Old Bailey Proceedings Online (www.oldbaileyonline.org, version 7.2, 02 July 2016), April 1844, trial of WILLIAM HENRY BARBER JOSHUA FLETCHER GEORGIANA DOREY (t18440408-1058).


1058. WILLIAM HENRY BARBER, JOSHUA FLETCHER , and GEORGIANA DOREY , were indicted for feloniously inciting one Susannah Richards, now deceased, to forge a certain administration bond, with intent to defraud the Archbishop of Canterbury.—2nd COUNT, stating their intent to be to defraud the Right Hon. Charles Shaw Lefevre, and others, Commissioners for the Reduction of the National Debt.—Other COUNTS varying the manner of stating the charge.


BAYLEY, conducted the Prosecution.

JOHN WILLIAM SEATON . I am a clerk in the Prerogative-office, Doctors

Commons—I produce a warrant for taking the act of administration granted to Elizabeth Stewart, the bond that was executed on that occasion, an affidavit annexed to certain certificates of baptism, and a copy of affidavit—the original, according to the regulations of the office, would be at Somerset House.

GEORGE BENNETT , clerk in the Stamp-office, here produced an affidavit.

JOHN ELLIOTT PAISLEY ROBERTSON , D.C.L. I am a surrogate of the Prerogative Court—the parties purporting to be the persons named in these documents, were sworn in my presence—my signature is to this affidavit of Elizabeth Stewart and Thomas Griffin, dated 26th Aug. 1840—this affidavit, dated 31st July, 1840, was sworn before me, purporting to be the affidavit of Elizabeth Stewart—here is the warrant of the amount of property sworn to, which the affidavit of the 31st of July refers to—the warrant is dated the same day—the jurat is signed by me—I administered the oath to the person who swore that affidavit—this warrant is signed by me—it is dated 31st of July.

Cross-examined by MR. GREAVES. Q. Are the affidavits explained to the parties in your presence? A. Not in the presence of the surrogate—the parties depose before me that the names subscribed to the affidavit are their names and handwriting, and that they believe the contents to be true—after which I sign the jurat, and immediately after the notary sign, attesting that the affidavit it sworn before me—that is the uniform practice—I do not remember this particular act.

Cross-examined by Mr. WILKINS. Q. Do you remember the person of Elizabeth Stewart? A. I do not, nor of Griffin.

JOHN POWELL . I am a clerk in Doctors' Commons, and am attesting witness to this administration bond—I saw a female, purporting to be Elizabeth Stewart, and the sureties sign—I was not acquainted with their persons—it is dated 31st July, 1840.

Cross-examined by. MR. WILKINS. Q. Have you any recollection as to whether the lady appeared aged or not? A. My impression is, that she was an aged woman.

JOHN BEETHAM . I am a clerk in the Bank of England. I produce the stock ledger of the Bank for the 51l. per cent. Long Annuities—I have an entry of one in the name of John Stewart, of Great Marlow—this is an examined copy of the book—this stock was transferred to the Commissioners for the Reduction of the National Debt, on the 11th of Oct., 1886,

CHARLES DAWES LEWIS . I am a clerk in the Bank of England. I produce the book in which the unclaimed dividends are entered—here is entered 51l., on the credit tide to John Stewart, of Great Marlow—there is no further description of him in this book—in this other book he is described as John Stewart, of Great Marlow, Bucks, gardener—in 1886, I summed up the dividneds due on that stock for the intermediate ten years, they amounted to 533l. 10s.—there are twenty-one dividend-warrants—that shows no dividends sequence received for ten years and a half, not since April, 1826—in consequance of instructions, I prepared a form of transfer of that stock to the Commissioners for the Reduction of the National Debt—the transfers are made by the secretary of the Bank—after I prepared the form of transfer, I Long it to the principal of the office, with the warrants—I was then in the Long Annuity Office—this stock was re-transferred from the commissioners on the 20th, of Oct., 1840, to Elizabeth Stewart, of Southampton-terrace. southampton-street, Camberwell.

Cross-examined by MR. WILKINS. Q. is there any signature in your book of the Elizabeth Stewart to whom it was re-transferred? A. Not in my book.

JOHN KNIGHT . I am secretary to the Bank of England. This transfer of Long Annuities, standing in the name of John Stewart, to the Commissioners for Reduction of the National Debt, is not executed by me, but by William Smee, the accountant-general—I find a transfer in this other book, that is executed by. me.

HENRY HYATT . I keep the Greyhound in at Great Marlow—I went there on the 22nd of July, 1836—in May 1840, I remember the prisoner Fletcher coming to my house to inquire after Mr. Stewart, of Great Marlow, to know if I knew him—as near as 1 can say, it was the beginning of May—he was there between six and seven hours—he said, his business was to find out the relatives of Mr. John Stewart, of Great Marlow, who had died worth a great deal of property—I did not know John Stewart—after some conversation with Fletcher, I recommended him to inquire of some old men who might know Stewart—I named several to him, and went with him to inquire of those men—he said, he came from the Lord Chancellor, from Government—he gave me his name, before he left, as Mr. G. Jones, 24, Little Guilford-street, Russell-square—I took him to an old man, named Windsor, who, I thought, might know Stewart, and a man named Holmes, also to Loosely, and M'Lean, and I took him to Holmes's wife, down at Court Garden, where Stewart used to live, as I was informed—I did not know any thing of Stewart before I went there—I heard what the people told Fletcher—we could not bear of any relation of Stewart—they told him there never was any relation of Stewart's, except a brother that went to sea many years before, and was supposed to have gone to America—Fletcher took a careful memorandum—he seemed to be writing down—we went to a grave-stone in the church-yard, and he took notes of what he thought proper—we found a grave-stone of Stewart—when Fletcher went away, he requested me to get all the information I could, respecting any relation of Stewart's, and send him word, and I should be well rewarded for it, and gave me his address—as Windsor could read and write, I asked, whether it would not be better for Fletcher to correspond with Windsor, as it would encourage him to find out those who knew Stewart better than I could—in about a fortnight or three weeks after this, the prisoner Barber came down—he staid about six hours with me—he went into my commercial-room—some of my people told me a gentleman wanted me—I went in, and he said, "Is your name Hyatt?"—I said, "Yes"—he said, "Did you have a gentleman here, sometime ago, of the name of Jones?"—I said, "Yes, there was"—he said that he came from Mr. Jones, and Mr. Jones and him were all one party; that he had come to inquire after the relations of Stewart, who had died worth a great deal of property, and all they wanted was to find out the real owner for it—he gave me his name, before he left, as Clarence Peckham., Esq., Nelson-square—he said, there was a great deal of the property at Chelsea, and so had Mr. Jones said before—something was said about property in the Sinking Fund, but that was gone, and so had Jones said before—there was something mentioned about 600l.—that the property in the Sinking Fund died with him, but I think I heard that from Jones previously, in conversation with the old men—Barber said that to me as well as Jones—I took him round to the old people—they said there was a brother of Stewart's many years ago—they bad some account from Stewart that his brother was gone to sea, it was supposed to America—M'Lean, the last man we went to, agreed to meet Barber at my house—he came up, and had a glass of grog—Barber was in the front room—M'Lean came to the bar—Barber came out to him, and talked to him—I was in and out, and did not hear all the conversation—I asked Mr. Barber where this property was at

Chelsea, as I had some friends there—he laid it was near the College—I said, "Do you know a gentleman named Eagle ton, surveyor of King's taxes, there?"—he said, "No"—I then asked if he knew Eagleton, who kept the Roebuck—he said he did not, nor did he know any such place—I did not press the inquiry—after he bad seen M'Lean, he said he would not trouble me further, he would go and see the old men himself, and he went out—I laid I was going to London in a week or so, and Mr. Barber asked me to come and dine with him, and get him all the information I could—I said I would endeavour to get all I could, and tell him when I came up; and when I came, I went to No. 52, Kelson-square—a woman answered the door—I asked if Clarence Peckham, Esq., was in—she asked my name—I told her Hyatt—she went away, then returned—I went into the passage, and Mr. Barber came—I did not dine with him—it was between nine and ten o'clock—I went for the sake of my word, as 1 promised—I told him I could not hear of any of Stewart's relations, except the brother before mentioned.

Cross-examined by MR. GREAVES. Q. This it nearly four years since? A. Yes—I can tell a great deal of the conversation, but what I did tell is true—there was a great deal I cannot think of—there were several old people, whom the person giving his name as Jones spoke to—I went with him to those people who knew about Stewart, and several of them I asked, whom Windsor recommended, who might know Stewart.

Cross-examined by MR. WILKINS Q. When you went to Nelson-square, did you notice whether there was a brass plate on the door? A. Not particularly—I cannot say whether there was or not—I never knew Barber come to my house except on that day—this bill (looking at it) is my writing, I believe—I do not know whether there was a bill made for the refreshment Mr. Barber had at my house—there was not much had—I think he had some wine or negus, 1 cannot say which—he had refreshment—I do not recollect what it was—he gave M'Lean some grog—the second item in this bill is three sixpennny-worths of gin and water—I do not recollect whether Mr. Barber had tea—he wanted to go away as soon as he could—I think he went about five o'clock, 1 cannot say exactly—he was in a hurry to get away, and had my horse and chaise to go to the railway, for which he no doubt paid me—my charge, I dare say, would be about 5s.—Mr. Barber was only once at my house, to my knowledge—the bill produced is my writing, but it was not made out to Mr. Barber.

Q. Now, do you mean still to adhere to your. statement, that it was within a fortnight or three weeks afterwards that Mr. Barber came down? A. Yes, I do—(looking at the bill)—I will swear it—was not in Oct that he came down and talked to these old people—I do not think it was more than a fortnight after Fletcher came—it was not more than three weeks, as near as I can tell—I have given the names of all the parties he spoke to—inquiry about this was first made of me on the 14th of Jan.—Mr. Barber first asked if my name was not Hyatt—I said yes—he asked if a gentleman named Jones had not been there—I cannot be mistaken about that.

Q. Did not he ask if a gentleman had been down there about Stewart, and did not you say, "Oh yes, Mr. Jones, a tall, dark gentleman?" A. No, I did not—Mr. Barber did not say, "Ah it is all the same"—he said he came from Mr. Jones, and Mr. Jones and him were all one, one firm, and I expected that was the firm of lawyers.

COURT. Q. Are you sure he mentioned the word firm? Yes, and I took them to be Chancery lawyers under Government.

MR. WILKINS. Q. Do you mean to tell these twelve gentlemen, on your solemn oath, you cannot be mistaken as to a conversation four years ago, when your attention was not called to it till Jan.? A. I am not—I noticed

it particularly, became it was a sort of excitement to me, a gentleman, as I thought, coming to me—I have repeated the conversation over and over again, and have made a great deal of inquiry, and that will justify what I have said is correct—there is no mistake about it—Barber said he came from Mr. Jones, that Mr. Jones and him were all one firm—I have not given two or three different versions of this—he said Mr. Jones and he were equally as one firm—he spoke as if they came from one place and one firm, and that is what he said.

Q. Did he say he and Mr. Jones were equally as one? A. No, that I swear—he said one firm—the inquiries were the same—they were all on one business, and he said he came from Jones—I had not been at Nelson-square a minute or two, before I saw Barber—I am quite sure he said Clarence Peckham, Esq., and I asked for Clarence Peckham, Esq., not for Mr. Peckham.

MR. ATTORNEY GENERAL. Q. Did you make any memorandum in your book about Clarence Peckham, Esq.? A. Yea—I have the memorandum here which I made at the time Mr. Barber was at Great Marlow—I wrote it from what he said—I made it that day—(read)—"Clarence Peckham, Esq., 52, Nelson-square"—my House is about six miles and a half from Maidenhead station—I keep a horse and chaise, which I let out, and sometimes let it to people to get to the station—the bill produced does not relate to Mr. Barber's visit, when I made the memorandum in my book—it is a date when I never saw Mr. Barber—I am quite sure—I told Mr. Barber I was coming to London shortly.

WILLIAM WINDSOR . I live at Great Marlow, and am a labourer—I do anything I can get to do. I remember receiving a letter from a person of the name of Jones—(looking at a letter)—for anything I know, this is the letter—I was living in West-street, Great Marlow, at that time, and was a baker—I dare say this is the same letter—Mr. Hyatt had it from me.

Cross-examined by MR. WILKINS. Q. Look at Mr. Fletcher, did you ever see him before? A. Not that I know of—it is a good while ago—I have no recollection of having seen either of these gentlemen—I saw two gentlemen—one came some time after the other—I do not know how long—one gentleman came to me first—some time after that I had a letter—it was some time after I had the letter that I saw the second gentleman—I do not know how long.

COURT. Q. Was it after you had the letter that the second gentleman came, or before? A. Well, I cannot say about that, whether it was before or after.

MR. WILKINS. Q. Try to refresh your memory, was it not some time after you had that letter, before the second gentleman came? I think it was before—I cannot recollect—I do not know what makes me say so—I cannot tell which way it was—I had not the letter many days before I took it to Hyatt.

MR. GRATTAN. I am acquainted with Fletcher's handwriting, from his having kept an account at the London and Westminster Bank where I am a clerk—I should decidedly say this letter is his handwriting.

Cross-examined by MR. WILKINS. Q. I believe you always considered him a man of the first respectability? A. We always considered him a respectable man—he banked with us three or four years, and kept his account in a very gentlemanly way—(letter read)—"To Mr. William Windsor, West-street, Great Marlow, Bucks; 24, Little Guilford-street, Russell-square, London, June 25, 1840.—Sir, When I was at Great Marlow, about a month since, inquiring after the relations of Mr. John Stewart, who was gardener to Mr. Strode, of Court-garden, you had the kindness to promise me, that if I wanted any further information respecting Mr. Stewart

you would obtain it for me; from this circumstance I now take the liberty to write to you upon the subject, with the understanding, as I before promised, that you should be paid for all or any trouble you might take in the matter; I should therefore be much obliged if you could make out the name of the gentleman that Mr. Stewart lived with before he came to lire with Mr. Strode, and the place where; and also, if possible, what part of Scotland Mr. Stewart came from. This I was told, if I recollect rightly, might be obtained from a fellow-servant of his, who is a Scotchman, and now living at Marlow; and every information you may have obtained respecting him since I was there, I shall be glad to learn. I have been able to learn that Mr. Stewart had a sister living about twelve years since, in America. If you will take an early opportunity of making the above-mentioned inquiry, and will let me know in the course of a few days, you will much oblige, Sir, your obedient servant, G. JOMES. N.B. Be so good as to address your letter to me thus—Mr. Jones, at Miss Hawkes's, No. 24, Little Guilford-street, Russell-square, London."

MR. WILKINS. Q. Whose handwriting is that—(producing a letter)—A. That is something like Fletcher's—I am not able to say it is his, but it is something like his writing—I have a doubt about it.

WILLIAM HOLMES . I am a labouring man, and live at Great Marlow. I have lived there fifty years, or more—I know Henry Hyatt, who keeps the Greyhound—I recollect Hyatt bringing a person to me about four years ago, to make inquiries after a person named Stewart—he only brought one at that time—he came twice, with a different person each time—I should not know the first person he brought—perhaps 1 might have some knowledge of the second one if 1 were to see him—to the best of my knowledge it was Mr. Barber—he asked about Stewart's money—I told him it was in the sinking fund, and I thought it was very little use looking after it—I do not think he said anything about Stewart's relations, but I told him I thought he had no relation.

Cross-examined MR. WILKINS. Q. The first one came somewhere about in the spring, did he not? A. I cannot tell what time it was—I cannot tell how long the first came before the other—I did not take any account of it—I cannot tell whether it was a little or a long time—whether it was one month or five.

COURT. Q. Did anything pass between you about what countryman Stewart was—A. No, I do not remember.

JAMES M'LEAN . I live at Great Marlow, and have done so some years. In 1840, I remember some persons coming down to make inquiries about John Stewart—I only recollect one coming at a time—one person came along with Henry' Hyatt—I had very little conversation with him—about a fortnight or three weeks after, I saw another person—I had very little conversation with that person—Hyatt also brought him—I should not know either of those persons again—I knew John Stewart in his lifetime, while he was in Mr. Strode's service—I never heard him speak of where he came from, or whether he had relations, or not—I told the first person who came down that I knew Stewart, but no relations belonging to him whatever, and I never knew or heard of any—nothing passed about what countryman he was—Stewart was a very close man, and I knew nothing at all about him further than knowing the man himself, and therefore I bad very little to talk about him—on the second occasion I said the same thing.

Cross-examined by MR. WILKINS. Q. When the first man came to you, was it not in the spring? A. it very likely may be in the spring, but I cannot positively say—I know it was in fine weather—I cannot swear that I saw the other person for some months after—I was so indifferent about

Stewart that I did not interest myself at all in it—I do not think it so long as months before I saw the second person, but I could not was swear it.

ROBERT LOOSELY . I live at Great Marlow, Buckinghamshire, and have done so some years—I remember John Stewart very well, who lived with Mr. Strode—in 1840, I remember a gentleman coming down, to make some inquiry about him—Mr. Hyatt brought him to me—I should not know the gentleman again—he asked me several questions about Stewart's family affairs—I was frequently in the habit of conversing with Stewart in his life-time, but not upon family affairs—he has told me what countryman he was—I told the gentleman who came down that Stewart had said he came from Scotland—I never heard Stewart say a word about any relations—I had heard say that he had a brother, and told the gentleman that, but no further. I remember another gentleman coming down a fortnight or three weeks after, or thereabouts—Mr. Hyatt brought him to me—it was a different person to the first—I should not know him again—he asked me the same questions about Stewart's affairs, and so, on about his relations—I told him 1 had heard say he had a brother, but he never told me so—I told the second gentleman that he came from Scotland.

Cross-examined by MR. BALLANTINE. Q. Stewart was rather a close person, was he not? A. Very close, he had not much conversation—he never used to talk about his family, or about his birth—I know nothing about his being a native of Scotland, no more than what I heard him say—it is sixteen or seventeen years since I had the conversation with him, and three or four since I saw these two gentlemen—I cannot recollect particularly the conversation I had with either of them—I will not swear that I said a word about Stewart's country, it is so long ago.

COURT. Q. What is it that you won't swear? A. About his saying anything about his family, or family affairs—I am sure I told the gentlemen, that Stewart had told me he came from Scotland.

Cross-examined by MR. WILKINS. Q. What is your age A. Seventy—my memory is not so good as it was—I have seen Mr. Weir, Mr. Freshfield's clerk, three or four times, about this business—he has talked to me about this business—he said to me, "Do not you remember a gentleman coming down to Great Marlow, to inquire about one Stewart?" and he then said, "And, in about three weeks afterwards, don't you remember another gentleman came down?"—I do not think it was more than three weeks—I would not swear it—it was about spring when the first gentleman came—I do not recollect whether it was in autumn when the other gentleman came, it is so long ago—I will net swear it was not in the autumn.

SARAH HAWKES . I am in the service of Mr. Lodge, of No. 5, Tavistock-street, Bedford-square. In 1837, I lodged at 35, Berwick-street, Soho, with a person named Mrs. Richards—Mrs. Dorey, the prisoner, was there with her—she was not married at that time—her name was then Georgian Richards—I lived in the same apartment with Mrs. Richards, and Mrs. Dorey who was her daughter, as near as I can correctly state, for a year and a half—I saw Mr. Saunders come there once, and Mrs. Saunters once—she was Mrs. Richards's daughter, and the sister of Georgiana—I afterwards went to reside at 16, Little Guilford-street, Russell-square—I cannot state the date—I afterwards went to 24, Little Guilford-street—I was in the embroidery line at that time—Mrs. Dorey, who was then Georgiana Richards called on me at 24, Little Guilford-street—I cannot say when—I cannot tell what year it was in—I think she told me she was then living at Mr. Wybrow's a music-seller's in Rathbone-place, and that it was called the Temple of Apollo—she said, "I have called upon you to ask a favour"—I asked her

what it was—she said, "It is to know whether you will allow me to have some letters left at your address, under the name of Mr. Jones?"—I said, Yes"—she said, "Don't yon remember hearing me and my mother speak of some property that was coming to us?"—she said, Mr. Jones was the lawyer—about a fortnight or three weeks after, a letter came to me in that name—I took it the next morning to Mr. Wybrow's, at the Temple of Apollo, and left it in the shop—I think I saw Mr. Wybrow behind the counter—I told him to give it to Miss Richards—I received another note after that—I cannot tell whether it was a week or a few days after—it was roughly folded up, and had the same address—I took that also to Mr. Wybrow's—I saw no more of Miss Richards, after that, for a year and a half, or two years, that I recollect—I did not then learn from her, whether or not she had had these notes.

Cross-examined by MR. JAMES. Q. How long had you known Miss Richards? A. I never knew her till I went to reside with her—I cannot say when that was—I think it was in Jan., as King William IV. died the following Jane—she then held a counter at the Pantheon-basaar, in Oxford-street—I understood she supported, or contributed to support her mother—her mother was living with her at Mr. Wybrow's—what she asked me was, if I would take the letters in, and take them to Mr. Wybrow's—I never saw her open or see any letter—her mother had formerly told me, that she had lost a deal of property abroad, for her husband had died at Lisbon—that had been the subject of conversation—she appeared to be a person who had moved in a respectable sphere of life—she told me that her husband was a Lisbon merchant—I do not know whether that is so or not.

MR. CLARKSON. Q. Do you remember ever seeing Miss Richards in mourning? A. Yes, in deep mourning, when I met, her, after the time of the letters, which was two years, as near as I can think—she said, "I have lost my poor mother."

MR. JAMES. Q. Was not the mother dead at that time? A. She was—I did not know it myself—I never saw the mother after that—I now know that she is dead.

COURT. Q. How long had you seen her before she came to ask to have the letters left? A. I cannot remember.

EMMA HARTWELL . I am the wife of John Hartwell, and live at No. 2, Mead's-row, Westminster-road. In 1840 I lived as servant to Mr. Bradley, a grocer, at No. 1, Southampton-terrace, Camberwell—I do not remember exactly at what time I went into Mr. Bradley's service—I cannot say the month—Mr. Fletcher came there in the beginning of the spring of 1840, to look at some apartments—I saw him, and spoke to him—he said the apartments would do for the lady that he was taking them for—I showed him the rooms—there were two rooms on the first floor and two on the second, two sitting-rooms and two bed-rooms—Mr. Fletcher afterwards came again with an old lady and Mrs. Fletcher—I believe they walked—they staid there for an hour or so—I cannot say whether they took tea or not—the old lady remained, and occupied the apartments—she staid there three or four months—she appeared to be between sixty and seventy years of age, I think—she appeared very old and feeble—she was not, to say, short; rather tall, and thin, and pale—she had very weak eyes—she had the gout in her arm occasionally—she complained of her arm and hand sometimes—she did not go out a great deal—she generally took an umbrella with her, which she used as a walking-stick—she generally wore a half-mourning cross-barred gown—I occasionally saw her in it a black silk dress—she wore a dark shawl, with a great deal of mixture in of all colours—while she was there Mr. Fletcher called sometimes twice a day, sometimes three times a day, and occasionally not so often—sometimes he

came between four and five o'clock in the afternoon, or later, and sometimes between ten and eleven in the morning—I did not know where Fletcher lived exactly—he lived near, not further from town—Mrs. Fletcher sometimes came—I very seldom saw her—I think I have seen Miss Fletcher there once or twice perhaps—I only heard the old lady's name by letters, to my recollection—letters came to her addressed to Miss Stewart—I did not hear any of the Fletchers ask for her by name—when they came they said, "Is the old lady at home?"—I never heard Mr. Fletcher mention her name—I have not seen her open the letters that came—I do not know what she has done with them—I have received them at the door, and taken them to her, and saw no more of them—she received them—she did not give them back to me, or say they were not for her—I have seen Mrs. Dorey there—she came to visit the old lady occasionally—they sometimes went out together—I do not know where they went to—(looking at a gown produced by Forrester)—this is the pattern of the gown I saw the old lady wear, but the colour is washed out very much to what it was—I am quite certain about the pattern—it is calico—this was black, and this was white—I saw it at the Mansion-house—it was brought to me before that—Mr. Fletcher occasionally took tea with the old lady—I think Mrs. Fletcher came once—Mrs. Dorey was generally accompanied by Mr. Fletcher when she came—I did not know her before—I did not know whether she was any relation or connexion of the old lady's—I never knew the old lady visit any­where in the neighbourhood, except at Mr. Fletcher's—I know of nobody in the neighbourhood coming to see her—she made no acquaintances in the neighbourhood while she staid there—no one came near her, except the persons I have mentioned—I believe she went to town two or three times while she was living there—she has been absent some hours—I cannot fix the date at which she went away finally—she generally paid for her lodging herself, I believe—she paid by the week—I did for her while she was there.

WILLIAM WYBROW . I keep a music-shop in Rathbone-place—the Temple of Apollo was my old house—that is also in Rathbone-place. I knew the female prisoner as Miss Richards—I became acquainted with her, to the belt of my belief, in November, 1838, but I am not sure—she called to see some lodgings at my house—one of my daughters had given her some lessons on the guitar, and I had some knowledge of her before she took the lodgings—at that time she kept a counter at the Oxford-street Bazaar—she took possession of the apartments a few days after taking them—her mother and two nieces, the Misses Saunders, came with her—they continued to lodge there from that time to the summer of 1840—I should say Mrs. Richards appeared to be about seventy-five years of age—she was rather tall and thin, very infirm, and rather pale—her eyes were rather blood-shot and weak—she walked rather feebly—I never saw her without an umbrella, which she used as a kind of support, as a walking-stick—she wore a dark bonnet, and a very dark cloak—I cannot say whether it was an invisible green or a black very much faded—I cannot say what sort of gown she had—in 1840 the old lady left my apartments—I cannot say the time—it was in the summer—Miss Richards and the nieces continued with me—I am not quite sure whether both nieces did, but I think the younger one did—Miss Richards continued to attend at the bazaar, as far as I knew—she said her mother was in very sad health, and was going to Camberwell for the benefit of her health—I have heard her say once or twice, or frequently, that she was going to see her mother at Camberwell; and likewise Georgina Saunders, the younger niece, said she was going to see the old lady—I cannot say whether she had taken lodgings or a house at Camberwell, or who took them for her—I cannot say how long she was away from my lodging—I am not quite sure whether she returned—I rather think she did, but I cannot positively say—Miss Richards

and the Misses Saunders afterwards left—I cannot say how long after the oldlady had gone to Camberwell—it was in the course of the same year—Miss Richards left in November, to the best of my belief, but I cannot say whether the old lady left and went with them—I think she did, but I am not positive—I am not sure whether she returned at all, but I think she did—I did not know from Miss Richards where she was going to when the left—while they were lodging with me I knew of letters coming from Bristol—I cannot say that I know a person named Hawkes—I do not remember receiving any letters brought to my house while they were lodging with me.

Cross-examined by MR. WILKINS. Q. Who attends in your shop generally? A. Myself—I did so while at the Temple of Apollo—there was a private door to that house—if the bell rung, the party occupying the apartments would answer it—I had not a servant—I did not attend the door myself—we only let the second floor, and if anybody rung their bell, of course the party who occupied the second floor would answer it; in case they did not, perhaps one of my daughters would—I did not see the persons who generally visited Miss Richards and her mother—I have known several persons come there, but I cannot say I have seen Barber there—I saw a man named Griffin at the Mansion-house—my son did not point out a man to me that had been in the habit of coming to the house—I have never said so—he said he thought he knew one of the parties—he did not point Griffin out as a party that had come to my house—I have no recollection of his saying so—I said I thought I had seen Griffin come there, but I would not be positive—when I was down stairs at the Mansion-house, I do not recollect my son pointing out Griffin as the man that came there—if my son had been present, he would have seen the whole of the parties, but I was not in the Court when he was examined.

Cross-examined by MR. GREAVES. Q. Your recollection is very imperfect as to the time the parties were in your house? A. Yes—I positively swear Mrs. Richards was in the house in the year 1840—Miss Richards left my house some time after she left the bazaar—I will swear she was in my house during 1840 some time—I know it was in the summer, and, I think, rather towards the latter part—I can say the old lady was lodging in my house some part of the summer, and, I think, the latter part of 1840—I am quite sure Mrs. Richards did not remain there till the latter end of the summer—I cannot tell the precise time she left, but I know she left to go to Camberwell—I am not quite certain about the time the old lady left—Miss Richards left after she left the bazaar, which was somewhere about Nov., to the best of my belief.

Cross-examined by MR. JAMES. Q. You say she was called "the old lady" there? A. Yes—I understood she was the mother of Miss Richards.

SIDNEY HAMPDEN WYBROW . I am a clerk in the Post-office, and the son of the last witness. In 1838 and 39 I resided at 24, Rathbone-place, with my father, at the Temple of Apollo—I know Georgiana Dorey—I knew her as Georgiana Richards—I recollect her lodging at ray father's house—I am not certain as to the date—it was in 1838, to the best of my recollection—there were two nieces lodged in the house, and also her mother, Mrs. Richards—I do not know her Christian name—I knew one of the nieces—the youngest was called Georgie—they were there about a year and nine months, or two years, I think, altogether—I think they left in 1840—I am not at all positive as to dates—I have seen the old lady on several occasions—she was a very old woman, and very infirm—she was subject to a violent cough, and very seldom went out—when she did she stooped a great deal, and coughed also, and generally carried an umbrella with her—she usually wore a dark gown, I think, and an old cloak—when she did go out she used an umbrella

to assist her in walking—I remember her leaving, but I do not know the date at all—she left without her daughter first, to go to Camberwell, I think, about three or four months previous to their leaving altogether—they left finally in 1840—I cannot say what part of the year it was—I have not the slightest recollection as to dates—when the old lady left, leaving her daughter there, I understood she went to Camberwell—I think I knew from one of the nieces that she went there for the benefit of her health—I never heard Georgiana Richards say where her mother was gone to—I am not quite positive that the old lady returned again—there were not very many persons visited her when she lived at our house—I appear to have a recollection of Mr. Barber having called there on several occasions—I have seen people call—I believe I have let Mr. Barber in once or twice—I might have stood at the door, and, rather than give them the trouble of coming down from the second floor, I perhaps might let people in, or ask them to walk through the shop—when I have let in persons, Miss Richards has been asked for.

Cross-examined by MR. WILKINS. Q. How long have you been a clerk in the Post-office? A. Very nearly four years—before that I studied music—I never made a practice of it—I think my age is twenty-two or twentythree—I remember, when I was at the Mansion-house, standing at the bottom of the stairs to see the different prisoners go by—I did not point out Griffin to my father; I pointed out no one to him—he asked me whether I remembered any of them—I said I remembered one of them; but three of them went up, and I do not think he understood which, but I think he believed I meant Griffin—my father did not mention Griffin's name to me—when we got into the Court they asked me whether I knew either of the prisoners, and I pointed to Barber, not knowing either of their names; and the only reason I have for saying I believe my father thought it was Griffin is, that when we came out he said, "I thought it was Griffin you pointed out"—I may have told my father it was the tallest of the three, I cannot say—I will not swear that Barber was ever at the Temple of Apollo—to the best of my belief he has been there on several occasions.

KEZIAH DIXON . My husband's name is Seth Dixon—we live in Crown-court, Dean-street—on the 10th of April, 1841, (I think this day three yean) I was engaged by a Mrs. Ellicot as char-woman at No. 24, Dean-street—I have acted in that capacity in that house until now—when I first went there Mrs. Dorey, and her mother, Mrs. Richards, were living there—I remember a niece of Mrs. Dorey being there—I cannot exactly say what her name was—her surname was Saunders—I learnt from Mrs. Dorey that they only came the month before I went—I remember the old lady asking me to act as char-woman to her also, and I did so—I remember the death of the old lady—I think it was the latter end of June in the same year—she died in that house—Mrs. Dorey left last Christmas twelve months—I did not assist the family in their apartments very often before the death of the old lady, only now and then for an hour or so—after Mrs. Richards's death I assisted Mrs. Dorey occasionally; sometimes more frequently—after the death of the old lady Mrs. Dorey left to go out of town—I understood from her that she was going to Bristol—she did that I think two or three times after her mother's death—I think three times—she staid away sometimes a month or six weeks—I have not known her go any where else, only sometimes on a visit to Camberwell—she told me she visited a physician of the name of Fletcher there—I have seen the prisoner Fletcher before—I answered the door to him once at No. 24, Dean-street—I know William Saunders and his wife—Mr. Saunders was in the habit of coming to the house occasionally, and Mrs. Saunders was on a visit once for about three weeks or a month—I understood

she was Mrs. Dorey's sister—I saw Mr. Saunders there while the old lady lay dead in the house—I recollect once opening the door to Fletcher at that house I cannot positively say I had seen him there more than at that time—I might have seen him, but 1 cannot exactly say—he asked for Miss Richards—she was not at home, and he left a message with me, for her and her niece to come and dine with him next day, on the Sunday—I should think the old lady was about seventy-three or seventy-four years of age—she was rather infirm—I did not notice any thing particular about her—she was subject to the gout—I have heard Miss Dorey talk of it with her, and the old lady as well—I think the gout was in her hand—I never saw the old lady dress in any thing but black—I think I saw her once in a cotton dress—after the old lady's death Mrs. Dorey gave me a gown of her mother's—the gown produced is what remains of it—I afterwards gave it to Forrester the officer.

Cross-examined by MR. GREAVES. Q. When were you first applied to to give evidence? A. I think it was in March last—I do not recollect the day, but I think it was at the beginning of March—I have never been before the Lord Mayor.

Cross-examined by MR. JAMES. Q. Did you know that the Saunders's, Mrs. Dorey's relations, lived at Bristol? A. Yes.

DUNCAN M'PHERSON . I am a school-master at Callander, in Scotland—in the year 1840 I was the session-clerk of the parish of Callander—I remember receiving a letter, purporting to come from a person of the name of Stewart—I think I received three letters, but I only retained one of them—I think I must have destroyed them, because I was not in the habit of keeping letters of that sort—I have looked for then, but cannot find them—I found this one.

MR. GRATTAN re-examined. I have a doubt that this letter it Joshua Fletcher's hand-writing—I cannot say positively whether it is or is not—it is something like his writing—let me see it again—I should act upon that letter at a rapid glance in business as Fletcher's writing—I believe it to be his hand-writing.

Cross-examined by MR. GREAVES. Q. Have you not a great deal of doubt about it? A. When I look into it closely, I see there is some disguise about it, but if it was brought to me in business, with a rapid glance I should act upon it—it depends on circumstances whether or not I should refuse to act upon it—looking into it minutely I should say it was Fletcher's writing; and as persons do not always write alike I should act upon it at his writing—I have frequently seen him write.

(Letter read, directed— Mr. Duncan M'Pherson, session clerk, Callander, Perthshire, Scotland—No. 1, Southampton-terrace, Southampton-street, Camber well, Surrey,—London, Oct. 9, 1840. Sir,—On Saturday last, Nov. 3, I wrote to you to have the goodness to send me the certificate of marriage of Robert and Jane Stewart, which took place in your parish in or about the year 1756, inclosing a post-office order for 2l. for the same. As I have not heard from you, I am anxious to learn whether my letter and its contents have reached you: you will therefore much oblige by giving me an answer by return of post. E. STEWART.")

DUNCAN M'PHERSON continued. I received two letters before this—this is the last I received, and before I received this, I had written a letter.

MR. GREAVES. Q. What did you do with the other letters? A. Very frequently when I receive letters of this sort, when they accumulate, I look through them perhaps once a year, and destroy those I think of no use, and this was reserved by accident—I cannot recollect what I did with the other two—I think I must have destroyed them with some other papers of the same sort—I think I put them on the fire—I think I must have burnt them—I

was in my own house when I received them—I think I may have received the first perhaps about a fortnight before I received this—I think my attention was called to the fact of having received these letters about Jan. last—I then searched throughout my papers—I kept them in drawers—I searched every drawer—I do not know that I searched every corner of the house, but I searched those places where I usually deposit the Sessional papers—I am not aware that I have a place in which I keep papers which I have not searched—I will not swear I have not.

MR. ATTORNEY GENERAL. Q. Have yon searched every place where papers of that sort are likely to be? A. I have—where the papers belonging to the Session are kept, I searched thoroughly—there may be places which I have not searched, where I keep letters of correspondence—I do not place them in the same place—I have searched all places where I kept the papers of the Kirk Sessions—this letter is my handwriting—I wrote it at the time it bears date—it is my answer to the second letter I received.

JOSEPH PARKES . I am solicitor to the registrar-general of births, marriages, and deaths. I had occasion to make some inquiry with respect to irregularities in the entries of registers in my department, and in consequence of that I heard of the circumstances of this case—I went to Mr. Barber's offices, in Bridge-street, Blackfriars, accompanied by his partner, Mr. Bircham—I think it was on the evening of the third examination at the Mansion-house, in the beginning or middle of Jan.—this letter was found there in my presence, and delivered to me—it was found in one of the upper offices—I think in a tin box, tied up with the parchment letters of administration, of Stewart, and five other papers—these now produced are them—this parchment is the letters of administration to Elizabeth Stewart—this is Mrs. Stewart's statement—a letter directed to Mrs. Stewart, by Mr. Pott, of Doctor's Commons, dated 13th Aug., 1840—Mr. Potts's bill of costs in the matter of the administration of John Stewart, and two memorandums in blue ink—they all tied up together, and were delivered by me to Mr. Charles Freshfield.

(Letter read—addressed, "Mrs. Stewart, No. 1, Southampton-terrace, Southampton-street, Camberwell, Surrey, near London," post mark, 9th Oct., 1840, dated 7th Oct., 1840, Callander—Mrs. Stewart, Madam, I yesterday received your letter, with enclosure, and now give the prefixed certificate of Robert Stewart and Janet Stewart's marriage. Were it in any way consistent with the duties of my office, I would comply with your desire, but were the records to be overhauled, and I found guilty of having given a false extract, according to the laws of this country I might be severely punished, if not denuded of my office; if they are the right parties, as I trust they are, I trust you may be able to adduce corroborative evidence, notwithstanding the slight difference of the female's name. DUNCAN M'PHERSON.")

Cross-examined by MR. WILKINS. Q. Did you find all these papers bound up together? A. Yes, I think in a tin box in the upper office—the box was opened—I did not observe that it was locked—some miscellaneous papers were found at the same time, either in the box or about the office, in different places.

DUNCAN M'PHERSON re-examined. Q. Tell, as far as you can recollect, what was the desire contained in the letter to which that was a reply? A. The desire was, that I might probably change the name Janet into Jane; and the reason assigned was, that Janet was Jane in England, that the name Janet was not used in England, but Jane for Janet—on receiving the first letter I wrote that I had found an entry of the marriage of Robert Stewart and Janet Stewart—I did not send the extract—I only gave this information, that 1 had found this entry—then came a letter, desiring me to send it, but that

I might perhaps make this alteration—I cannot charge my memory with the very words, but it was to that effect, and to that I sent this answer—Callander is fifty-one miles from Edinburgh—the name of Stewart is very common in Callander—the Earl of Moray is the heritor—then are a great number of that name in our parish—there are about a dozen families in one district, all of the name of Stewart.

Cross-examined by MR. GREAVES. Q. What date is the marriage certificate which you sent in the letter? A. January, 1766—I have a perfect recollection of the purport of the letter which is lost—I do not say I could repeat every word, but I can say that I was desired to alter the name, and that I refused to do it I made that seen by my answer.

COURT. Q. I presume in your situation as clerk, you have application to you for copies of registers? A. Very frequently—I never, on any other occasion, received a remittance of 2l. for one.

EDMUND KEENE . I am clerk to Mr. Potts, a proctor, and have been so eleven years. In 1840, the prisoner Fletcher came to our office—I think it was in July or August—he was accompanied by an old lady—he said he wished to give instructions for letters of administration to the effects of John Stewart—I had never seen him before—I asked who he was recommended by—he said that he had known Mr. Potts, or something to that effect, I do not remember exactly the answer—I do not think he told me his name at that time—he told me that the elderly lady was the sister of the deceased—he gave me instructions to prepare the necessary documents—there if a form of affidavit kept printed, called the Stamp-office form of affidavit, which is necessary to be deposed to, before letters are granted, and in which there are blanks for the name of the person deceased—I made inquiries of him to fill up the blanks in that form of affidavit—this is one of the forms in blank—I took one for the purpose of receiving the instructions—this was done in the presence of the elderly female—she did not say anything, or take any part in the matter, that I remember—she heard what was passing, she sat in the room—I proceeded to prepare the usual warrant, in which the relationship of the proposed administratrix would appear—one of the necessary pieces of information is the situation of the party deceased, whether bachelor or married—Fletcher told me what the deceased was—it must have been stated to me at the time—this is the affidavit which I filled up from Fletcher's instructions.

MR. GREAVES. Q. When did you next see Fletcher? A. Some day or two afterwards, if I recollect right—however, in the course of the proceedings to obtain the administration, I saw him several times, certainly three times—the next time I saw him after this business was in 1841—I was at the Mansion House, but was not examined—I do not know why.

MR. CLARKSON. Q. Mr. Potts, your employer, was examined? A. Yes—I do not know whether Dr. Robertson was—(The affidavit sworn before Dr. Robertson was dated 21st July, and stated that Elizabeth Stewart, of No. 1, Southampton-terrace, appeared personally, as the party applying for the letters of administration, that the deceased died on or about 13th March, 1827, and that his property was under 1500l.)—it is always necessary, in cases of this sort, that a bond should be given, before granting letters of administration—I explained that to Mr. Fletcher, and that sureties would be required, and he gave me the name of Thomas Griffin, I think—I have no document to which I can refer, to refresh my memory—it was suggested to Fletcher that there must be an affidavit to account for the delay—it is always the case when there is a certain lapse of time in taking out letters of administration—such an affidavit was prepared by me on the same occasion—this is it—(This was dated 31st July, 1840, and stated, that the deponent, Elizabeth Stewart, was the lawful sister, and only next of kin of John Stewart, late of Great Marlow, Bucks, gar denert

who died intestate, a batchelor, on 13th March, 1827; that the deponent was residing in New York, at the time of his death, and was not aware of it till May last, when she returned to this country, which was the reason why letters of administration had not been before applied for)—the facts which I put into this affidavit were furnished me by Mr. Fletcher—I then spoke about a bond, and he gave me the name of one of the sureties, Thomas Griffin, at least the name was given me, I do not remember whether it might be from him or the woman—it was at the same meeting—I told them two were necessary, and Fletcher asked me, as he had not another surety, whether I could procure him one—he should be very willing to pay for his attendance and trouble—when I found there was apparently no risk, I told him I was willing to procure him a party who would sign the name, who would become co-surety with the sister of the deceased and Griffin—I then proceeded to calculate the duty, it was 45l.—Fletcher handed me the money—I then prepared the bond—this is it—I wrote that in the public-office—I afterwards prepared this other affidavit—the first one was objected to as insufficient—I prepared that from instructions I received, a portion of it from Mr. Fletcher, and afterwards from Mr. Barber—after preparing the first affidavit I communicated with Mr. Pott—I should say I did not introduce the names of the sureties to Mr. Pott before I went in to the surrogate, it is not the custom to do to—I think I accompanied Mr. Pott and the administratrix, (the elderly person and Fletcher,) to the surrogate—if I did I saw the parties sworn—I afterwards accompanied the elderly lady and Fletcher to the Prerogative-office—I there filled up the bond—John Gregory is the name of the other surety I agreed to furnish—he is my brother-in-law—the elderly lady then signed the bond at the office—Griffin was not there then—no particular appointment was made for Griffin's attendance—they were to send him—I kept the affidavit and the other papers in my possession—I paid the duty on the 3rd of August, to Mr. Powell, the clerk of the seat—it is not customary to pay until the bond is completed—I should say that the bond was certainly completely executed before I paid the money—it is useless to pay the money, until the papers are completed—I keep it in my possession till the bond is complete—I remember bringing my brother-in-law down to execute the bond—I saw him execute it—after that, and after paying the duty, I lodged the documents with the clerk of the seat—I was afterwards sent for by him—from my objecting to the affidavit, I believe it was referred to the registrar—I saw the registrar on the subject—he declined to receive it—upon which a letter was written to the administratrix, whether by me or Mr. Potts I do not know—it was addressed to Southampton-street, if I recollect right, or Southampton-terrace, Camberwell—I saw the letter before it was sent—I do not recollect what the contents of that letter were, not the words, the purport of it was, that the affidavit had been objected to, and we should require further instructions—Fletcher called in consequence of that letter, and I received from him on that occasion, a portion of the instructions to enable me to prepare a second affidavit—I first prepared them roughly on a piece of paper—I have not preserved that piece of paper—if I have not destroyed it, it is mislaid—there was afterwards a draft made of the affidavit, when complete, in my handwriting—Fletcher gave me certain instructions, and 1 prepared the affidavit—he said he understood there was a box in the possession of a clergyman at Great Marlow—that was stated to the clerk of the seat and the registrar, and they directed application should be made to the clergyman to look into this box to ascertain, in fact, whether there was any will contained—Fletcher was present, and heard that pass—I afterwards went into Mr. Potts's room with Mr. Fletcher—I did not then mention that direction to Mr. Potts—I think it had previously been mentioned

to Mr. Potts—Fletcher said he believed there was no will—he understood there was no will—I forwarded the draft of an affidavit to the elderly person, Mrs. Stewart—I prepared and forwarded that by Fletcher's direction—the affidavit was drawn in the first instance by instructions given by Fletcher—that was objected to by the registrar as insufficient—other facts were required, and then Fletcher, on being applied to, sent Mr. Barber-Mr. Barber was informed what was required, and from him we received written instructions, which I have—this is the draft of the affidavit I prepared, and which was objected to, and afterwards perfected, as in red ink, but it had been submitted to him several times—there are other alterations made in black ink—those were the first—the subsequent ones were in red ink—those alterations were from instructions received from Fletcher, and afterwards from Barber—these are the written instructions I received from Mr. Barber—the draft of the affidavit appears to be signed "Elizabeth Stewart" and "T. Griffin"—the draft came back to me in this state—there is the word "approved" above the signature—I required to have the signatures of Stewart and Griffin to this, being a very peculiar case, and the instructions not being given very fully—I had no instructions furnished to me, which I can produce signed, or any document emanating from Griffin or Stewart—I required their signatures to the draft, being a very peculiar case, and in order that we might be sure the parties were cognisant of the fact; and more particularly because the registrars in general, will not look at any draft-affidavits unless they can ascertain that the parties will really swear, in order that there may be no perjury—they will not look at it until it is sworn, unless under very peculiar circumstances; and I therefore produced this signed—I think Fletcher brought it back, "approved," with these signatures upon it—I then took it an approved, to the clerk of the seat, and afterwards, by his direction, submitted it to the registrar, as is always the case—the affidavit was no at that time perfect—I afterwards received the draft back from the clerk of the seat—it was objected to from time to time; at length it was perfected—the registrar directed application should be made to the clergyman, having been informed this box was in his possession, to ascertain whether any will was contained in the box; and that. the answer should be submitted to him, the registrar—an application was made to Mrs. Stewart for that purpose—I think a letter was written—this is the letter I wrote—(This letter was dated 13th August, 1840, signed Frederick William Potts, and directed, Mrs. Stewart, 1, Southamptonterrace, Southamp­ton-street, Camberwell, and stated that the draft, approved by herself and Griffin, was not deemed sufficient, and requesting her to write to the clergyman of Great Marlow, for further particulars about her brother's property, to inquire whether there was any will, and to forward the reply to him, Mr. Potts)—after I had written that letter, Fletcher called again—he was informed of all that that letter states—it was gone through with him, and he went away, if I recollect, promising that the application should be made to the clergyman—I do not think he said any thing about his attorney on that occasion—I think it was on a previous occasion, when application was made to him to amend the affidavit, stating that certain amendments were required, he said that be would send his solicitor, Mr. Barber, a very shrewd, clever man—that was before I saw Mr. Barber at all—Mr. Barber then called—the circumstances were all detailed to him—I am not aware that he took any notes in writing, of the information I gave him—Mr. Barber, when I had told him this, said he would furnish me with the necessary instructions—Mr. Potts, upon seeing Mr. Barber there as a solicitor, said, he was very happy to see a professional man, he had not the pleasure of knowing Mr. Fletcher, and asked him who he was—he said he was a man of high respectability and large property, or something to that effect—a day or two after, Mr. Barber called again—he brought

a paper which I have got—that was on his second call—a letter was produced, I think, on another occasion—when he came in the first instance, it was explained to him what was required—he then brought the written statement, and, I think, this letter, with a burial certificate—this is the letter Mr. Barber produced on that occasion—the burial certificate was afterwards annexed to the document, as also the letter, but the clerk of the seat did not consider it necessary to remain, and it was disannexed—then the affidavit was prepared, produced to the clerk of the seat, again laid before the registrar, and afterwards sworn—thus is the affidavit—I was not present at the swearing of that last affidavit that I am aware of—I have no mark I can speak to—it is not necessary for me to be present—a letter was written to Mr. Barber upon that—a certificate or certificates of baptism were also brought, I am not certain which—they were brought at the same time with this statement, by Mr. Barber—they were annexed to the affidavit.

(A certificate of baptism of John Stewart, son of Robert and Jane, of the parish of St. Marylebone, on 26th of April, 1761, born on 11th April, was here read; also of Elizabeth Stewart, the daughter of Robert and Jane, on May 15th, 1763, born April 22nd.)

(The written instructions furnished by Mr. Barber were as follows:— "Mrs. Stewart states, that she was informed of her brother's death through the kindness of an intimate friend of her late aunt's, who resided in New York, in America, who came over to Bristol with her in May last, of the name of Jones, in consequence of his having business in London. He promised her that he would go down to Great Marlow and see her brother, and take a letter to him for her, which he did. On his return, he informed her that her brother had been dead ever since March, 1827. Mr. Jones called on her about a month since, and informed her that he was then going back to America, and she had neither seen or heard from him since. Mrs. Stewart was informed by her late aunt, that Mr. Jones was formerly a captain of a vessel trading from New York to Bristol, but that he is now a gentleman of independent property. Her late aunt, Elizabeth Stewart, with whom she (Mrs. Stewart) had been living at New York, had frequently told her that her brother John had about 700l. in the sinking fund in the Bank of England, and also that he had money out on mortgage, which she has every reason to believe is true.")

E. KEENS re-examined. Q. In the course of your different conversations with Mr. Barber upon this subject, when speaking of the prisoner Fletcher, did you ever speak of him by any other name than Fletcher? A. Never—a letter was written to Mr. Barber, and I should think an appointment was made through Mr. Barber, for the parties to come to be sworn to the affidavit—I remember their attending to be sworn, but I do not remember the day—I recollect an elderly person coming and Griffin—I think they came together—I do not remember whether or not Fletcher was present upon that occasion—I do not remember that Mr. Barber came in the course of the attendance for the swearing of Griffin and Mrs. Stewart—the administration was sent to Mr. Barber.

Cross-examined by MR. GREAVES. Q. Did the old lady come alone at first, or who was with her? A. Mr. Fletcher, I am quite certain—I am speaking of what passed while they were there, from looking at the bill of costs—I have a recollection of what passed in my own memory, without the document—I am quite certain of these two parties coming together—I have no recollection of the conversation that took place, except from the document, in that respect, because there was nothing very peculiar in it, further than giving instructions for an administration, on the first occasion—I have been speaking of what passed on the first interview, when Fletcher and the old lady came

together, from my ordinary practice in all cases of administration—I was present when Griffin was there—I cannot recollect whether I saw him sworn or not—I recollect the affidavit being explained to him—it was read over to him—he appeared thoroughly to understand it—he asked no question about it that I remember—it was read over by examination, Mr. Pott taking either the draft or engrossment, and one reading against the other—I was present when the old lady signed the bond—J. Powell, the clerk of the seat, is, in all cases, the attesting witness—there were many persons in the seats' room—a person named Jones was in the same seat—I cannot say that he was present at that time—he is a usual clerk, and his usual place is in that seat, ouring business hours.

Cross-examined by MR. WILKINS. Q. About what age did this old lady appear to be? A. She was an elderly lady, but I cannot say as to her age—she had on, I think, a dark cloak, if I recollect right—I cannot say as to her personal appearance—she was not very tall, she was a moderate-sized woman—I did not see Mr. Barber until after the second affidavit was required—the bond had been prepared at that time, at the first proceeding—I should certainly not have supplied a security for Mr. Fletcher if I had not regarded him as a respectable man—there was apparently no risk to any party, the sister being the only next of kin, and the only person entitled to property—all that, I learnt entirely from the representations of the sister or Fletcher; and from his appearance and those representations, I thought there was no risk in furnishing him with a security—the obtaining letters of administration was an irregular business, a peculiar affidavit being required—as far as I could see, it was transacted in a proper manner—I did not go to Mr. Barber's office during any part of it, to my recollection—I do not know whether Mr. Pott did.

Cross-examined by MR. JAMES. Giving a bond is a mere matter of form, is it not? A. No, it is not; I procured my own brother-in-law to execute it.


Friday, April 12th.


WILLIAM SMEE , Esq. I am chief accountant of the Bank of England—In 1840 Sir John Rae Reid, Bart., was the governor of the Bank—I received written directions coming from him, to transfer certain stock, 51l. Long Annuities—this is his order, signed by him—in pursuance of that I transferred a sum of 51l. Long Annuities on the 20th of Oct., 1840—I have the transfer before me—the stock was transferred into the name of Elisabeth Stewart, of Southampton-terrace, Southampton-street, Camberwell, spinster—there is no number given—I made the transfer myself—E. C Wilkinson is the attesting witness.

Cross-examined by MR. GREAVES. Q. Do you know anything about who was the governor of the Bank at the time you are speaking of? A. Yes, because I have the governor's order before me signed Sir John Rae Reid, governor—I know that he was the governor at that time, independent of that document.

EDWARD CLOSE WILKINSON . I am a clerk in the Long Annuities' office in the Bank—I am the attesting witness to this transfer of 51l. long annuities on the 20th of Oct. on account of Elizabeth Stewart.

Cross-examined by MR. WILKINS. Q. Have you the signature of Elisabeth Stewart there? A. Not to the transfer.

JOHN WELDON . I am a clerk in the Will-office at the Bank—I keep a

book called the taking-in book, which I have here—I have an entry of the 16th of Oct. 1840, made by myself—letters of administration of John Stewart appear to have been left at the Bank for registration on that day (looking at the letters of administration)—I find on the back of these the mark of that registration by the Bank—it is "Bank Register, K. z., 73036"—my initials J. W. are at the bottom—an application for the restoration of the stock was also left at the Will-office—this is it—here is also a burial certificate, two baptismal certificates, and a letter from Mr. Cox well—I cannot say these papers were all brought at the time of the letters of administration, but they were subsequently produced—they were brought in about that time in relation to these letters of administration—this other document, which is pinned up with these papers, I should say came with them—it is not usual to keep letters of administration at the Bank after they have been registered—we return them to the parties on their producing a ticket to entitle them to it—the letters of administration were returned on the 24th of Oct.—it is customary for the person who gets back such a document, to sign a receipt for it—here is the receipt for which was signed for that—(the entry was—" Name? Stewart. Will or administration? A. Number? 170,658. When registered? 19th of Oct. When re-delivered? 24th of Oct., without ticket. To whom re-delivered? (Signed) W. H. Barber, 21, yard.")

WILLIAM JOHN DONALD . I believe this "W. H. Barber" to be the signature of the prisoner Barber—I know him personally—I believe it to be his handwriting (looking at a letter)—I believe this to be his writing—I have no doubt whatever of it.

Cross-examined by MR. WILKINS. Q. Have you ever seen Mr. Barber write? A. I cannot recollect having seen him write—I have a knowledge of his writing from paying his checks with his name to them.

MR. WELDON Cross-examined by MR. GREAVES. Q. It is not usual, is it to produce the bond for administration at the Bank? A. I am not aware that it is.

Cross-examined by MR. WILKINS. Q. Is this entry "Stewart A.," the number and date of re-delivery, all written by the same person? A. No, "Stewart" is written by Mr. Rippon—the numbers are Mr. Smith's I apprehend—the 19th of Oct. is in my writing—the "24th of Oct. without ticket" if Mr. Rippon's—that means either that the ticket had been lost or mislaid, and the administration restored to the party, and that memorandum is descriptive of the transaction—we sometimes restore the papers without a ticket, when the parties are known—we do not return them unless the parties are identified—the process of identification is very short—we say, "You know the party to be the party mentioned in these documents?"—it is signed by some person known to the clerks in the office—they are generally brokers, or brokers' clerks, or bankers' clerks—the entry with regard to the ticket was made on the day on which it bears date, the 24th of Oct.—it was given up that day.

JOHN BRADLEY RIPPON . I am a clerk in the Bank—the word "Stewart" in this entry is my handwriting, the rest is in the handwriting of two other persons—the day of the re-delivery is mine, 24th Oct.—I have no doubt that was the date of the re-delivery—the person to whom I delivered it no doubt signed that name—that is the practice.

(The following documents were here read)— "15th Oct. 1840. To the Chief-accountant at the Bank of England—Sir, I respectfully request, that you will have the goodness to transfer into my name certain Long Annuities, amounting to 50l. a year, or thereabout, now or lately standing in the name of my late brother, John Stewart, of Great Marlow, Buckinghamshire, gardener, and which I am informed have been

transferred to the Commissioners for the Reduction of the National Debt. I should long since have made this application, bat hare been for several years in America. I only learnt the death of my brother on ray return in May last. My brother died in March, 1827.—ELISABETH STEWART, NO. 1, Southampton-terrace, Southampton-street, Camberwell."

A certificate of marriage, signed D. M'Pherson Session-clerk, between Robert Stewart and Janet Stewart, both of the parish of Callander, on 19th Jan. 1756—a certificate of baptism of John Stewart, son of Robert and Jane, on 26th April, 1701, at St. Marylebone; also of Elizabeth Stewart, daughter of Robert and Jane, on 15th May, 1763, both signed Bryant Burgess, curate—a certificate of the burial of John Stewart, steward to James Cranbourne Strode, Esq., on 19th March, 1827, at Great Marlow, Bucks, signed Thomas Tracey Coxwell, vicar of Great Marlow.

"To H. Barber, Esq., 21, Tokenhonse-yard, London, dated Marlow, Aug. 16,1840.—Sir, I see on the gravestone of the late Mr. John Stewart (be age 65 years. I never heard of a will. I never had any papers, or anything belonging to him, in my possession. T. T. COXWELL."

MR. G RAT TON . This paper is something like the prisoner Fletcher's writing—I believe it to be his—(read.)

"Mrs. Stewart states, that in or about the month of June, 1826, she received a letter from her brother, John Stewart, of Great Marlow, informing her that he intended to come to London on a certain day in that month, but was afraid that he should not be able to call on her as usual, as his time would be short; he therefore wished her to meet him in the Bank of England, as he had previously promised to make her a present the next time he came there—she went to the Bank accordingly, in company with Mr. Grffin, when her brother presented her with 5l., and he (her brother) ultimately agreed to, and did accompany her and Mr. Griffin home, and stay a short time, at No. 49, Mortimer-street, Cavendish-square, the same day."

CHARLES HILL . I am a member of the Stock Exchange. In 1840, my office was at 23, Threadneedle-street—I know Mr. Barber—I had seen him for two or three years, before 1840—in Oct. 1840, he called at my office—I cannot recollect the day—he requested me to accompany him to the Bank, to identify him—I went with him to the chief-accountant's office, Bank of England—I there saw Mr. Gray the deputy-accountant, and a female dressed in dark clothing—she was between forty and fifty, as well as my memory will serve me—to the best of my recollection, she was not far advanced in years, or feeble—I think she was not an aged person; but the time is to long since—she was not thin—to the best of my recollection, she was a bulky person, stout in width and breadth, and rather above the middle stature—I have no distinct recollection, whether she was pale or fresh-coloured—she was in black—I did not observe any decrepitude about her—I think, she did not appear to have any of the infirmities of age—Barber introduced her to me as Mrs. or Miss Stewart—the usual document was then handed to me, with the words, "W. H. Barber, known by me;" which I signed—this is my signature—I do not know Mr. Barber's hand-writing.

MR. DONALD re-examined. This signature, "W. H. Barber," is Mr. Barber's writing.

(The order of Sir John Roe Reid, Governor of the Bank of England, was here read, directing William Smee, the accountant-general, to transfer to the account of Elizabeth Stewart, of Southamptonterrace, Southampton-street, Camberwell spinster, the sum of 51l., Consolidated Long Annuities, for eighty years, transferred from the account of John Stewart, of Great Marlow, Bucks, gardener, to the account of the Commissioners for the Reduction of the National Debt, on the 11th of Oct., 1836; and also, directing 739l. 10s.,

being the unclaimed payments on the said annuities, from the 10th of Oct., 1826, to the 10th of Oct., 1840, to be paid to the said Elizabeth Stewart. On the back was written, Paid, 22nd Oct., 1840, Elizabeth Stewart, spinster—known to me, W. H. Barber—known to me, Charles Hill.")

MR. HILL re-examined. On the 24th of Oct., Mr. Barber called at my office, and gave me instructions to sell 51l. Long Annuities, for Elizabeth Stewart of Southampton-terrace, Southampton-street, Camber well, spinster—at the latter part of the day, an appointment was made to attend and transfer the stock—I sold the stock in the meantime—at or about two o'clock, Mr. Barber called, and we went together to the Transfer-office—the same female was introduced to me, as the person who was to transfer the stock—I have never seen any body since who, in my opinion, resembled that person—the female transferred the stock in my presence—I gave this cheek to Mr. Barber—(This check was dated 24th Oct., 1840, on Lubbock & Co., far 652l. 0s. 9d.; signed, Charles Hill)—I afterwards discovered, that I had paid him 3l. 3s. 9d. too much—I made that discovery by taking the Bank receipt to the dealer, to be paid for the stock—instead of selling the stock at 12 3/4, it was sold for 12 13-16ths, the fraction was 1/15, 1s. 3d. for each annuity, which amounted to 3I, 3*. 9d.—on making' the discovery, I went to my own office—I afterwards went to Barber's, in Token house-yard, but did not find him—I then went to Lubbock's the banker's, and, on returning from thence to my office, they told me that the bankers had sent a clerk to say, the check had been paid, in gold—at the latter part of the day, I told Barber that I had learnt the bankers said, it had been paid in gold—he observed, they were silly people, or country people, and were alarmed at the panic, that then prevailed (there were rumours of war with France)—! inquired the address of Elizabeth Stewart—he gave it me—I wrote to her, and sent the letter by my clerk—it was returned—a day or two after, Mr. Barber repaid me the 3l. 3s. 9d.

Cross-examined by MR. WILKINS. Q. I believe you were a colleague of Mr. Barber's on the committee of the Southwark Literary Society? A. I think not—we were both members of that Society—Mr. Barber was one of the committee—he stood high and respectable in society as far as I know—the members of the committee were chosen on account of their respectability—the committee is formed of some of the very first men in the borough of Southwark—I heard that Lord Brougham presided on one occasion—I was not present—I do not exactly recollect whether I asked for Elizabeth Stewart's address, or whether Mr. Barber gave it me before I asked for it—I think if I were to see the female again, with the same attire, I should recollect her—she was not very aged—to the best of my recollection she did not exceed fifty—I have seen no person since, resembling her—I saw Mrs. Saunders at the Mansion-house, and I now see Mrs. Dorey—I do not remember whether the female had a cloak on—I identified her at the sale of the stock.

MR. ATTORNEY GENERAL. Q. On the second occasion you identified her? A. Yes—the stock cannot be sold without the broker does so—on the former occasion, on my identifying Mr. Barber, Mr. Barber's identification of her was taken as sufficient—I have no doubt whatever that the woman I saw on the second occasion was the woman I had seen before—I think if I saw her again it would bring her to my mind—the address of Mrs. or Miss Stewart was on some of the papers—there must be a ticket drawn out, upon which the whole description must be given—if I wanted the address, I could not have obtained it without any difficulty—persons very often change their residences half a dozen times—it did happen to be the same address—I did not know the stock had been transferred into her name so recently—when my clerk brought back the letter he said Miss Stewart was out—my instructions to him were to bring it back if he could not find the person at home.

THOMAS HARDING . I am a cashier in the banking house of Sir John William Lubbock and Co. I paid this check all in gold, as far at I know—the sum was £652 0s. 9d.—there might have been a mixture of sovereigns and half-sovereigns—it was weighed.

RICHARD JAMES TILLOTSON . I am a clerk in the public Drawing-office of the Bank of England. I have an entry of the 22nd of Oct, 1840—this is an order of the chief cashier of the Bank of England for the payment of £739 105. on the Long Annuities for eighty years—it was brought to me and I paid it—it is signed Elizabeth Stewart—I cannot swear that a female signed it—I have no recollection of the transaction beyond paying the money according to the practice, the party should put their name at the back.

MR. DONALD re-examined. These words, "Administratrix, 1, Southamp-ton-street, Camberwell, Surrey "I believe to be Mr. Barber's handwriting—it reads, "Elizabeth Stewart, administratrix," &c.

MR. TILLOTSON continued. I paid £630 in Bank of England notes—I did not pay the remainder—it is the practice of the office for one clerk to pay the money, and the other notes—the notes I paid were four of £100, all dated 9th of March, 1840, Nos. 63460, 63461, 63462, and 63463; five of 20l., all dated 5th of March, 1840, Nos. 93879,93880,93881,93882, and 93883; ten of 10l., all dated 3rd of Aug., 1840, Nos. 49088, 49089, 49090, 49091, 49092, 49093, 49094, 49095, 49096, and 49097; six of 5l., all dated 1st of Sept., 1840, Nos. 19122, 19123,19124,19125,19126, and 19127—I handed the order to Mr. Hilary to pay the remainder—we pay notes or cash at the desire of the person presenting the order.

FRANCIS CHARLES HILARY . I paid the remaining 109l.10s. in gold and silver.

JOSEPH DERMER . I am an in-teller of the Bank of England. I have a book to which I refer when I pay gold for notes—on the 2nd of Nov., 1840, I exchanged some Bank of England notes, in the name of Stewart, for gold—they were four 100l. notes, three 20l., eight 10l., and six 5l.—I have not the numbers or dates—they amount to 570l.—I file them, and a clerk comes down, and receives them of me—when notes are exchanged for gold, we require the person's name and address to be put on the top of the note as on those produced—it is generally put only on the first note, but it is frequently put on more—we only require it on one—they are kept together.

WILLIAM PALMER ORD . In 1840 I was a clerk in the Bank of England, in London,—I am now in the Leeds branch. On the 2nd of November, 1840,1 find notes to the amount of 570l. were exchanged for gold—I took them from Mr. Durmer, of the Teller's office—they had the name of Stewart in Mr. Durmer's book, and on the back of the notes—(looking at some notes)-these are the notes that I took from Mr. Durmer—I have referred to Mr: Dunner's book, and find my initials to an entry there, showing that I obtained these notes.

MR. GRATTON re-examined. The writing, "Elizabeth Stewart, No. 1, Southampton-terrace, Camberwell," on all these notes, 1 believe to be Joshua Fletcher's. —(These notes were four of 100l., dated 9th March, 1840, Nos. 63460, 63461, 63462, and 63463; three of 20l., dated 5th March, 1840, Nos. 93880, 93882, and 93883; eight of 10l., dated 3rd. of Aug. 1840, Nos. 49089, 49092, 49093, 49094, 49095, 49096, and 49097; six of 5l., dated 1st Sept., 1840, Nos. 19122, 19123, 19124, 19125, 19126, and 19127.)

JAS. CRANBOURNE STRODE , Esq. I formerly resided at Court-garden, Great Marlow—I had an uncle named William Strode, who lived at Niarn Inn Lodge, Northall, near Barnet—he lived there in 1804—he had a gardener at time, named John Stewart—I knew a gentleman of the name of Von

Hopkins, of Cobham, by name—I am not sure whether Stewart came from him to my uncle—my uncle died in July, 1809—Sir Simon Le Blanc bought part of the estate of Northall, in 1811—Stewart remained there some time after Sir Simon bought the estate—in 1820 he came to reside with me as gardener, at Court-garden—he died in 1827—I respected him, and a stone was put up to his memory in the church-yard—I often had conversation with Stewart—he told me he had no relations, except a brother, who went away early from Scotland—I never heard him mention any other relation; and he had not seen him or heard of him for a number of years—Stewart was himself a Scotchman—I could judge that from his dialect—after his death some papers of his came into my hands—among them I found some stock receipts—I know Stewart's handwriting—this endorsement, "My own private affairs," on this paper, is in his handwriting—within that paper I found these other papers—they were exactly as they are now, in this tin case.

Cross-examined by MR. GREAVES. Q. Did you find that box yourself, or did one of your servants? A. This tin case was given to me when I returned home—I was absent when Stewart died—I cannot recollect who gave it—it is so long since—I came home the day after he died.

JOHN HUNTER . I am the Session clerk of Canongate, in the city of Edinburgh. I think I am acquainted with the handwriting of William Lothian, the minister—he is dead—I have here the handwriting of Archibald Aitkin, one of the elders—I know his handwriting from this book, but not individually—he is also dead, and has been dead thirty or forty years—I do not know the handwriting of Alexander Crichton—he was an elder—he is dead—I did not know Mr. Lothian—he has been dead more than fifty years—there were no books kept by him—the public books in which his signature appears, have come into my hands—I have not become acquainted with his handwriting by seeing those books—I have not had occasion to refer to them, and to act upon his signature—this book is the minutes of the Kirk Session of Canongate, and is kept for the purpose of minuting the transactions of that body—I have never referred to them that length of time back—I have looked over it since this business—it is the course of business for the minister to sign these minutes—I have the minutes during the time this gentleman was minister—I have not, by looking at those minutes, acquired such a knowledge of his handwriting, as to be able to form an opinion whether it is his signature—I have looked at the books since this question has arisen.

Q. I want to know whether, looking at the minutes, and looking at that gentleman's handwriting, you can form any opinion whether that is his handwriting 1 A. My opinion is that it is—I have been able to form an opinion from that source—on the 27th of May, 1782, there were two ministers of Canongate, the Rev. John Macfarlane and the Rev. William Lothian—two persons, named Archibald Aitkin and Alexander Crichton, were elders at that time—James Brown was at that time the session clerk—he was not my immediate predecessor—he has been dead twenty or thirty years, or more.

Cross-examined by MR. GREAVES. Q. Who is that book kept by? A. The session clerk—I bring it from the Canongate—it is kept in my possession as session clerk—I knew some of the parties, from personal knowledge, in my infancy—I did not know the clergyman—I must have been very young at that time—I did not know Macfarlane—I knew Aitkin and Brown—I am fifty-nine years old next August.

COURT. Q. Does this contain an account of births, marriages, baptisms, or deaths? A. No—they are kept in separate volumes—that is the record of the births—this is merely the transactions of the meetings of the kirk session.

MR. ATTORNEY-GENERAL. Q. Who are the persons who attend the kirk

session? A. The two clergymen, the elders, and the clerk—their duties, are various; each one has bounds appointed to him, to Visit the poor, and attend to the business of the church, as to collections, and many other things—they have something to do with church discipline—they can remove a person out of the congregation—it is very seldom done, hut they can do so with improper persons—they also assist as dispensers of the sacrament—the Kirk Session is a court from which there is an appeal to the Presbytery, from the Presbytery to the Synod, and from the Synod to the General Assembly—I knew Brown, but I cannot say he was session clerk then—I was very young—my father and he were very intimate.

MR. STRODE re-examined. All these papers were delivered to me in the tin ease the night I came home—these Bank papers were not within the paper marked private—the papers inclosed within that envelope, marked "My own private affairs" were in the tin-case—he died early on Tuesday morning, and I came home on Wednesday night.

JOHN HUNTER re-examined. Q. Is it usual for the minister and elders of the kirk session, when a person leaves a congregation, to give any certificate, so as to enable him to be admitted into any other congregation? A. If they ask for it, it is given—it is usual—if they apply to be received into another congregation, it is usual to require a certificate from the congregation they have left.—(This document was not read.)

MR. STRODE re-examined. I never saw Barber, or any of the prisoners till I was at the Mansion-house—I received this letter (looking at it) in Sept., 1840, and this is the answer I wrote.

MR. DONALD re-examined. I believe the signature to this letter to be Mr. Barber's handwriting, and the name of the person it is addressed to.

Cross-examined by MR. WILKINS. Q. Did Mr. Barber bank at the Bank of England? A. He did—his account was not always low generally speaking—I cannot tell, the largest amount be had, without looking through the whole of his account—I do not know the handwriting of Mr. M. Nauara, Mr. Barber's clerk—Mr. Barber did not bank with us in Oct., 1840—(read)—Sept. 7th. Sir,—I am instructed to apply to you or behalf of Mrs. Stewart, the administratrix of her late brother John, who was. formerly in your service. As there was some property in the funds which belonged to the deceased, it is important that Mrs. Stewart should be possessed of the stock receipts, which, she understands, are in your possession. Will yon have the goodness, therefore, to acquaint me if such be the feet, and whether you have any other documents which belonged to the deceased? (Signed) W. H BARBER.

Sir,—Your letter, dated the 7th of September, arrived in due tint, but I was from home Mrs. Strode did not forward it to me. As she was in daily expectation of my arrival, it was not forwarded. In answer to your note of yesterday, the 11th of September, I beg to say I received it in its regular order. The papers I had of my late gardener's (Stewart's) are at my solicitors', Messrs. Pickering, Smith, and Thompson, Stone-buildings, Lincoln's Inn, where I beg to refer you for any explanations you may wish J C. STRODE.

MR. WILKINS to MR. STRODE. Q. Did you receive more than one application from Mr. Barber? A. I did not—I never kept the letter of the 11th—I do not recollect having it—Mr. Barber did not apply to me for any arrears of wages due to Stewart, or any one on his behalf.

Cross-examined by MR. GRHAVES. Q. Did not you cause a gravestone to be put over the deceased? A. I did—the inscription put on it was by my direction—it was, to the best of my knowledge, correct—I think he appeared to be between sixty and seventy years old—I paid the expense of his burial

out of his money—I know Mr. Coxwell, the vicar of Great Marlow—I never had a box of Stewart's in my possession—he lived with my uncle before he lived with me—I have seen him there.

MR. ATTORNEY-GENERAL. Q. What was the inscription of the stone? A. I do not recollect—I think his age is stated as sixty-five—that was from what I have heard from the time he had been away from Scotland, and hearing him talk about it—I understood from himself that he was sixty-five.

EDWARD THOMPSON . I am one of the firm of Pickering, Smith & Co. solicitors, Lincoln's-inn—we were concerned for Mr. Strode—I heard of the death of Stewart from Mr. Strode several times—I heard of it in 1840, and before.—On the 19th of Sept., 1840, Mr. Barber called at our office, (I do not remember his producing any letters of administration then, he did afterwards), he wanted me to give him information respecting the property of John Stewart, the late gardener of Mr. Strode, of Great Marlow—I believe these to be the letters of administration—he said he applied on behalf of the sister—I said I knew there was no sister, from information I received from Mr. Strode, and I always understood Stewart had died leaving no relation whatever—he asked me to give him information of the property, and some stock receipts which were in possession of Mr. Strode, which he understood had been forwarded to me by Mr. Strode—I said I had no instructions to give him any information whatever—I certainly should not be satisfied with the letters of administration—he said not with letters of administration? the Prerogative Court have been satisfied with the evidence, and granted letters of administration—I said it was easy to procure letters of administration from the Prerogative Court, and from information I had of Mr. Stewart having no relations whatever, I certainly should not give him information—he said there was an affidavit produced with the letters of administration—I asked him to let me see that—he said the affidavit was filed—I asked him to let me see a copy of it—and that was the end of the first interview—he said he would call again and produce the affidavit or a copy—he said that the sister was a very old person—I do not know whether that was at that interview or a subsequent one—I said, "Let me see the sister"—he said she had come from America, as well as I can recollect—I do not recollect whether he said how long she had been from America—he said she had shortly returned from America—I asked to see her—he said she was very infirm, and could not come, a very old person—he called on the 24th Sept and produced a copy of the affidavit, and there were no certificates attached to it—I asked him for the certificates—he said they, were filed, but the affidavit referred to them—I refused to give him any information—I said we were so perfectly satisfied there were no relations whatever of Stewart, we should be satisfied with nothing short of legal proof, at which be seemed very much surprised—my clerk (Andrew Bessant) was not present at this interview—I believe he saw Mr. Barber afterwards—I did not see him afterwards myself—I believe I have stated all that passed—letters passed from our office with the prisoner.

Cross-examined by MR. WILKINS. Q. Did you receive a letter from Mr. Barber on the 31st of Oct? A. I cannot say the date, they are all in court.

ANDREW SPENCER BESSANT . I am a clerk in the office of Pickering and Co.—I remember being present at an interview between Mr. Barber and Mr. Thompson—I believe it was on the 24th of Sept.—after that Mr. Barber called again on the 1st of Oct. following—I then saw him—he was to send a copy of the affidavit on the 24th of Sept—I think the copy was in my possession on the 1st of Oct.—I referred to it in conversation that day—I told him it was not satisfactory, and pointed out where I considered it was not so—I have not seen the affidavit since—I believe he took it away with him—I have not seen it for four years—I believe that is it (looking at it)—I stated the defects

in it, more particularly any omissions—I quite recollect pointing out to him that the meeting at the Bank ought to be better explained, it was not likely a woman coming to England should meet her brother, coming from a distance, at the Bank—I particularly requested information as to where the deceased was born, and where he went to school—I also observed it was very odd the lady having come from New York to Bristol, and from thence to London, should get a person to take a letter to Marlow instead of going there herself—I said I wished to see the certificates—I recollect on that occasion Mr. Barber expressed himself very much dissatisfied that we did not think what he had already shown us was sufficient, and wished to know what would satisfy us—I told him we certainly depended on any information the sister could give, a sister could give any information that would satisfy us, and I suggested that we might see the sister—I rather think he said she was indisposed—at all events there was an answer given that we could not see her—I wrote on a piece of paper the particulars required—I objected at first, saying, "You ought to give us information without our suggesting it"—I then put down two or three simple questions—he took the memorandum away with him, and said he would get the information we requested—I never saw him again, and believe he never called it all—I received this letter on the 31st Oct., and this is a copy of my answer.

MR. DONALD re-examined. This letter is Mr. Barber's handwriting—

(Read)—"21, Token-house-yard, Oct. 31, 1840. Re Stewart, deceased, Gentlemen,—I am informed your client, Mr. Strode, holds some monies of his late servant, and which were due to him at his decease. As it will be the duty of my client to get in all assets without delay, and to furnish a residue account to the Stamp-office, I shall be glad if Mr. Strode will inform me what amount of money, if any, was due to him, either for wages or otherwise W. H. BARBER. Messrs. Pickering, Smith, and Thompson."

"Stone-buildings, Lincoln's-inn, Nov. 2, 1840 Re Stewart, deceased. Sir, In reply to your letter of the 31st ult., we beg to inquire who is your client, and by what right such client calls for information touching the affairs of the deceased. If your present application be on behalf of the party whom you represent as being a sister of the deceased, we have only to say, as we have before told you, that we are not satisfied that she is the sister, and as such we are not disposed to pay any more attention to it than to the applications made by other parties claiming to be next-of-kin of the deceased. Yours, &c., PICKERING, SMITH, and THOMPSON. Mr. W. H. Barber."

MR. BESANT re-examined. I afterwards received this letter:—

MR. DONALD re-examined. This is Mr. Barber's handwriting.

(Read)—" 21, Tokenhouse-yard, Nov. 4, 1840. Re Stewart, deceased. Gentlemen,—In inquiring who is my client, and by what right such client asks for information on this subject, it must surely have escaped your recollection that I took the trouble to produce for your inspection the letters of administration procured by such client, Elizabeth Stewart, the sister of the deceased, together with an affidavit in support thereof. Such an administration was not obtained until every query suggested by the registrar had been answered to his entire satisfaction. Subsequently to this, I have supported the claim of Mrs. Stewart so entirely to the satisfaction of the Bank Directors, as to induce them to order the transfer of stock which had stood in the deceased's names to that of my client. With all due deference, therefore, I submit she is entitled to have her claim regarded in a very different light to that of the other applications to which your letter refers. I submit also that she is fairly entitled to an answer to the inquiry contained in my last, without being driven to the expense and delay of a bill of discovery, or any other adverse proceeding. Yours, &c., W. H. BARBER. Messrs. Pickering, Smith. and Thompson."

MR. BKSANT re-examined. This is my answer to the application of the 4th of Nov.:—

(Read)—"Lincoln's Inn, Nov. 6, 1840. Re Stewart, deceased. Sir,—We have no desire that your client should be driven to the expense and inconvenience of filing a bill. Our only object is to be satisfied, on the part of Mr. Strode, that Elizabeth Stewart is the sister of the intestate. When this is accomplished we shall afford every information in our power. At present, certainly, it appears to us, from the copy of affidavit, which is all that we have had produced, that she has not made out her relationship. We shall be glad to have satisfactory answers to the queries you required us to put down in writing when you were last here, and which we then requested you to procure for our in-formation. Yours, &c, PICKERING, SMITH, and THOMPSON. Mr. W. H. Barber."

MR. BESANT re-examined. I heard nothing more of Mr. Barber after that—I recollect pretty nearly what the queries were—I put down where the deceased was born, where he went to school, at what age he left home, and which of his parents, if either or both, was at home at the time he left home.

Cross-examined by MR. WILKINS. Q. I find here "this deponent refers to annexed certificates of baptism?" A. Yes—I read that—I do not recollect Barber telling Mr. Thompson the certificates were filed—I was not present during the whole interview—if I had heard it I should have known I could go to the Prerogative Court to see them—I am not aware of the practice of the office—I believe our house had a trifling matter of business with Mr. Barber since that—it may be a year or a year and a half ago—he was concerned for a man against whom we brought an action for a small debt, which has never been paid.

MR. BODKIN. Q. Did you understand that the original affidavits were filed? A. It was understood to be an office copy—I am not aware of the practice of the Court—Mr. Barber did not say anything about that—there, was no office copy produced of the certificates.

COURT. Q. Do you know whether they give office copies of exhibits? A. In Chancery they do—I am not aware of the practice of the Prerogative Court.

MR. SEATON re-examined. We should give copies of exhibits, with copies, of affidavits, if asked for—I do not know whether they were supplied in this instance.

JOHN HARDY . I am seventy-one years old, and live in the parish of Crichton, in the county of Edinburgh—I have lived there almost all my life—I knew a person named John Stewart perfectly well—I first knew him upwards of fifty years ago—he worked with me as gardener to Mr. Patteson, more than two or three years—Patteson had three sons, John, William, and James,—I do not know whether they are alive now—the son John was fourteen or fifteen years old when I first knew him—he went into the west country, to some nobleman—he was bred a gardener—John Stewart went from our parish to Phantassie, to live with a Mr. Rennie—I know nothing of John Stewart's family, I never heard him mention one.

Cross-examined by MR. GREAVES. Q. Is not Stewart common name in Scotland? A. Yes, very common—I never knew any other John Stewart—I heard that he went to Phantassie—I never saw him there—I did not see John Patteson after he left.

SIR JOHN BAYLEY . Q. Do you know when John Stewart went away from Crichton? A. About fifty years ago—he got a certificate from the parish—I never saw it.

JOHN WITHERSPOON . I live at Kedlow, in Scotland, and know Hardy, the witness—I have lived at Phantassie, in the parish of Preston—it is upwards

of fifty-two years ago—I knew John Stewart living there at the time I was there—he lived with Mr. Rennie, in the same service as I was, and under the same master—I did not know him at Crichton—he continued there twelve months—he was there that time—Phantassie is about eighteen miles from Crichton—I left him at Phantassie when I came away—I understood from him that he had a brother named James—he never spoke to me about having a sister—I was very intimate with him—I do net remember whether I saw him with a certificate or not, but he came with me to Haddington, on the road to Crichton, which is better than a mile from Crichton—I left him at Haddington—he returned the Same day and we went home together—I got my certificate that day, and brought it back with me—(looking at a certificate) I do not remember seeing this—he did not show it me—after he left Phantassie he came to visit me for three days the left the neighbourhood very soon after that—he was eight years older than me—I am seventy-four—he was about thirty years old when he left Phantassie—I never saw him in Scotland after he took leave of me.

JOSEPH LOCKHART . I was formerly a gentleman's gardener, and reside at Wimbledon—I was acquainted with John Stewart, A gardener at Wimbledon—I first became acquainted with him between forty and fifty years ago—he always went as a native of Scotland—I could not judge from his talk whether he was a Scotchman or not—I was born in Scotland—when I first knew Stewart he was living at Wimbledon, with John Shelly, Esq.—he had a man named John Patteson, working under him at Mr. Shelly's—I was intimate with Stewart—I saw him occasionally till near his death, but not very lately—I remember him With the two Mr. Strode, the uncle and nephew, one at Northall, and the ether at Court-garden—when he lived with Mr. Strode, he occasionally called on me at Wimbledon—I once saw John Patteson's father as Wimbledon—he called to see his son, when be worked for the same John Stewart—old Patteson and John Stewart always appeared to be acquainted—he saw John Stewart—I never beard John Stewart mention his family but once—he once told me he had no relations living that he knew of, he had a brother that went to the Indies, and he had not seen or heard of him for twenty years, and he supposed he must be dead—he never told me he had a sister.

Cross-examined by MR. GREAVES. Q. Were you ever at either of the Mr. Strode's in your life? A. Never, nor ever saw John Stewart in their service, but I have seen him at my house when he was in the service.

JAMES GUDGE . I am clerk of the Journals of the House of Commons—this is the journal of the Home for May, 1839—on the 27th of May, Mr. Charles Shaw Lefevre was appointed Speaker of the House—he was also Speaker in 1840, and has been so ever since.

Cross-examined by MR. GREAVES. Q. Do you recollect whether the House was sitting in October, 1840? A. I believe it has not sat so late as October for several years.

JANE BIRD . I live at Falmouth. I knew Mrs. Susannah Richards, who was married at Falmouth—it is more than thirty years ago—I saw her once in my shop, after she returned from Lisbon, she was then a widow—I do not know the prisoner Dorey—Mrs. Richard's children were young when she left—she had three daughters, Susannah, Lydia, and Georgiana—I forget what Mrs. Richard's name was before she was married—her father Was a soldier When I knew him—I forget his name, but should know it if it was mentioned—it was Crene.

Cross-examined by MR. GREAVES. Q. How long did you know her father? A. I only knew him by seeing him in Falmouth—I cannot say how long, he was there for years.

Cross-examined by MR. PHINN. Q. Do you know what regiment he belonged to? A. No, he was a pensioner.

THOMAS GRIFFIN . I am a tailor by trade. I have come here from jail—I lodged in Poland-street, Oxford-street, about a dozen years ago—I there became acquainted with a person named Saunders, his wife and children—I knew Mrs. Dorey while I lived there—her name was then Georgiana Richards—I knew her mother, she lived with them there—there were four children, I believe—they lost one of their children while there—my wife laid the child out—that was the commencement of our acquaintance—Saunders and his family left the apartment before me—the Richards's went with them—they all went together—I afterwards left the lodging myself, then went to Gilbert street, then to 31, Duke-street, Grosvenor-square, and then to 34, in the same street—I lived therein 1840—Georgiana Richards (now Mrs. Dorey) called on me there—I think it was in the early part of the year, or perhaps April or May—I cannot say exactly—she asked me to do a favour for her mother—I asked what favour it was, if it was anything respecting money affairs I must decline doing it—she said it was merely to become a bondsman at the Stamp-office, respecting some property her mother was going to recover of a brother of hers, who had been dead some years, over in Berkshire; she had not been able to recover the money for want of means of doing so, that the brother had been dead thirteen or fourteen years, and if I was agreeable she would let me know when the document was ready for me to sign—I agreed to do so—I told her I could not afford to lose my time—she said she would pay me for the time I lost in attending—she said she would let me know when she should want me, when the paper was ready to sign—she said the brother of her mother had been living as steward and gardener with a gentleman in Berks, but I do not recollect that she mentioned the name of the place—after this conversation, I received a message, in consequence of which I went to St. Paul's church-yard, and at the corner of Paul's-chain met the old lady, Mrs. Richards, Mrs. Dorey's mother—a gentleman was with her—Mrs. Richards said, he was her friend who had advanced the money for her to recover the property—it was the prisoner Fletcher—I went with them both to the door of the Proctor's Office—Fletcher did not go into the office, I believe, at that time—I and the old lady went in—we went from there to the Prerogative Office, and I there signed a bond—after I left the office I received a sovereign from the old lady, and we parted—this is my signature—(looking at the bond)—about a fortnight after, I received another message, in consequence of which I went again to the corner of Paul's-chain, and met the same gentleman and old lady—we went to the proctor's office together again—(previous to that, Mrs. Dorey had called on me to go to meet her mother at the same place again, to complete the business)—we went to the proctor's office—I think Fletcher went with us—I was in the outer office at first, and while there another person came—I did not know who he was till the old lady said it was her solicitor—it was the prisoner Barber—this was not in the presence of Barber or Fletcher—she told it me quite privately—Mr. Barber spoke to the proctor's clerk, and then went into the inner office—I was in the outer office with Mrs. Richards—Barber did not remain in the inner office more than two or three minutes—after that, I went into the inner office with Mrs. Richards, and put my name to a paper—I think it was read over to me before I put my name to it—(looking at an affidavit)—I am not certain this is the paper—this is my signature—I signed this at Mr. Potts'—I then went over to the surrogate's, the old lady with me—I think I was sworn to the truth of this paper—after I had sworn and signed it,

I received a sovereign from the old lady, and a shilling to ride home with—about six months after that I received a letter enclosing another from Mrs. Stewart—I had observed that the old lady had subscribed the bond as Stewart, and not as Richards—she gave me a reason for that—Fletcher was not then present—I took no notice of the first letter—it was from the Stamp-office—I received a second and third, I believe, in consequence of which I went to Mr. Potts—I saw Mr. Potts's clerk, and received information from him—I went to enquire after Fletcher, and ultimately got an address which led to Southampton-terrace, Camberwell, and there left a message for Fletcher—I went to an address where I expected to find Mrs. Richards, and she had left—it was in the same place as Mr. Fletcher was living, Southampton-street, or terrace—I think it was terrace—I enquired there for her as Mrs. Stewart—I wrote to her two or three days after this, and two or three days after, Mrs. Dorey, (then Miss Richards,) called on me, and said she called in consequence of a letter she had received from her brother-in-law at Bristol, Mr. Saunders, about some letters which I had for his mother—that was the Stamp-office letters—I told her I was very much surprised to find the business was so very much neglected respecting the payment of the stamp-duty, which I was answerable for—she told me she would forward the letter to the attorney, who had the business to do for her, and I should have no further trouble about the matter—she said she was lodging in Dean-street, Sobo—I afterwards called in Dean-street, and saw Mrs. Dorey—she told me the letters were forwarded to the attorney, and she believed the business was settled—I afterwards got another letter from the Stamp-office, and went again to Dean-street—in consequence of information I got there, I sent a message to No. 45, Oxford-street, and in consequence of the answer I got, I went myself next day to No. 45, Oxford-street, and saw Mrs. Dorey—she was then married—she wished me to take the letter to the attorney, who, she said, was Mr. Barber, Bridge-street, Blackfriars—I went, but did not see him the first time—I went again, I think the next day, and saw him—I told him I had come respecting a letter I had left the previous day with his clerk—he told me he was then in treaty with the Stamp-office respecting the duty being paid, and I should hear no more about it—if I did hear any more about it, I should forward the letter to him if I got it from the Stamp-office—I never received any more letters—I received 10l. from Mrs. Dorey for what I had done.

Q. Do you remember seeing this paper (the draft of an affidavit with "approved" written on it) and putting your name to it, before you were taken to the Prerogative-office to be sworn? A. This is my signature to it—I dare say it was read to me before I put my name to it—it was read to me in Mr. Potts office.

Q. Were the contents of the affidavit to which you were sworn, at far as you were concerned, true or false? did you know the people for the length of time you state you did? A. I did not—I do not know that it was read over to me—not the whole of it, distinctly.

Cross-examined by MR. GREAVES. Q. On your oath, was not the whole affidavit read over to you by Mr. Potts? A. I will not take upon myself to swear it was not, certainly—I will not say it was or was not—I think if it had I should not have signed it, if I had understood the contents of it certainly not—I do not at present recollect any of it being read—I think it was most likely read over to me—I thought I was going to complete the business commenced previously at the Stamp-office—I knew I was sworn—I dare say I was sworn to the truth of the contents of the affidavit—I ought to have known better—I was sworn to the truth of it, no doubt—if I had known what was in it I certainly should not have signed it—I took the oath without

giving it a serious consideration—I did it in consequence of being told it was to complete the business previously begun—I certainly swore to the truth of the contents of an affidavit without knowing what they were—I believe in a state of future rewards and punishments.

Cross-examined by MR. PHINN. Q. How long before you moved from Poland-street did the laying out of the body occur? A. About six or eight months, I believe—that led to considerable intimacy between me and the family of the Richards—I saw very little of Mrs. Dorey—she was chiefly out—she appeared to be an obedient child to her mother—I had not heard the Richards talk of property belonging to their family which had been lost before I moved from Poland-street—I do not recollect hearing them talk of property at Lisbon which had been lost—I thought this a mere matter of form—I received the 10l. three or four months after I was at the Prerogative-office—I believe she said the money came from her mother.

JOHN HAWKES GEM . I compared this copy with the marriage register at Falmouth parish church—I also compared this with the register of baptism—they are correct. (These were a certificate of the Carriage of Thomas Richards and Susannah Crene at Falmouth on the 5th of May, 1785, and the baptism of Georgiana, daughter of Thomas and Susannah Richards, at Falmouth, on the 23rd of April, 1802, born on the 15th of March, 1802.")

FREDERICK WILLIAM POTT . I am a proctor—Mr. Keen is my clerk—I had no previous acquaintance with Fletcher before this business that I am aware of—Mr. Keene chiefly attended to it.

Cross-examined by MR. GREAVES. Q. Did you read over an affidavit to Griffin? A. It was read over in my presence—I was present as the notary when they were sworn—this is the draft of the affidavit of the 31st of July—there is no doubt that was read over at my office—the affidavit itself was also read over—I examined it with the clerk—I had the draft and the clerk the original—Griffin was there at the time.

Cross-examined by MR. WILKINS. Q. I believe Mr. Barber was not called to your office till late in the transaction? A. No; all the preliminary arrangements had been transacted before he came—the affidavit, which I presumed would be sufficient, was made—I was not present when instructions were given for it—I do not conceive I saw Mr. Barber more than once—I then considered him simply professional—I have no doubt the certificates produced were annexed to the affidavit filed in the Prerogative-office, but I have no recollection at this distant period—I recollect there was some certificates annexed and filed with it.

MR. ATTORNEY-GENERAL. Q. Was the only reading over of the affidavit a comparison of the draft with the fair copy? A. I have no doubt the affidavit was read two or three times—the reading, I have spoken of, was for the purpose of comparison, and, at the same time, that the witnesses might thoroughly understand what the affidavit was that they were about to make, the affidavits were read to the witnesses before they went to be sworn—I do not recollect any reading, except the comparison—I do not recollect it, it is so long since—it is the invariable practice to read over affidavits to persons who are to swear, and, as the affidavit had been revised by the registrar, I am certain it was read over to him before it went to the registrar—it is the course of my office, that it should be so—the draft went to the registrar—I am certain the draft was read to him before it went to the registrar—I was not present, but it was the invariable practice—I think it went to the registrar two or three times—Mr. Barber came to me, in consequence of the difficulty of getting it through.

EDWARD PARKER WOOLFF . I have acted as solicitor to the female prisoner on

this charge—this statement is in her handwriting—I communicated the statement to Messrs. Freshfield's office, by desire of Mrs. Dorey herself—the had some time before expressed great anxiety to make a statement, and put the prosecutors in possession of all the facts she knew.

(The following extract from the statement was here read;)—"It is new about fourteen or fifteen years since I first became acquainted with the prisoner Fletcher, who was then living in the London-road, and practising as a surgeon, having a chemist's shop there; I was then residing in Portland-street; I cannot speak with certainty of my age; to the best of my belief, I was about eighteen or twenty; both Fletcher and his wife expressed a great partiality for me, and I became a frequent visitor at their house. They introduced me to a Mr. Stokes; and represented him as a gentleman holding a situation in the Bank of England. Some time after my intimacy at Fletcher's, Mr. Fletcher and Stokes solicited me to go to the Bank; they said, if I would only sign my same and address for them as a bondswoman, they would and did give me 50l.; I wrote more than signing my names and went to the Bank, I think more than once, with them both, and to the Commons'; I did not understand the business at all; Fletcher and Stokes took the money in their possession, that was paid at the Bank, and afterwards went to an inn, with a Mr. Pizey, (or Pizley,) who acted with them at the Bank, Mrs. Fletcher, and myself; after a long conversation between Fletcher, Stokes, and Pisey, the latter left us; we then got into a coach, and returned to Mr. Fletcher's residence, in the London-road. I gave the money I received from their, to my mother; I was at that time living with her, also my sister Mrs. Saunders, and her husband; neither of them knew that I had any money at all given to me by Fletcher; I remained on terms of friendship with Fletchers, for some time; I cannot speak of dates with any certainty, but I know it continued up to the first Christmas following the trial Mr. Fletcher induced me to enter against Mr. Taylor, for breach of promise of marriage.—After exchanging visits with them, Mr. and Mrs. Fletcher said to my mother and myself, they could do much better for us than my being in the Pantheon. On our inquiring how, they said that Mr. Fletcher had a friend in the Bank of England that enabled him to get money, and he could get some for us; we again asked, in what manner, but they did not explain, beyond Mr. Fletcher observing to my mother, that if she would place herself under his instruction and direction, he would do well for her, and asked her if she would do as be wished in, every thing; she said she would, after Fletcher saying he would guarantee that she should do nothing but what was right; Fletcher, after this, explained what he meant by saying there were a great many sums of money in the Bank of England without any claimants, which was in the hands of the Commissioners, and as there were no relatives. left to claim it, it belonged as much to the public as to them, therefore he would represent her as a relation to some person deceased, who had left money unclaimed, and one of the clerks, who stood high in the Bank, would supply him with all the information requisite to take the money; Fletcher then mentioned the name of Stewart, and said, that a man of that name had been dead some years, and left a sum of money, which by my mother being represented as Stewart's relation, could be easily obtained, but that she must place herself entirely under his direction, and leave her home for a short time to go to a lodging winch he would prepare for her; my mother assented, and promised to do as Fletcher directed. He asked, if I knew of any friend that would take care of any letters that might come through the post, directed to a Mr. Jones; I mentioned Miss Hawkes, and afterwards asked her, if she would take care of such letters, if directed to her care; she said the would, and the letters she brought to me, I gave, unopened, to Mr. Fletcher; I do not, on ever did know, their contents; I went to—the Bank of England with Mr. and Mrs.

Fletcher; Mrs. Fletcher waited with me in the Rotunda, while Mr. Fletcher went to look for his friend; whilst he was gone, the gentleman passed us; when Mr. Fletcher returned, Mrs. Fletcher told him Mr. Christmas had passed us, and we pointed to the office he went in; Fletcher went after him; after being absent some time, he returned, and we left the Bank together, Fletcher observing, I might be sure the gentleman I had seen would not risk the high situation he held, by giving information for him (Fletcher) to act on, if it were not legal. Fletcher took a lodging for my mother, at a shop in Southampton-place, (or terrace) Camberwell, in the name of Stewart, and my mother went and lived there in such name, and I, by Fletcher's direction, visited my mother as her niece. He said, he would not do any thing for me, if I did not give up my business in the Pantheon; that if I would do so, he would establish me, with his daughter, in some first-rate business at the West-end; I consulted with my mother about it, and she thought it best for me to do as he wished; therefore, I disposed of my stock in the best manner I could, and quitted the Pantheon, relying solely on Mr. Fletcher's promise of doing better for me. To revert to my mother's case, Fletcher expressed his regret at not having a person at command, who would say, that he or she had for a considerable time known my mother as Miss Stewart, and sister to the deceased, and, in other respects, to establish my mother's identity as such; on my asking him how he did not know of such a person, he said the fact was, he had employed all the persons he could in that way; that during the period of our not being on friendly terms, he had two rich cases, in one of which he was the principal, and, in the other, he had only a share, but that he realized a large sum of money by them; that a man named Briggs, and his wife, were the parties employed to take the cases; Fletcher said he had taken lodgings for Mary Briggs the wife, and mentioned those cases, to assure my mother that she was not endangering herself in any way. On my mother saying to Fletcher she knew a poor man, a tailor, that was much reduced in circumstances; he said, tell him you will give him 10l. to identify you as Miss Stewart, and sister to the deceased Stewart. He (Fletcher) wrote out an account for my mother, to make herself perfectly acquainted with, and desired her to give it to Griffin after she had done so, that he might know what to say as to the particulars of the matter; at the same time, he said, she was to strongly impress on the mind of Griffin a belief, that Stewart was my mother's family name. Mr. Griffin lived in Duke-street, Grosvenor-square; my mother subsequently saw Griffin, the man now in custody on this charge, and made the proposition to him, which he accepted; she told Fletcher, that Griffin was quite willing to the proposal; he (Fletcher) then said, that was all he required, as Mr. Barber and himself would manage all the rest; I cannot say how long the case was in hand; Fletcher was fearful my mother would not live to go through the business; he took her medicine nearly every morning; she was then seventy-one or seventy-two years of age; I do not know of any other inquiries made, respecting the case, but those I have stated. The money was obtained, and Fletcher gave my mother between 400l. and 500l. for her trouble; I heard nothing further of the matter, except that the legacy duty was not paid, although it had been invested in the hands of Barber, the solicitor, to do so at the time. An official communication was made to Griffin, some time after, from Somerset House, upon which he came to me to know what to do; I said he had better take it to Barber, the solicitor; I gave him half-a-sovereign for his loss of time. Previous to my mother quitting the lodgings at Camberwell, Mr. Fletcher said he should not consent to my mother's returning again to Rathbone-place; therefore, much against her inclination and my own, I took a lodging in Tottenham-court-road; I do not recollect the number; it was a carver and gilder's shop, on the right-hand side

of the road from Oxford-street; I am the only person that visited her, while the remained there; she was so unhappy, I told Fletcher I should have her home; he reluctantly consented, after she had been there about a fortnight or three weeks. In Stewart's business, I gave to Mr. Griffin ten sovereigns; I took them to his lodging in Duke-street, and gave them into his own hand; five from Fletcher, and five from my mother. Soon after this, I removed from Rathbone-place, to live in Tottenham-court-road; the Fletchers were then living in Southampton-place, Camberwell; I spent much time with them; he was our only friend and adviser; he frequently said he interested himself as much in my welfare as he could do for his own daughter."

MR. GREAVES to MR. WOOLFF. Q. When was it you sent the statement? A. I believe it was the end of Feb., the 28th I believe.

MR. BODKIN. Q. is this the letter you sent with it? A. Yes.

MR. GREAVES. Q. Did not she want to be admitted as an accomplice, to give evidence? A. She was in hopes that by furnishing the particulars to the prosecution it might prove of advantage to her I believe—that is a deduction of my own from conversation I had with her.

MR. ATTORNEY-GENERAL. Q. I do not know whether you know that any caution had been given to her? A. Oh yes—I had cautioned her—I believe a caution had been given to her by the visiting Magistrate in my presence—I had several interviews with her before the statement was furnished, and she insisted on its being furnished.

Cross-examined by MR. WILKINS. Q. Do you mean to state to the best of your belief she was cautioned before she made any statement? A. Yes—she was certainly not asked for the statement before she made it to my knowledge, nor in my presence—I do not know that she was asked to make a statement by a Magistrate of the City before she did so—in what I have said I have acted on the instructions I have received—I was to instructed by her.

MR. ATTORNEY-GENERAL. Q. Were you present when any thing passed in the presence of the Lord Mayor on that subject? A. Yes I was, and in the presence of Mrs. Dorey—the Lord Mayor entirely repudiated it—he denied it.

WILLIAM CHRISTMAS . I was formerly a clerk in the Bank, and have been so for fifty years. I was suspended about two months since—my situation in the Bank gave me the means of knowing about the unclaimed dividends and stock in the Bank—I had some communication with the prisoner Fletcher on the subject of disclosing to him any particulars of that stock—I cannot say precisely to the time—with respect to the prosecution now before the Court, in the name of Stewart, I think it must be between three and four years since.

Q. Did you communicate the particulars of the annuity standing in the name of John Stewart? A. Unfortunately for myself I did—after the stock was transferred and sold I received some money from Fletcher—I cannot charge my memory exactly how much—there were other occasions upon which I received money from him—whether it was on that occasion 50l. or 100l. I do not know—it was one of the two—it was in gold—my mind has been so distressed I cannot speak with certainty.

Cross-examined by MR. GREAVES. Q. Pray, did you know it was contrary to your duty to communicate anything about it? A. Most unhappily for myself, I did—my communication about what passed with Fletcher has been principally with Mr. Freshfield—I mode no communication to any one else—I did not mention a word of it till after Fletcher was in custody—I think it is more than a month ago that I communicated to Mr. Freshfield—I

think Mrs. Dorey was in custody before I communicated it—I believe so, but I cannot speak positively to the time.

THE RIGHT HON. WILLIAM MAGNAY, LORD MAYOR . I acted in my capacity as Lord Mayor when the prisoners were under charge during several examinations—I remember the occasion when Mr. Wilkins appeared on behalf of Mrs. Dorey—from instructions which he received, certain observations were addressed to me, as having had a private communication with Mrs. Dorey—in consequence of what fell from Mr. Wilkins on that occasion, I thought fit to state publicly what I knew on the subject—there is not the slightest truth in the suggestion that I had sought to procure any statement from any party on the subject matter of this trial—I said that publicly to Mr. Wilkins, and he in the handsomest manner apologized to me for having been betrayed into stating it.

(The bond was here read, and was for 300l., dated 31st July, 1840, for the due administration of the effects of John Stewart, gardener, Great Marlow, signed Elizabeth Stewart, John Gregory, and Thomas Griffin.)


Saturday, April 13th, 1844.


MR. WILKINS called the following witnesses.

JAMES MORRIS . I am gardener and beadle of Nelson-square, and have been so eight years last July. I recollect Mr. Barber residing in the square more than seven years—I think he resided at No. 52—the brass plate now produced was upon that door till within the last year or nine months—it was taken off when the house was under repair—("Mr. W. H. Barber, solicitor" was on the plate—I knew some of his clerks—Mr. Barber held his office there during the earliest portion of the time—I know a clerk named Peckham very well indeed—he came to the office every morning, I believe—if there had been any inquiries for Mr. Peckham, I should immediately have gone to Mr. Barber's to seek him.

ROBERT PECKHAM . I am now managing clerk to Mr. Bramhall, a solicitor, No. 5, Verulam-buildings, Gray's Inn—I was managing clerk to Mr. Barber—I went to him on 10th Feb. 1837, and continued in his employ up to the January of this year, about three weeks after his arrest—I had access to Mr. Barber every day while he was in custody, during that three weeks—I remember the parties from the Bank coming to see his papers—during that three weeks no alteration whatever had been made as to the position of these papers, with the exception of looking out such letters as were advised by Mr. Barber's attorney, and copies being made of them, all of which have been produced to-day—I remember the case of Elizabeth Stewart being brought to Mr. Barber's office—at that time there were two clerks in the office directly employed by Mr. Barber, and a messenger—there was a gentleman having offices in the same house, whose business Mr. Barber had purchased, and whose clerks salaries were also paid by Mr. Barber, and who had to do his business, when required—I think there were five or six besides a messenger—this business of Stewart's was conducted in the office precisely in the same open way in which other business was done—a clerk who managed the business kept a diary of the transactions carried on there, and Mr. Barber also—I have carefully looked over that diary, in reference to this transaction, to see what entries were made by myself—this is the diary—here is an entry of 25th August,

1840, in my own handwriting—I made it at Mr. Barber's dictation, or from being told by him to what effect to write—at the time I made that entry I was perfectly acquainted with the events of which it is a short history, and if Mr. Barber gave the names wrongly, in the hurry of dictation, I altered them as the fact was—I very well remember Mr. Fletcher attending at Mr. Barber's office that day—I did not hear what his errand was—this diary is for the year 1840, and during that year it was always on Mr. Barber's desk, ready to be entered daily—it was open to the inspection of everybody—it was a book of access and reference—Mr. Bircham was not a partner at that time—it was open to his inspection when he became a partner—I observe two handwritings of clerks in the diary, and that of Mr. Barber—James Macnamara is the other clerk—I cannot speak as to the number of times Mr. Fletcher attended at Mr. Barber's office, between 25th August and 23rd Oct.—I saw him coming frequently, sometimes daily, but I took no particular notice—he had been a client of Mr. Barber's since the autumn of 1838, or the spring of 1839—but with reference to Mr. Fletcher's calls, I should observe, a call-book is kept in the office, by which, the moment a gentleman appeared in the office, his name is put down by a clerk, and that book is here—every time any client called his name would be immediately entered by one of the clerks—that was a task generally performed by Mr. Macnamara—during the time I was in the office, Mr. Barber transacted very considerable business for Mr. Fletcher—it was not so extensive, but it was rather heavy business—actions for demurrage and freight, mortgages, rent-charges, and various things—it was what we call the superior business of a client—I was on very intimate terms with Mr. Barber, during the whole time I was his clerk—he treated me more as a son than a clerk—I never in my life saw Mr. Fletcher in his company, except at his office—he was so proud, that I had particular instructions never to assume any familiarity—I never discovered or saw any familiarity between Mr. Barber and Mr. Fletcher—there was a greater coldness towards Mr. Fletcher than any other client—Mr. Fletcher was rather repulsive in his manner, and Mr. Barber did not court him—I remember Mr. Barber going to Great Marlow very well indeed—I did not go with him—I made an entry in the diary at his dictation, a day or two before he went, of his intention to go, and I know of his absence from the office on that day—I remember the months of May and June preceding the 1st of Oct.

Q. Now during the whole of those two months was Mr. Barber absent for a day from the office? A. On one occasion he and I were at Rochester together, with the exception of that one day he certainly was not absent from the office during the whole of those two months—Mr. Barber's effects have been sold since this, both at his private house and his office—they were sold to defray the rent—Mr. Bramhall has conducted his defence gratuitously—several other friends have supplied funds to pay counsel's fee.

MR. ATTORNEY GENERAL. Q. When did you first go to Mr. Barber's? A. On the 10th of February, 1837—I was never articled to him, I was to have been—I continued in his service from the 10th of Feb. up to Nov. 1839, when I left him to go into a large office for two months—I then returned to him, and have been with him ever since—I think it was in Nov., 1839, that I left him, and went into the office of Taylor, Sharp, and Field, Bedford-row—I cannot give the precise date, I think it was about the 16th of Nov.—I returned, I think, about the 19th of Jan. 1840—I have been in his service ever since, down to the time of his apprehension, without any intermission—I know a person named Hartung, a German—at least, I did know him when he was a client, I think about 1839—I called on him at the time I was at Taylor, Sharp, and Field's—I had some dispute with Mr. Barber's servant, in

consequence of slamming a door—he gave me some unkind word, and I left him, this situation offering on the same day—the servant's name was Charlotte Gallard, I think—Mr. Barber is unmarried, he never has been married that I am aware of, I never heard of any wife, certainly none ever lived with him—he had no wife.

Q. During the time you were absent from Mr. Barber's, did you not say to Mr. Hartung that if you chose you could hang Mr. Barber? A. Oh, no—I heard, through Mr. Barber, that such a statement had reached his ears, I was disgusted at it, and immediately wrote to Mr. Fresh field, emphatically denying it, that it was a gross falsehood—I believe somebody had told Mr. Barber—I heard it at the Mansion-house from Mr. Barber—I most certainly swear I did not make that statement—this is not the only transaction with Mr. Fletcher relating to the proving of wills—there are several others relating to the same business as the wills, relating to unclaimed dividends—there have been three of these transactions besides this, which form the subject of other indictments—there was another before, I think, or very nearly contemporaneous with this, which has not been made the subject of an indictment—those were the only ones that I am aware of—Oh, by the bye, I beg your pardon, there was another; there was one in which Mr. Bramhall, my present employer, received about 1000l. from unclaimed dividends, for which he was very thankful—that was an affair between Mr. Fletcher and Mr. Barber—Mr. George Robins, the auctioneer, was the party who died, leaving the dividends unclaimed—altogether there were three transactions besides this, forming the subject of an indictment—there was one, I think, before, or if not before contemporaneous with these certainly; and there was another, Robins' matter—I do not know at this moment of any other—that is six, I think—Mr. Fletcher was concerned in all those—there were others besides, in which Mr. Fletcher has not been concerned, I believe—I do not know when they began—I mentioned that because you were so anxious in your inquiry, and Mr. Barber's instructions are, that every thing should be stated—he has not given me instructions as to the manner in which I should give evidence—I have been instructing Mr. Wilkins in this case—Mr. Bircham became a partner. either on the 17th or 21st of Dec, 1841—Mr. Barber generally came to the office of a morning about a quarter past nine—he was generally there before anybody—up to the latter end of Nov., his office was at his residence, 52, Nelson-square—just at the time of my leaving him, he changed his office to Tokenhouse-yard—when I returned to him at the beginning of 1840, his office was in Tokenhouse-yard—he continued to reside at 52, Nelson-square, up to his apprehension—his office hours at Tokenhouse-yard were from half-past nine; he staid till half-past five, himself, and I was generally there till half-past six—I lived with my father at that time, on the Buildings, at Apothecaries hall—he has been there thirty years—I did not live in Nelson-square, but I used to be there about three nights a week, and spend the evening with him; to read and write, and enter up his diary—he had no family at that time that I know of—I have continued my intimacy with him up to this day—he has, I think, two children, but I do not know that they are his children, by any means—I never heard him say so, it was only from popular report I heard it—they never lived in the house with him—I was not aware of his having two children; it was too delicate a subject for me to talk to him about—I am perfectly aware that no birth ever took place in his house.

MR. WILKINS. Q. Except as to popular report, did you ever know Mr. Barber had any children? A. By no means—my father is the head assistant in the warehouse of the Apothecaries' Company—he has been on the Company's buildings I think about thirty years—Mr. Hartung is a client who got

very angry with Mr. Barber, because he sent him in rather a heavy bill—he has often said he would like to hang Mr. Barber—I never said I could hang him—there were all together six of these transactions—the one not the subject of an indictment was a claim of about 200l. by the representatives of a person named Smith, in which Messrs. Lawrence and Blenkiron, of Bucklersbury, were concerned for the parties—Mr. Barber merely gave the information through Mr. Fletcher—the other matter, which we called in the office "Robins's matter," was a claim to about 1,500l. unclaimed dividends, standing in the name of Mr. George Robins—Mr. Barber communicated with the trustees, and I believe the property was recovered—Mr. Bramhall has frequently told me so—he got his information from Fletcher in that case, and the money has since been paid into the Court of Chancery—I used to go home three evenings in the week with Mr. Barber, to read letters that came, to draft answers, make up the diary, prepare business for the following day, and take his instructions upon those matters which I was attending to, which I could not consult him about in the office from the hurry of business.

JAMES MACNAMARA . I have been a clerk of Mr. Barber's upwards of four years. I was his clerk in 1840—his office was then in Tokenhouse-yard—I do not remember during that year a case relating to unclaimed dividends in the name of Stewart—(looking at a paper)—this is my writing—I have a slight recollection of the case, but I do not know when it was.

MR. ATTORNEY GENERAL. Q. Look and see if that is your handwriting? A. Yes—(this was the instructions for the affidavit accounting for delay)—I have no recollection upon what occasion I wrote that, or how I came to write it—I suppose I was told to copy it—I cannot say by whom—I was sometimes told to copy things by Mr. Barber, and sometimes by the clerk—by any of the clerks—there was a boy in the office—I believe he might give it me to copy—he had not the conduct of any business—he would be acting under Peckham's authority—I do not think there was anybody besides Mr. Barber, Peckham, and the boy—I had it to copy from somebody—I cannot say by whom—there were other persons in the office—Mr. Knight had his clerks there—he is a solicitor in the same office, and his managing clerk managed some of the business as well, I believe.

COURT. Q. Did he manage for Mr. Barber? A. No.

MR. WILKINS. Q. Did Mr. Barber buy Mr. Knight's business? A. I heard something about it, but I cannot swear to the fact—Mr. Knight was there when his clerks were there—Mr. Knight might have given me instructions to write this paper—there was a Mr. Ackerman there—he might have given me instructions—he very frequently did, and so did Mr. Knight—a Mr. Swanisland was there—he might have given me instructions—I remember the diary being kept—I frequently made entries in it by Mr. Barber's dictation—I never saw Mr. Barber in company with Mr. Fletcher except in the office.

(The bill produced to the witness Hyatt was here read as follows:—"Greyhound Inn, Great Marlow, Oct. 13,1840; wine negus, 1s.; gin, 1s. 6d.; tea, 1s. 3d.; horse to Maidenhead, 5s.; total, 8s. 9d.")



DOREY— GUILTY . Aged 32.

Tuesday, April 16.

Before Mr. Justice Williams.