bring such a case as this before an English Jury, I think it is a hard prosecution; for you hear all this while he never thought of his finger, but renews the attack: my brother Willes is of the same opinion.

Mr. Justice Willes. I have often heard it said, by a very great man who is now alive, that the Crown should never prosecute but where every thing is very clear.

Mr. Garrow. My Lord, we are charged with cutting his finger off, and the surgeon cut it off after: I submit it is too soon for us to offer to discuss the law till the facts are proved.

Mr. Wilson. Was the blow given while you was standing with the pistol in your hand at the head of the prisoner, or after you was down? - After I was down.

When was you examined? - The night following.

You begged for mercy and he granted it you on condition of your quitting the vessel? - I take it so.

Court. Are you an officer of the customs? - I am boatman.

Was you then in the execution of your office? - Yes, they were all officers.

How many had you on board? - There were myself, Ward, Elbin, Coward, and one Perry, he is not here.

On board the cutter there were only three persons? - Only three, the master, the prisoner, and a passenger, as he informed us, he did not meddle or make.

Had they any fire arms? - I did not see them have any.

WILLIAM WARD sworn.

I am a boatman in the Custom-house service; I was in October last with Morze at Haylin island, four miles from Portsmouth; about eleven at night me and Morze, Elbin, Coward, and Perry, took our boat to board this vessel, we came up with her before she dropped anchor, we went on board, there was no opposition to

that; we searched the ballast for goods but saw none, but we saw the marks of small casks in the ballast; we next went in search after the boat, which we expected was gone from the cutter, we could not see any thing of the boat, and we returned again to the vessel a second time; we attempted to board her, and the prisoner stood with a hatchet in his hand, he was the master of this vessel, in order to cut any body down that should attempt to board her.

Did he make use of any expressions? - I did not hear him; as I got on board he up with the hatchet and knocked me on the head very much; Morze came on board after he had struck me, he came before the mast to come to my assistance.

What passed between you and Morze, and the prisoner? - I cannot say, I was so stunned with the blows I received with the hatchet, I did not see what passed afterwards.

How long was it before you recovered your senses? - Sometimes, I do not know rightly how I got into the boat, I found myself in the boat on recovering my senses; we went on shore, and got some soldiers, and pursued the ship and came up with her; and we jumped on: board; they swore we should not, but we did, and I took the hatchet out of his hand.

Had you made any attack on them, previous to your going on board; did you fire on them? - I did not fire on them, I do not know who did; I took charge of the cutter and carried her into Portsmouth; there were two casks of brandy found; I was not in the hold at the taking of them.

(The hatchet produced.)

In what station was the vessel when you was knocked down? - In the harbour, just going out, it was some time after she was under way; that was the third time of my boarding her.

Court. The limits of all ports are ascertained by survey, have you that here? - Yes.

Mr. Peat, another of Prisoner's Council. What are the usual limits of that port as they are generally understood by seamen? I do not know.

You met with no obstruction in going on board the first time? - No, we saw the prisoner the first time.

Was it the prisoner that furnished you with a candle to examine the vessel? - I cannot say who did.

You went off very peaceably then into your boat again? - Yes.

When did you go after the boat of the vessel? - After the first time.

Did you see any thing that passed between the last witness and the prisoner? - No.

How many times was the vessel fired at? - I cannot say.

Were there many pistols fired? - There might be a dozen.

Did you see any thing that passed between the last witness and the prisoner? - No.

Is an hatchet an instrument usually carried in vessels at sea? - Yes.

Are they carried for the purpose of cutting wood, ropes, and other things, or are they carried as weapons of defence? - I cannot say.

Can you do without those hatchets? - Not cleverly.

Did you understand them as defensive weapons? - Never before that.

Did you hear any thing that passed between Morze and the prisoner? - I cannot say that I did.

Court. What brandy was on board? - An hundred and five casks of brandy.

What size were they? - All four gallons.

What was her name? - The Eagle cutter.

Mr. Solicitor. My Lord, every ship is bound to admit the Custom-house officers on board her when she comes within the limits of a harbour.

Court. And so they did.

WILLIAM COWARD sworn.

Examined by Mr. Solicitor General.

On the 9th of October last I was on board a Custom-house boat with others, at

eleven o'clock I was on the look out, and I saw a vessel coming along, I called the people, and took the boat and went on board of her; she brought to and came to an anchor; when we came on board Mr. Morze and Mr. Ward went to examine, to see what she had got, suspecting she had got smuggled goods; I was not below; we did not stay any great while; we left one person on board; we imagined the boat had gone off with goods, and we went in search of her, we went no great distance, we saw she was getting under way again and we changed our minds; we went on shore and got two shovels and a spade to examine the ballast, suspecting that there were goods by the marks of casks which we saw on the top of the ballast; we had not seen any goods then: we came back a second time, in order to board her, but the prisoner refused our coming on board, he had an axe or hatchet in his hand, and he swore we should not come on board, but that the first man that did so would be a dead man; then his man and he consented we should come on board and take the goods and not the cutter, which we agreed to; upon this agreement Mr. Ward jumped on board first, and as soon as he jumped on board Mr. Rose altered his mind again, and swore we should not have the goods till the vessel was out of the harbour; he knocked Ward down, and Morze jumped on board to Ward's assistance, and he came round the mast and met Morze just before the mast, and took hold of him and threw him down, and gave him a cut with the hatchet, which cut his finger and the nob of his pistol off.

Had Morze or any body fired any pistols at this time? - No, Sir, nobody; Mr. Morze called for assistance and help, and Rose told him if he did not quit the vessel he would murder him, and by that means he got away, and got into the boat, and ordered the boat to be put off.

Who went into the boat? - We all five went in, Morze, Ward, Elbin, myself, and another, we then dropped aftern, and Morze told Rose he would fire, upon which Rose said we might fire and be damned, we fired several shot, and wanting more assistance, we went on shore on the west side, there we took the three soldiers; we went and boarded her a third time, and Rose came forwards, and was going to get out an oar, but he could not manage it, being too long; then we proceded to Portsmouth with this vessel; I went below by Mr. Morze's order with the shovel, and dug out two casks that held four gallons each; I bored one of them in order to taste what it was, and it turned out to be brandy; we let these two casks abide on the ballast till we got to Portsmouth, then we brought her up, and Perry and I were going out with the anchor, and Rose jumped overboard, and a wherry just by took him in, we rowed after him, but he out rowed us; I saw no more of him; I was not on board the cutter afterwards; the name of the vessel was the Eagle, I have seen her twice before.

What had Ward done when he came on board the second time? - He went in order to take possession of the vessel, to bring her to an anchor, in order to take the goods out.

Had he done any thing to the person of the prisoner himself? - No, Sir, the prisoner catched hold of him first, and knocked him down; Morze jumped over-board to his assistance.

Mr. Chetwood. You went with him the first time yourself? - Yes.

Did you meet with any resistance the first time? - No.

Did not you rather receive a contrary treatment? - We asked for a candle, and they brought us one.

Did not they say you were welcome to search any part of the ship? - Yes.

After you were sufficiently satisfied, you went away? - Yes.

When you came back again, you say there was a kind of fight between Morze and the prisoner Rose? - Yes.

Do you know how that struggle began? - The prisoner took hold of Morze first.

Was not it a struggle who should lay hold of the helm? - I imagine it must.

He did not go to throw the anchor, but the quarrel was at the stern of the vessel? - Yes.

When this stroke was given the prisoner had had no words at all with Morze on board the ship? - No, none.

Did you see Morze run to Ward's assistance? - He was not running for assistance, the prisoner came round towards him.

Did not he go towards him; were not Ward and Rose engaged in a struggle at the time that Morze pointed the pistol at his head? - I cannot say.

Did you see him point that pistol? - I did not.

Upon your oath now? - I did not see the position of the hand, I did not see the hand at the time the injury was done, but I saw the blow made.

You had full possession of the vessel? - Yes.

Did you find any pistols or guns on board? - There was a musquet.

But you never saw it brought into use; cannot you swear positively that he did not bring the gun to him? - No, I cannot.

Did you see the gun in his hand? - No.

Then cannot you swear he had none: how many shot were fired at this poor man? - I cannot say.

Twenty times? - Not as I know of.

How many do you think? - I cannot say.

Was it sixteen or eighteen? - I cannot recollect.

Did he call any body to his assistance? - I did not hear him.

There are hatchets are board every vessel? - I know nothing about that.

It was agreed that you should have the liquor and he the vessel, was not it known on board the vessel that he had received a ball in his breast? - I did not see it.

Did you try whether the musquet was loaded afterwards? - I did not try it.

Court. You left a person on board the cutter? - Yes.

And you meant to return? - Yes.

HENRY TUTTY sworn.

I am a surgeon, I know Richard Morze , he applied to me on the 10th of October about five in the morning, the man had lost a vast deal of blood, I advised him to sit and compose himself for about an hour, in the mean while I got things necessary for the amputation of his finger, which I found to be necessary.

When he had composed himself, did you amputate it? - I did.

Did you, as a surgeon and a man of business, conceive it to be necessary; I thought it very necessary myself, and I likewise made the man sensible of it, before I performed it.

What was the appearance of his hand? - His finger was very much cut, and the bone quite divided, it was absolutely necessary to amputate it.

Mr. Peatt. Amputations are frequently necessary from the most trivial causes in their origin, are not they? - Yes.

Such as a whitlow for instance? - Yes; the finger was slit long ways, th e bone was divided in the middle longitudine as we call it.

That might arise from the rebounding of fire arms? - I should think not, it appeared to be done with a sharp pointed instrument, I cannot say what instrument.

DENNIS FELL sworn.

Here is an office copy of the limits of the port of Portsmouth, examined by the original, (read) dated 28th September 1682.

Mr. Wilson. Now I will call a witness to prove that Langston is within the limits mentioned herein.

EDWARD EARLE sworn.

Court. By this survey it appears that Portsmouth is not a port of itself, it is only a member of that port; if the Gentlemen that are Council for the prisoner, think

there is a any thing in that objection, I shall reserve it for them.

Mr. Peatt. I submit to your Lordship with great deference, that in descriptions of this kind, entirely relating to marine affairs, as a Jury are not so well instructed to judge of them, they ought to have produced a plan of the harbour to be submitted to the Jury for their inspection, in order that they might ascertain the locality of this vessel when she was attacked, and particularly in a case so highly penal as this is.

Mr. Solicitor General. In answer to that, any plan we can produce is no evidence at all.

Court. You charge in this indictment this to have been done in the port of Portsmouth, whereas Portsmouth is not a port, it is the port of Southampton, of which Portsmouth is only a member; upon that foundation alone I think you ought not to go on.

Mr. Solicitor General. If your Lordship will please to reserve that.

Mr. Baron Perryn . Exclusive of that objection in this case, whether a hatchet is an offensive weapon or not, the act of parliament recites at the outset of it,

"whereas divers dissolute persons have associated themselves, and entered into confederacies, and have appeared in great gangs in carrying fire arms and other offensive weapons, and have run divers goods, &c. or in obstructing the officers of the revenue in the execution of their office, &c." then the act of Parliament provides this,

"that if any persons, to the number of three or four, armed with offensive weapons;" now here are three persons, but one of them is merely a passenger, he is not assisting them, so that in fact there are but two. Then it goes on,

"that with offensive weapons," why this is not an offensive weapon; they give him free access, and one of their own men is left actually in possession, whilst they went in pursuit of the cutter boat; then they return again, when this affray happened; then the act of Parliament goes on,

"or shall be aiding and assisting in the illegal exportation of goods," &c. that is not the case;

"or in

"rescuing or taking away the same." that is not this case;

"or in rescuing any person who shall be apprehended, &." or in case any persons to the number of three or four so armed as aforesaid, shall be aiding or assisting;" and then comes the clause which I suppose you rely on,

"or if any person shall have his face blacked or in disguise;" this all applies to smugglers who go in gangs;

"or shall obstruct or hinder any of the officers of the Excise in the seizing or carrying off any such goods; or shall maim or dangerously wound any officer of the Customs, or any officer of his Majesty's revenue, in his attempting to go on board any vessel; every person so offending shall be adjudged guilty of felony, and suffer death," this appears to me a clause subsequent to the seizing prohibited goods on board a ship or vessel; but then the provisions are relative to three persons, the weapons must be of a dangerous nature, and according to my apprehension it applies to this clause as much as the other.

Mr. Wilson. My Lord, it is in the singular number the last clause.

Court. It is any person that is part of these gangs.

Mr. Justice Willes. It says, in case any person shall do so and so, and be so aiding and assisting, there I think the first part of the act concludes, what comes after? The words are

"If any person shall from and after the said 24th day of July have his face blacked, or wear a wizard mask when passing with such goods," that is one substantive clause, then comes another,

"or shall obstruct, &c. any of his Majesty's officers of Excise, &c." the word person goes to that clause; then it comes

"if any person or persons shall maim or dangerously wound any officer of his Majesty's Customs," I look upon all this to be substantive, and if this offence is fully proved, my opinion is on the last clause if clearly within the last clause, but I wish to have the other objection reserved about the Port.

Mr. Chetwood. Your Lordship observes

that with respect to that

"attempting to board," they had actually boarded.

Court. That is a consideration for the Jury.

Mr. Garrow. My Lord, as to the law of the case which has been suggested from the bench with respect to the description of the port it seems to me to be unanswerable; I hope therefore your Lordship will not suffer it to go to a Jury, and let this man remain in gaol if you are clear there is a fatal objection: the Crown have described where this offence was committed, they have stated it to be within the limits of the port of Portsmouth, averring that the port of Portsmouth was one of the ports of the kingdom; that they prove by proving the direct reverse; and with respect to the maiming, I take it the act of maiming has been committed by the Surgeon, I believe the finger might have been splintered and it would have united at the expence of a stiff joint: now as to the instrument, it is an instrument caught up in a hurry, to beat down that pistol which was levelled at his head; for Morze says, it cut the pistol quite through and cut his finger, it has appeared in evidence that this is a necessary instrument in the prisoner's trade, in his business, in his calling on board of ship, for protecting his own life, and that in cutting down that pistol which was cocked at the head of the men they found on board the vessel, he has injured this man's hand: can your Lordship believe, that this man thought to protect himself against the whole gang of Custom-house Officers.

Mr. Chetwood. I shall humbly move your Lordship, that Elby may be called to shew how he was treated whilst they left the vessel.

Mr. Justice Willes. Very proper certainly.

Mr. Solicitor General. My Lord that it should necessarily be a weapon offensive in its own nature, is to me perfectly new; the clause in the act of Parliament describes no weapons, none; it is sufficient that a Custom-house officer goes on board a vessel and is maimed in so doing, not one of these clauses have any thing whatever to do with this substantive clause which says, if any person or persons, &c.

Mr. Baron Perryn . You need not trouble yourself, for I am of opinion now with my brother Willes, that this is a substantive clause.

Mr. Solicitor. With respect to the point of the Port, at least it is so new a point, I hope you will not form a Judgment upon it, the Exchequer Records themselves treat the Port of Portsmouth as a Port.

Court. If a thing passes sub-silentio that is no valid authority, but my objections is that the evidence you have now adduced to prove the allegations in the indictment, proves directly the reverse, for instead of shewing this is the Port of Portsmouth it proves directly the contrary: what may have been done in former cases I do not know, or what was produced, or whether the objection was taken; the part you have read directly negatives your charge in the indictment, which says it is within the limits of the port of Portsmouth, that being one of the ports of this kingdom; the evidence you have brought to shew this, says the direct contrary!

Mr. Fell called again. This is a true copy of the condemnation of the 105 gallons in the Exchequer.

Mr. Garrow. We admit it.

EDWARD HERLE sworn.

Examined by Mr. Russel.

Do you know the port of Portsmouth? - Yes.

Is a vessel in Langstown harbour, that has passed Haylin Island in the limits of the port of Portsmouth? - I understand so.

You are an officer of the port of Portsmouth? - Yes.

And you have officiated and done duty in this place as in the limits of the port of Portsmouth? - Yes.

Mr. Chetwood. Do you know the port of Southampton? - No.

Is not the port of Portsmouth a part and member of the port of Southampton? - I know nothing to the contrary.

Can you say that the place called Haylin Island is not within the limits of the port of Southampton? - I cannot say.

Can you say where the port of Southampton or the port of Portsmouth begins or ends? - I am not competent.

FOR THE PRISONER.

- ELGIN sworn.

Examined by Mr. Peat.

I am a Custom-house Officer, I went on board this ship with Morze and the rest as has been mentioned, I was not obstructed the first time, a candle was provided.

They went away and left you in possession of the vessel? - Yes.

Did you receive any ill treatment from the men while you was in possession of the vessel? - No, Sir.

He did not attempt to force you out of the vessel? - No.

But continued his course towards the Custom-house? - Yes.

You continued in peaceable quiet till the boat came along side the second time? - I never received any ill treatment at all.

Do you remember Ward and Morze coming back with the shovels? - Yes, I was then in the cabbin, when I came upon the deck, I looked forward and saw William Ward and Captain Rose closely engaged.

What did you see the prisoner do to William Ward ? - The Captain had a hatchet in his hand, which he held up over Ward's head and I slipped down on the deck, and hurt myself all across my back, when I got up I was obliged to get out of the vessel, and Mr. Morze stepped on board the cutter, and I saw him on his back, and I hardly knew what to do, and I took up the musket, and laid it down again for fear I should do a wrong thing.

Did you see at that time the prisoner strike Ward? - No, Sir, I cannot say I did.

When he had Morze down on the deck, what did he do to him? - I cannot say, I never saw him strike a blow.

Court to Jury. Gentlemen of the Jury, This man seems to me to have struck at the pistol, and by knocking off the nossel of the pistol the finger has been wounded; and by unskilfulness in treatment, or his delay in applying to the Surgeon, the man has lost his finger; you observe the scuffle did not begin between Rose and the prisoner, but between the prisoner and Ward; and with respect to the wound whatever it might have been originally, I suppose with proper treatment the finger might have been saved, but you see this man after he has received this violent wound from which he afterwards loses his finger, his pistol not succeeding, and all his ammunition expended, he goes on shore, gets assistance, takes the vessel, goes into harbour and then first applies for a surgeon, and you see in this further struggle great part of the injury might be occasioned. A question arises on the limits of the ports of Portsmouth, which will be referred to the consideration of the Judges if you should be of opinion that the prisoner is guilty, and which is not necessary for me to state to you: but if you are of opinion that in pointing the pistol at the man's head he acted only in his own defence, and not with any design on the revenue officers; and that all that this man wished was to have the benefit of that agreement mentioned by one of the witnesses; and that this man was not obstructed in the due execution of his office; then in my apprehension you may very fairly conclude that the prisoner is not guilty of the offence in this indictment.

NOT GUILTY .

Tried by the second Middlesex Jury before Mr. Baron PERRYN .

Reference Number: t17840526-135

658. STEPHEN BACCI was indicted for wilful and corrupt perjury, in Trinity term last, in a certain action depending in the Court of King's Bench, wherein Chevalier Assereto was plaintiff, and Leopar Viscount de Patin, defendant .

Mr. Garrow opened the indictment, stating, That an issue having been joined, came to be tried before William Earl of Mansfield, and a special Jury, on the 12th of December 1783, when a verdict for 1000 l. was given, subject to the arbitrement of the gentleman to whom it was referred; and that on the 8th of January, the said Stephen Bacci appeared as a witness for the plaintiff before Sir William Henry Ashhurst, one of the Judges of the said Court, and was there sworn to give due evidence before the arbitrators as a witness in that cause; and he was afterwards examined, and deposed to the following purport, viz. that the laces, meaning a certain quantity of laces alledged by the Chevalier to have been on board a certain ship called the Counte Clerfait, were in a bank or seat of a window, called a locker, on the side of the said ship; that he saw the laces, and they were shewn to him by the Captain, that he heard something break, and he saw the said defendant Patin with a chissel forcing the locker, and that upon entering the room the said defendant asked with haughtiness what he had to do there; whereas in truth and in fact the plaintiff had not any laces in the window seat, and the said defendant Patin did not at any time whatever force open the said locker.

Mr. Sylvester opened the case as follows: May it please your Lordship, and you gentlemen of the Jury; this is an indictment, as it has been opened to you, against the prisoner, for wilful and corrupt perjury. In all the catalogue of offences, there is not one of a deeper die than that of perjury; it involves in it almost every other kind of offence; in this case it involves in it, not only a charge of robbery by certain persons, but a destroying of the character of the persons so accused, for it is no less than a charge made by the prisoner against a gentleman of the name of De Patin, that he had taken out of a vessel a large quantity of laced ruffles, to the value of between 300 l. and 400 l. The prisoner now before you, Gentlemen, to be tried for this crime of perjury, was a seaman on board a ship, called Counte Clerfait; the ship belonged to a lady in Flanders, the Countess Proli. In that country the ladies are somewhat more industrious than our's are here in England, for many of them carry on the business of merchants and banking houses, and the most considerable banking house now at Paris is carried on by a lady, Lady Allen. A ship was procured, and the command given to the Chevalier Assereto, she engaged him for the voyage, and it was not long before she had reason to repent of having given him the command; for instead of proceeding to the East Indies, as he should have done, he by unskilfulness got to the coast of England, the ship run aground on the Goodwin Sands, and being greatly injured, application was made here to Anthony Songu , Esq; the Imperial Consul, on this business, and a letter was wrote to Madame Proli, to inform her of the arrival of the ship, and the danger she had been in; she applied to the Viscount Patin, Lieutenant-Colonel Commandant of Bruges in

Flanders, to come on her behalf to England; he came, and the Consul accompanied him to Ramsgate, and got possession of the ship and cargo, and another Captain was appointed to succeed Captain Assereto , of the name of Laurens. Captain Assereto being extremely hurt at having the command taken from him, he consulted my worthy friend here Mr. Morgan; he first told him a story, and my friend told him that will not do, the action will not lay upon that; then he, Captain Assereto , mended the story, and my learned friend said now the action will lay -

(Court. How came you, Mr. Morgan, to let your friend, Mr. Sylvester, into the secrets of your consultation?)

The cause, my Lord, was referred to Mr. Lowton, a man of known abilities; and amongst the rest of the articles there was one for lace, and the prisoner now before you was produced as a witness, and he then by way of inducing the arbitrator to allow this article, swore that the laces were in a bank or seat window on the left-hand side of the cabin, that he saw the laces, that they were shewn to him the last hour before the Captain went to Flanders, and that three or four days after, De Patin went into the cabbin, and the defendant saw De Patin with a chissel breaking the locker, and in three or four minutes after the said De Patin asked the prisoner now before you, with haughtiness, what he did there, and ordered him to go away; and swore that Mr. Laurens the mate was then present; this witness being produced, and swearing positively to this fact, the fact was as positively denied on the other side; the consequence of that was, that Mr. Lowton determined in favour of Viscount De Patin, and did not allow the account. Mr. Lowton by his award states thus,

"I do find, and adjudge, and determine, that there is not any sum of money whatever due and owing from the said defendant, Viscount Patin, to the plaintiff Assereto." Now if this man had been believed, there certainly would have been a loss of 335 l. and upwards, the value of these laces: you see therefore, Gentlemen, how material this point was before the arbitrator, because, if true, there must have been an award against the defendant in that action; it is therefore not only a foul perjury in this man the prisoner now before you, but a wicked imputation on Viscount Patin, a Gentleman of the first character, in order to deprive him of his honour, charging him with the taking these laces in a clandestine way. Viscount De Patin finds himself bound therefore in point of honour to bring this before the Court, in order that his character may be cleared, and that it may not go forth to the world, that he had gone on bord the ship and stole these laces. Gentlemen, you will hear the facts, and if they are true, there cannot be a doubt but the prisoner Stephen Bacci has been tampered with by Chevalier Assereto, to commit this bold and wilful perjury. The Chevalier himself has been also indicted, but he has withdrawn himself. The cause cannot be a long one; I shall call two witnesses to contradict those facts; if the facts are contradicted, and you credit that contradiction, you must find the defendant Bacci, now before you, guilty of wilful and corrupt perjury, imputed to him by the indictment.

Court. What award did Mr. Lowton make? - That there was not any thing due from Viscount Patin to the Chevalier Assereto.

EDWARD RICHARDS sworn.

I am clerk to Mr. Lewis, this is an office copy of the judgment, which I examined with the record of the Court of King's Bench.

(The Record read.)

Assereto against Leopard Viscount De Patin. Afterwards on Friday next, after eight days of St. Hilary, &c. shall first come on Monday the first day of December, at which day afterwards, that is to say, on the day and place within contained, came as well the within named plaintiff and defendant, &c.

Mr. Morgan, one of defendant's Council. My Lord, at the very last sessions but one a cause of this kind came on; the proceedings should have been continued down to the 18th, the day the cause was tried, I thought it was a fatal objection, and the Council on the other side gave it up, and the defendant was acquitted. I submit that the record may relate to another trial not contained in this indictment, and that they cannot call any parol evidence to support the record: this is stated to have been on Monday the first of December, and they cannot give any evidence to support this indictment, which states it to be on Friday.

Mr. Sylvester. We now go to prove that this was tried on the 12th.

Mr. Rose, another of the defendant's Council. My Lord, I do not know that I can state it more fully than Mr. Morgan has done, but I take it, whatever they state on the indictment they are bound to prove; if the record produced before this Court states one transaction or issue to be tried at a different time to the first stated in the indictment, they cannot be permitted to go into separate evidence, and they have stated a different day on the indictment: could they or not have stated it agreeable to the record? if they could, I beg leave to contend they are bound by law to state it so; therefore, I trust they cannot give any parol evidence on this matter whatever, and that the Court will be of opinion, that this is a fatal objection, and that there must be an end to it.

Mr. Garrow. My Lord, the learned gentleman says, you have produced a certain piece of evidence to prove this fact; I say no, it is not with a view to that, it is not a fact assumed in our indictment that the continuance was down to the 12th of December, if we had stated it we should have committed an error; the fact stated in our indictment is this, that at a sitting at Nisi Prius this cause came on to be tried, not that it was continued till that day, and then came on to be tried; I should contend that the sitting at Nisi Prius is a continuation, that it is all one day, but I am not at all driven to that by the evidence that I shall by and by produce, in affirmance of the fact stated in our indictment.

Court. If it is one continued day then it is not the first day.

Mr. Sylvester. We state thus, and which is according to the rule or order of Nisi Prius, made by the Judges before whom the cause was tried, viz.

"that afterwards, to wit, on Friday the 12th day of December, at the sitting at Nisi Prius, then holden &c. on the 12th of December, this cause came on to be tried;" if we had stated any other day it would have been a fatal objection: in the former case mentioned by Mr. Morgan, we stated it to be on the day stated in the record; says Mr. Morgan you must state the fact truly, you say on the 12th of December, you ought to state the 14th of December.

Court. That is reasoning on a case which was not an adjudged case, in which no peremptory opinion was given, even by the learned judge who tried it.

Mr. Garrow. I understand the objection to be this or nothing; that what we have produced not only does not make out our fact, but that it proves something contrary to the fact alledged in the indictment; now is there in the copy of the judgment one single tittle of the trial of the cause?

Court. I will read it to you,

"unless the King's right trusty and well beloved William Earl of Mansfield shall first come on Monday the 1st day of December, at which day before our said Lord the King at Westminster, the said parties came, &c. and afterwards, on the day and at the place, &c. came as well the within named, &c." then it recites the whole trial of the issue.

Mr. Garrow. It is not easy for me at all to recover the scattered ideas that have suggested themselves on the moment, before the learned gentleman objects, I shall be permitted perhaps to state for what purpose I call for the judgement; having stated that there was a cause upon the ground of which alone the arbitrator had the authority to examine the witness, I call for this instrument to prove this fact, that there was a

plaintiff and defendant, and that there was a cause which was at issue; I should not then have entitled myself to produce any thing which the arbitrator has done in consequence of the issue so joined, because I must go one step further, and I must shew, that in point of fact this cause came on to be tried on the 12th of December; was there ever a record made up in this way, unless he shall come the first day of December, and then stating that the cause was tried on the 12th? they presume that which in point of practice used to be the case; namely, that the cause comes on to be heard on that day when the Chief Justice is expected to hold his sitting of Nisi Prius. I ask the Gentleman whether he will contend this, that if we had asserted in our indictment that the cause came on to be tried on the first day of December, which was the first day of the sitting of Nisi Prius, and I had called Mr. Richards, who would have told you the cause was not tried till the 12th, would they not have said this contradicts your indictment?

Court. Why could not you state it thus,

"and afterwards at a sitting of Nisi Prius, held on Monday the first of December, and afterwards continued till the 12th of December, came on to be tried, &c." it would surely have been conformable both to the fact and the record.

Mr. Morgan. I say in an indictment of this kind you are to prove every thing, and the record says the cause was tried on Monday the 1st, whereas in the indictment it is stated that it was not tried till Friday the 12th.

Court. The question, as it seems to me at present, is this, whether the day of the trial is or is not material to be stated: it is a general rule that that which comes in any process of law under a videlicet, is not considered as a direct allegation; the question will be, whether the indictment would have been good if it had stated,

"that afterwards, at a sitting of Nisi Prius held, the cause came on to be tried," I never saw an indictment in that form. If the indictment had stated it thus,

"on Friday the 12th of December, came on to be tried, &c." it would have been an averment: I have not a doubt but if the allegation is material the objection is fatal; you might have stated in the indictment, that that came on at a sitting of Nisi Prius, held on that day and continued by adjournments; but the objection for which you produce your record, is totally immaterial; you produce it to prove one fact, upon the face of that there is another fact clear; and shall I permit you to contradict it by parol evidence?

Mr. Garrow. My Lord, we beg leave to save the point.

Court. I do not see how you could possibly have stated this so as to be good, without stating the day, I have been trying to leave out the day, and make the averment compleat without it: how could you state this at all without stating the day? that is the only way in which you can make it good. I have not a doubt in my own mind.

Mr. Sylvester. I trust the Court will reserve the point.

Mr. Morgan. This is not a new point.

Mr. Sylvester. They do not shew us a case.

Court. There can be no case produced but by analogy, because the same variance may or may not occur: all the object that is of consequence to the prosecutor Viscount De Patin is obtained, by the defendant being acquitted on a point of variance; but we must not break through the rules of law, and I think it right publickly to say, that the prosecutor's character is as compleatly vindicated, as by the most solemn trial; for the evidence of the man at the bar has been fully investigated by a gentleman of character and great experience, who is unconnected with every party, and who has thought his evidence undeserving the smallest credit. If you state a case of consequence in a Court of law, the meaning is, that it is of consequence in point of precedent; now this certainly is not, because the objection, if a good one, which I think it is, is so easily guarded against, nothing to do but to state the adjournment; and as to

the honour of the prosecutor Viscount De Patin, which was attacked by the defendapt's evidence, it is as fully vindicated as it could be by any trial. I, as a Judge, should decide according to my own opinion; supposing it to be a point of consequence, it does not therefore follow, that a Judge should reserve a case where he has no doubt, for that implies a doubt in the mind of the Judge. If my opinion is wrong, you may bring a writ of error upon that judgement, that will be given in the verdict of acquittal, and assign error in fact. The opinion of no Judge in this country can conclude in point of law; there must be always a way of resorting from the erroneous opinion of a Judge in any Court of law, except in those cases which are taken care of by act of Parliament. I am of opinion that the defendant ought to be acquitted.

NOT GUILTY .

Tried by the London Jury before Mr. RECORDER.

Reference Number: t17840526-136

659. JOHN KING was called, in order to plead to an indictment for wilful and corrupt perjury , but not appearing, he was called on his recognizance, which was ordered to be estreated.

Reference Number: t17840526-137

660. ANN BURGESS was indicted for feloniously receiving, on the 16th of May, two quart pots, value 2 s. the property of John Tisdale , well knowing them to be stolen; and also for receiving three pint pewter pots, value 2 s. stolen by a person unknown; and for receiving one other pint pot, value 10 d. the property of John Janeway .

NOT GUILTY .

Reference Number: s17840526-1

The Trials being ended, the Court proceeded to give Judgment as follows:

Received sentence of death, 11.

Sarah Slater , Isaac Simms , Nathaniel Collier , John Richards , George Dane , John Branton , John Hunter , John Harris , Thomas White , Mary Garrett , William Thompson , otherwise Peter Smith .

Transported for seven years, 40.

William Smith , John Ayners , John Adams , John Anderson , James Bagley , Francis Blake , Edward Hudson , Samuel Peyton , William Parker , Joseph Murrell , William Cady , Thomas Darkiss , Joseph Wright , John Hill , Henry Davis , Joseph Levy , James Bradley , Ann Wright , Thomas Tyler , Samuel Matthison , Mary Lawrence , John Archer , Thomas Bradley , William Thompson , Samuel Bennere , James Dealey , John Key , Robert Jones , David Lankey , Benjamin Wright , Robert Morgan , Daniel Daniels , John Chipchase , John Welch , David Richards , John Neale , John Tate , Richard Sanders , Andrew Hackman , Moses Pike , (he has since been pardoned.)

To be imprisoned two years in Newgate, 2.

George Matthews , John Matthews .

To be imprisoned one month in Newgate, 3.

Edward Reubens , William Perry , James Bellamy .

To be confined to hard labour twelve months in the House of Correction, 4.

Elizabeth Day , Mary Carter , Elizabeth Miller , Alexander Elder , (whipped.)

Confined to hard labour six months in the House of Correction, 6.

Christiana, alias Catherine Wigmore , Ann Roberts , alias Hall, Sarah Northey , Frances Fielder , otherwise Jones, Sarah Scott , Ann Hannaway .

Whipped, 12.

William Harrison , William Gardner , John Dean , John Paul , George Spittle , William Mountain , Alexander Elder , Edward M'Quid , George Hyatt , Edward Nunn , Patrick Kennock , William Lane .

Fined sixpence, 1.

John Taylor .

Sentence respited on Joseph Hickman and James Dyers till next Sessions.


View as XML