BENJAMIN POOLEY.
14th January 1801
Reference Numbert18010114-55
VerdictGuilty
SentenceDeath > respited

Related Material

ActionsCite this text | Print-friendly version | Report an error
Navigation< Previous text (trial account) | Next text (trial account) >

149. BENJAMIN POOLEY was indicted,

for that he, being a person employed in the Post-office on the 6th of June, feloniously did steal a letter addressed to one Archibald Thomson .

(The indictment was stated by Mr. Myers, and the case opened by Mr. Fielding.)

DAVID THOMSON sworn. - Examined by Mr. Woodfall. Q. You reside near Maidstone, I believe? - A. Yes.

Q. Do you recollect, on the 5th of June last, having written any letters to town? - A. Yes.

Q. Look at that draft? - A. On the 5th of June I inclosed it in a letter directed to Archibald Thomson , nurseryman , Mile-end, near London.

Q. Do you remember the purport of that letter? - A. I wrote, dear brother, I have inclosed a check, which I have given you information of, for 200l. signed David Thomson, and dated 5th of June.

Mr. Knowlys. They must at least prove that the letter is not in existence.

Mr. Fielding. We will prove, by Hill, that it was destroyed.

Mr. Thomson. On the 5th of June last I delivered that letter to Mr. Poole, the post-master.

Cross-examined by Mr. Knowlys. Q. Where did you reside at the time you wrote this letter? - A. At Diston, near Maidstone.

Q. How many miles from London? - A. Thirty-two.

Q. Thirty miles from the place where the persons live upon whom it was drawn? - A. Yes.

Q. More than ten miles at any rate from London? - A. Yes.

THOMAS POOLE sworn. - Examined by Mr. Woodfall. I am post-master, at Maidstone.

Q. Do you recollect, on the 5th of June last, receiving any letters from Mr. Thomson? - A. I do, several, which I put into the box, and they were forwarded in the usual and customary mode the same night; I was present at the making up of the bag that day.

ISAAC HANSON sworn. - Examined by Mr. Abbott. I am a sorter in the General Post-office.

Q. Were you on duty in the General Post-office on the 6th of June last? - A. I was.

Q. Do you remember the Maidstone bag arriving on that morning? - A. Yes, it came in the usual course to table E.

Court. Q. And opened there? - A. Yes.

Mr. Abbott. Q. When the bag was opened at table E, would it be the regular course that the letters to be delivered by the Penny-post should be separated from the letters which were to be delivered by the General-post carriers? - A. Yes.

Court. Q. What are the letters that are delivered by the Penny-post - are they those that lie at a greater distance from the Post-office? - A. Yes; all that are directed out of the town delivery, and within the circuit of the Penny-post.

Q. Is Mile-end in the delivery, or within the circuit of the Penny-post? - A. The Penny-post.

Q. Were the letters that morning separated in the usual way? - A. Yes, they were.

Court. Q. Were you at table E then? - A. Yes.

Q. Was William Chalfont a sorter at that table that morning? - A. Yes.

Cross-examined by Mr. Knowlys. Q. This table E is an office in which the prisoner is not present? - A. Yes.

Q. He has no connection with that table? - A. No.

Court. Q. On the 6th of June, was the prisoner employed in the Post-office? - A. In the Pennypost department, but not in the General-post.

Q. Then, before any letters get to the Pennypost department, they are first of all dealt with at letter E? - A. Yes, they are.

Q. Do all the letters that come by the Generalpost come into that office in which table E is situated? - A. Yes, they do.

Q. At which office Pooley has no duty or empolyment? - A. None at all.

Q. Does it not often happen, that, by mistake, letters that should be delivered over to the Penny Post-office, get into the delivery of the General-post carriers? - A. Yes, it does frequently happen.

Q. Therefore it might have happened with this letter, as it has with others, that it might have got there by mistake? - A. No, it would have got delivered by the carrier to the Penny Post-office.

Q. That is to say, if the General-post carrier is honest, and discovers the mistake in time, he will return it? - A. Yes.

Court. Q. Not to give it back to the General Post-office , but put it in himself at the Penny-post? - A. No, he would give it to the clerk in the General Post-office, who would forward it to the Penny-post.

WILLIAM CHALFONT sworn. - Examined by Mr. Abbott. I am a letter-sorter in the General Post-office, and was so on the 6th of June.

Q. At what table were you upon duty there on that morning? - A. Table E.

Q. Do you remember the Maidstone bag coming to that table that morning? - A. No, I have nothing to do with the bags.

Q. Were you employed that morning in sorting at that table the letters that were for the Pennypost delivery, from those that were for the town delivery? - A. Yes; we separate them in fourteen divisions.

Q. Was that separation made in the usual course that day? - A. It was.

Court Q. What do you mean by fourteen divisions? - A. Tweleve town deliveries, one delivery to the merchants that are called for, and the other division is for the Penny-post.

Q. Do you know whole duty it would be to

take away that morning the letters that were ready for the Penny-post delivery? - A. When they are told up, they are carried away by a messenger.

Court. Q. What do you mean by told up? - A. The amount of the money is told up.

Mr. Abbott Q. Who tells them up? - A. Mr. Hanson and Mr. Godby.

Cross-examined by Mr. Knowlys. Q. Being sorted into so many divisions, mistakes frequently take place? - A. Certainly.

AUGUSTUS GODBY sworn. - Examined by Mr. Abbott Q. Did you tell up the charges on the 6th of June? - A. Not all of them, some of them I did.

Q. Who told up the others? - A. Mr. Hanson. Court. Q. What charges? - A. Of the Pennypost.

Mr. Abbott. Q. Did you tell up the charges of the Penny-post? - A. Part of Them.

Court. Q. Do you mean the postage of those letters that are to go by the Penny-post? - A. Yes.

Q. And Mr. Hanson told up the remaining part - was that your presence? - A. Yes.

Cross-examined by Mr. Knowlys. Q. There is nothing in the performance of yur duty, I suppose, that leads you to know that any particular letters gets into the Penny Post-office, you only know that the letters in general go there? - A. Yes.

Q. A letter intended for the Penny-post delivery might have got into the town? - A. yes, it might be mis-sorted.

Mr. Abbott. (To(Hanson). Q. Did you assist in telling up the charges of the Penny-post letters that morning? - A. Yes.

Q. You, and the last witness, Godby, told up the whole? - A. Yes, we did.

Q. The next process is to be delivered to the messenger to be taken over? - A. Yes.

GEORGE BOWNS sworn. - Examined by Mr. Abbott. Q. Were you at the Post-office on the 6th of June last? - A. Yes.

Q. Did you fetch any letters from the table E? - A. I believe I did all of them.

Q. What lettes - did you fetch the Penny-post letters that morning? - A. Yes.

Court. Q. Do you mean all the Penny-post letters? - A. Yes; after the letters for the Pennypost were told up, I took the charges to their respective places.

Mr. Abbott. Q. Did you take the Penny-post letters, as well as the charges? - A. Yes.

Court. Q. What do you mean by taking the charges? - A. The amount of the charges put upon a paper, and I delivered it over to another person, who took the charge of the Penny-post; there they are told over again, and he checks it.

Q. Who is that person? - A. Mr. Webster.

Q. To whom did you deliver the Penny-post letters? - A. A person that comes for them.

Q. Is that Mr. Hazard? - I believe it is.( John Hazard was called, but did not appear).

WILLIAM HARRIS sworn. - Examined by Mr. Abbott. Q. To what department of the Post-office do you belong? - A. To the Penny-post.

Q. Did you, on the morning of the 6th of June, receive the Penny-post letters that had come by the General-post? - A. I did.

Q. In what manner are they brought to you? - A. In a locked box.

Q. YOu have the key of that box, I believe? - A. Yes, I have.

Q. Is thre an account of the charges also brought to you? - A. Yes.

Q. Do you count the letters over to see that they agree with the charges? - A. After they are stamped, the box is opened in my presence; they are delivered to the stamper and counted.

Q. Did they agree that morning with the charges? - A. They did.

Q. The delivery of the Penny-post is divided into several districts? - A. Yes.

Q. One of which is called the Eastern district? - A. Yes.

Q. Into how many walks in the Eastern district divided? - A. Four.

Q. Be so good as name them? - A. Whitechapel, Wapping, Limehouse, and Goodman's-fields.

Q. Was the prisoner, Pooley, employed on the 6th of June in any situation relative to these letters? - A. As charge taker in the Eastern district.

Q. What is his duty as charge taker? - A. To receive the letters from the sorting office, and divide them into four walks.

Q. Who were the four persons who were to deliver in the four walks? - A. Pooley was one, for Limehouse walk.

Court. Besides being charger, he was carrier? - A. Yes.

Mr. Abbott. Q. Is Mile-end in the Lime-house walk? - A. No.

Q. Philip Absolem was another, I believe? - A. He was; his walk was Goodman's-fields.

Q. William Lloyd? - A. Wapping walk. Q. William Godwin ? - A. The Whitechapel walk.

Q. Is Mile-end in the Whitechapel walk? - A. Yes.

Q. About what time in the morning would Penny-post letters be dispatched at that time of the year? - A. From the arrival of the mails till half past nine or ten o'clock.

Cross-examined by Mr. Knowlys. Q. I do not know whether the place where you fit and do your business is the same office where the prisoner is engaged? - A. No; the first part of his duty is there, but he divides them down in another office.

Q. The office in which he sits, I believe, has a

great number of clerks in it, has it not? - A. No clerks at all; it is for letter carriers only.

Q. There are a great number of them? - A. Yes. Q. How many of them do you think? - A. Forty or fifty at that hour.

Q. All of whom have access to the letters, and are engaged in sorting? - A. Yes; and the letters are delivered to the care of five charge takers.

Q. The Penny-post letters come under the care of forty or fifty letter carriers? - A. Most assuredly, they are in the same room, and assist in sorting.

Court. Q. There are five charge takers, and these persons sub-divide them? - A. No; the charge takers divide them, the letter carriers may assist; they do in the penny-post business; I have seen them; but I am not in that office.

Mr. Knowlys. Q. Therefore that would put it in the hands of a great number? - A. No.

Q. The Penny-post letters frequently get into wrong divisions, don't they? - A. - Yes.

Q. Therefore taking all the divisions together may have access to them? - A. Yes.

Q. Do you know a person of the name of Charles Hill? - A. I do.

Q. Was he engaged in the employment of the Post-office? - A. Not at that time; he had been discharged.

Q. Upon suspicion of improper conduct? - A. He was.

Q. During the time that this business is going on strangers to the office do get into the office? - A. Sometimes.

Q. Do not you know that Hill, since the time of his being discharged, has been in that office? - A. Yes, I have seen him there once or twice.

Q. I speak of this Charles Hill who is, I believe, here to-day? - A. Yes.

Mr. Abbott. Q. You have seen him once or twice, how long might it be before the 6th of June, a short time was it not? - A. Yes.

WILLIAM GWYNNE sworn. - Examined by Mr. Myers. I am a letter carrier for the Whitechapel division, the Eastern division.

Q. Is Mile-end in that division? - A. It is.

Q. Do you know the house of a Mr. Archibald Thomson at Mile-end? - A. Yes, very well

Q. Did you deliver all the letters that you received in the manner that they were directed on that day? - A. I did.

Q. Who delivered the lettrs to you that morning? - A. The prisoner at the bar.

ARCHIBALD THOMSON sworn. - Examined by Mr. Myers. Q. Did you receive a letter from your brother on the 6th of June last? - A. I did not. Court. Q. Your brother is Mr. David Thomson, the witness who was here some time back? - A. Yes.

Mr. Myers. Q. Not at any time dated the 5th of June? - A. No.

Q. Look at bill, did it ever come into your hands? - A. No, it did not.

CHARLES HILL sworn. - Examined by Mr. Fielding. Q. We understand you have been formerly employed in the Post-office? - A. Yes, I have been between four and five years.

Q. How long is it since you have been out of that employ? - A. It might be about two years; it must be two or more.

Q. What was your employ in June last? - A. In the Excise.

Q. Are you acquainted with the prisoner at the bar? - A. Yes, I know him extremely well.

Q. Were you particularly intimate with him? - A. Yes, particular friends during the time I was in the Post-office, and since that we have been upon terms of friendship.

Q. How came you to be dismissed from the Post-office? - A. There was a little misunderstanding between the Gentlemen of the office, there was something lost as I understand, and they went to my house to search it, and at that time thre were half a dozen spoons, and they took them away.

Court Q. A misunderstanding about what? - A. About a note that was lost from some letter in my walk, I believe. and on account my not giving them that answer which they wished, which was to know where I got the spoons from.

Court. Q. Who do you mean by they? - A. The officers; I sent them there of my own will, there was no warrant.

Mr. Fielding. Q. In consequence of that you were dismissed from your employ? - A. I was suspended till I gave a satisfactory account.

Court. Q. A satisfactory account of what? - A. Where the spoons came from.

Q. Did you give that satisfactory account? - A. I told the Comptroller I had no objection to inform him in private, but the officers should lnot be so far satisfied.

Q. And you were discharged? - A. No; I was suspended, not discharged, as Mr. Harris can prove.

Q. Do you remember the 6th of June last? - A. Yes.

Q. Did you see the prisoner that morning? - A. Yes, at the Dolphin public-house, the corner of Cannon-street, near the new road, St. George's in the East.

Q. What time in the morning? - A. To the best of my recollection, between tell and eleven o'clock; but I am sure it must be half after ten.

Q. What passed between you and the prisoner at that time? - A. I called in, not by appointment,

but by accident; the prisoner was there; he informed me that he had got something of value.

Q. Was it in the house, or when you came out of the house? - A. When we came out of the house together, I asked him what it was, and he produced me a check, after we had walked, I may say, the fourth part of a mile down the road.

Q. Look at this check?

Mr. Knowlys. I object to the production of this piece of paper as not being stamped.

Mr. Fielding. With respect to that, it might avail my friend, if it was produced as a note, but as a mere piece of paper to be identified as a thing shewn to the witness I contend it will not; if I were calling upon the witness to look at it as a note it might be a different thing; but I only offer this in order to connect it with the letter containing that piece of paper.

Mr. Woodfall. I will not detain your Lordship a minute, only to suppose a case; a man is indicted for stealing a letter, containing a half-guinea, and that which was supposed to be half-a-guinea, proved to be a piece of lead, of course that indictment could not be sustained; then, suppose a fresh indictment is preferred for stealing the letter, and that dump were to be produced as evidence of that letter having been stolen, no reference could possibly be had to the original indictment for stealing the half-guinea, but I contend it would be good evidence of a fact to trace the allegation of the letter having been in possession of the parry who clearly had that dump in his possession. That is a case perfectly analagous to this; it is to be considered as a piece of blank paper with marks upon it, sufficient to bring it to the recollection of the witness.

Mr. Abbott. My Lord, I am very well aware of the extensive words of the Stamp-act, but we contend-that the words are no more than this; that a paper requiring a stamp, shall not be given in evidence as a good and valid instrument. My Lord, it is perfectly clear, notwithstanding the very large and extensive words of the statute, that such a piece of paper may be given in evidence for some purposes, because it may be produced in evidence, to convict the party drawing it, which, if the words of the statute were to be taken literally, could not be done. It is perfectly clear from several decided authorities, that such a piece of paper may be given in evidence in a criminal prosecution for forgery, and I apprehend it is upon this principle, that it is the nature of the crime of forgery, that the instrument should be false and counterfeit. My Lord, we do not offer this in evidence, as a good and valid draft, but one of the witnesses having informed your Lordship that he put that piece of paper into a letter; we now offer it to prove, that that piece of paper was taken out of the letter by the prisoner himself, and for that purpose, as it seems to me, it is of no sort of consequence whether this be a valid stamp or no, we only shew that this bit of paper was put into the letter, and we offer it in evidence as a medium to shew, that that letter was in his possession.

Mr. Myers followed on the same side, and contended that it ought to be admitted as evidence, to prove, that as it was in the possession of the prisoner, he must also have been in possession of the letter which contained it.

Mr. Knowlys. My Lord, my objection is, that that paper-being produced, however they may with to call it waste-paper, is a thing bearing definition, that the law forbids to be given in evidence. There was one answer to this objection, which I with to get rid of immediately; that, supposing a half-guinea to be contained in a letter, and the party is indicted for stealing a letter, containing a half-guinea, which should turn out afterwards to be a mere dump, or false coin; it is said, that that piece of false coin may be produced in evidence. - To be sure it may, but it is begging the question to assume that in argument, because that dump is a thing which no law of the land forbids you to produce in evidence, that is therefore a plain begging of the question, because a dump is a thing which they might legally produce, and which it would be extremely important to produce in evidence. The witness calls this piece of paper a check, I say, they cannot produce that, unless it is legalized by having received the proper stamp which a check ought to have, and if this be the check, the witness has himself proved to your Lordships, that that is a thing not to be received in evidence, it is a thing that cannot be produced in evidence, because the law says it shall not be produced in evidence, not shall it be pleaded, nor of any avail in any Court of Justice whatever.

My Lord, it has been said, that there have been decided cases in which this point has been ruled, but I rather think those cases that have been alluded to, of Hawkeswood, and other cases, were put upon the instrument itself, that it was not a valid instrument, and therefore not capable of having the effect of availing the party in law to obtain the money which the forgery was intended to defraud the party of, which, therefore, cannot be the subject of an indictment for forgery; but I don't think that any of those determinations have gone upon the question, is this admissible or not? - I am informed there was a case in the Court of Exchequer, at nist prias, where an instrument was produced, merely in order to enable the party to ascertain the fact of another transaction having taken place, and not as an acquittance for money, and there my Lord Chief Baron Eyre refused to receive it in evidence, because the law had said it shall not be offered in evidence. My learned friend, Mr. Gurney, has furnished me with the case, he was present when it was so determined, and therefore I contend, with considerable confidence, that it will not be decided against me ultimately, and perhaps your Lordships may think that there is room for after-consideration.

Mr. Baron Graham. Are you quite sure that those are the words of the statute.

Mr. Knowlys. The words of the Statute, 3l. Geo. III. ch. 25. sec. 13. are not that it shall not be pleaded, or given in evidence in any Court to enable the party to recover it; but that it shall not be pleaded or given in evidence in any Court, and then comes a subsequent clause, which says it shall not be good, useful, or available in law or equity. Upon these grounds I contend before your Lordships, that this statute prohibits it's being given in evidence for any purpose whatever.

Mr. Justice Lawrence. The question, how far a

note unstamped may be given in evidence, has been under the consideration of all the Judges in the case of Moreton, which ruled the case of Cotin Reculist. The Judges were of opinion, and it was expressly so stated by Mr. Justice Grose in delivering the opinion of the Judges upon that case, that the note ought not to be received in any way to make it a valid instrument, but that it was evidence for collateral purposes. Now, the answer given by Mr. Knowlys, to the argument of Mr. Abbott, with respect to the penalty, I think does not hold, because it is to be construed in the most extensive way. - Look at the object of this Act of Parliament, it was a revenue law to lay a duty by means of these stamps, but not to enable persons to commit larcenies, and all sorts of crimes with impunity, that was not the object. We are of opinion that the evidence should be received; if between this and the first day of the term, any doubt should strike our minds, we will certainly take the opinion of the Judges, but at present we have no doubt.

Mr. Fielding. (To Hill.) Q. He gave you that check? - A. I do not know that this was the check, it is impossible for me to swear that, I wrote nothing upon it, it was for the same sum, it answers the description; a few minutes afterwards, a letter was shown to me by the prisoner, but what became of it I do not know; I saw the prisoner tear the letter, but I cannot be certain whether it was that or not.

Q. Had you a memory of what was written upon the paper which he produced to you? - A. To the best of my recollection, it is a long time since, it was from one brother to another, with an enclosure of 200l. it began, dear brother; I do not know the date, I know it was signed Thomson, but I cannot recollect the christian name; it was directed to Mr. Thomson at Mile-end.

Q. How long did you continue together then? - A. If I staid ten minutes, it was the outside.

Q. For what purpose did he put that first piece of paper into your hand? - A. To get it changed; the next day I went with it to Stratford- place, to the banker's shop.

Q. Did you tender that piece of paper at the banker's? - A. Yes; I received a 100l. a 40l. and a 50l. Bank of England notes, and 10l. in cash.

Q. Did any thing pass at the banker's shop? - A. Yes; he asked me if I received it for Mr. Thomson, and I told him, yes.

Q. When you had got these notes, where did you go? - A. To the Bank of England to change those for small notes.

Q. When change did you get from the Bank - was it the same day? - A. Yes, to the best of my recollection; I got, I think, forty-five 2l. notes, and four 25l. notes.

Q. Were you desired at the Bank to write your name upon any one of the notes? - A. Yes, upon one.

Q. What did you put upon it? - A. Welch, Kensington-grove.

Q. Did you put any letters denoting a christian name? - A. Yes, J. or P. or something of that sort.

Q. Where did you see the prisoner after this? - A. At the Black-horse, Fieldgate-street, Whitechapel, about seven o'clock in the evening; I told him I had changed the notes, and he wanted some of the money, but I would not give him any that night, except four or five guineas; on the Sunday morning, I called upon him at his lodgings, and gave him ten 2l. notes.

Q. How many notes did you give him, either that or the next day? - A. On Tuesday morning, I gave him ten 2l. notes.

Q. How many notes did you give him either that or the next day? - A. On the Tuesday morning, I gave him ten more 2l. notes.

Q. In what way did you dispose of the other notes? - A. I exchanged them at different shops.

Q. For the purpose of getting rid of them? - A. Yes.

Q. Do you know how much the prisoner had of notes and cash? - A. Ninety pounds exactly.

Q. How long was it before you knew the prisoner was apprehended? - A. I cannot be certain, but I think it was the Wednesday fen'night after.

Q. Did you pay him a visit in the Computer? - A. I called and intended to pay him a visit, but I could not see him.

Q. How soon after was it that you heard of yourself being enquired after? - A. I knew it the next day, I think it was; I went away on the Saturday morning, and therefore it must have been two days afterwards.

Q. How long were you from town, before you were apprehended? - A. Five weeks, or more.

Q. Part of these notes were exchanged by you, were any exchanged by any other person? - A. Yes; some by Mrs. Sturgess, but she was perfectly ignorant of it.

Q. Do you recollect how you passed the 6th and 7th of June? - A. On the 6th, I was to attend the surveyor at the chamber.

Q. Did you see the surveyor of excise, Mr. Hindes, in company with the prisoner, any time that day? - A. Yes, at Hackney.

Q. Did the prisoner say any thing to the surveyor of excise, for you? - A. I sent him with a message to beg him to assist me in my duty, for I had particular business that morning, and would come to him as soon as I could.

Q. What particular business was this? - A. To get the money, but I did not go that morning.

Court. Q. Did you send the prisoner from the Dolphin, down to Hackney? - A. I did; upon looking at the note, I discovered that it was the 6th day of the month, the note was dated the 7th; I never looked at the month, I discovered that the note was dated wrong, it was dated the 7th; I

thought it was the 7th of June, instead of that, it was over due a month.

Cross-examined by Mr. Knowlys. Q. I like to have people's own words in their accounts of transactions - while you were in the employ of the Post-office, there was what you call a little misunderstanding? - A. Yes.

Q. Now, that little misunderstanding was merely telling you that you were suspected of having stolen a ten pound note out of some letter? - A. No, it was not.

Q. What then? - A. It was a 100l. note.

Q. Had your superior in office, in this little misunderstanding, told you there was some suspicion of a one hundred pound note being missing? - A. It was a misunderstanding, I am certain.

Q. This little misunderstanding produced some officers to search your house? - A. Yes.

Q. And you were desired to account for the possession of some silver spoons? - A. Yes.

Q. And you tell us, you were suspended but not discharged, till you could account satisfactorily to your superiers? - A. That is exactly the case.

Q. You were suspended but not discharged? - A. I was not discharged.

Q. How came it that you were not discharged? - A. The case was, that I got a better situation.

Q. That is to say, you resigned? - A. Yes.

Q. Before they could determine whether they would turn you out of place or not, you resigned? - A. I never went into the employment afterwards.

Q. You were in the Excise-office, were you not? - A. I was.

Q. You have not appeared to attend in your duty there since? - A. I have been in confinement ever since.

Q. Do you come from prison here? - A. I do.

Q. You have at least made use of 100l. out of this 200l.? - A. Yes, and it cost me above 100l. more.

Q. Running from justice, you know, is an expensive thing? - A. I should never have gone from the place, but by the persuasion of my friends; I positively meant to surrender to the Lord-Mayor.

Q. Did you do it? - A. I did not.

Q. Then, instead of surrendering to give information, you absconded, and was pursued from place to place, for about six weeks; I dare say it was.

Q. As you were called to account about this business of the Post-office, I will ask you, though you left your employment there, have you not been frequently in the Penny-post Letter-office? - A. I have been twice.

Q. You had no business there? - A. No business whatever.

Q. Were you ever turned out of that place? - A. Never, I was ordered to go out; I was desired by Mr. Harris to walk out.

Q. You were not turned out, that is, not laid hold of by the collar, and kicked out, but you were desired to go out? - A. I was.

Q. Those who are in that office can reach the table of course? - A. It is impossible without the notice of letter-carriers.

Q. Things are to be done sometimes, unobserved? - A. It is impossible.

Q. Do you not know, that by giving evidence against this man now at the bar, you exempt yourself from all prosecution? - A. I received a letter at the time I was taken; signifying the same.

Q. And not till then did you come forward? - A. No, nor would not; then they over persuaded me in protecting a woman that knew nothing of it; the first word Mr. Parkin said to me, when I was apprehended, was, to save myself, and become an evidence.

JOHN CUELL sworn. - Examined by Mr. Fielding. I am clerk to the London and Middlesex Bank in Stratford-place.

Q. Does Mr. David Thomson, of Maidstone, keep an account at your house? - A. He does.

Q. You have your book there I see, turn to the 7th of June, was any draft of Mr. Thomson brought to your house on the 7th of June for 200l.? - A. Yes.

Q. Was any other sum of Mr. Thomson's, besides that, presented on that day? - A. Not to my knowledge.

Q. Look at the draft? - A. This is the draft; it appears to be paid to a Mr. Thomson.

Q. What are the notes you paid? - A. A Banknote for 100l. No. 1724, dated the 22d of May, a 50l. No. 702, dated the 6th of May, the 40l. is No. 8398, dated the 26th of May, and 10l. in cash.

Q. Have you any memory of the person who received this? - A. None at all.

Mr. Knowlys. Q. Some person received it in the name of Thomson? - A. I asked him if he received it for Mr. Thomson, and he said, yes.

JOHN PENN sworn. - Examined by Mr. Wood. fall. Q. What are you? - A. Bank-note pay clerk belonging to the Bank of England.

Q. You have some notes in your possession, I believe? - A. Yes, (produces them), one 100l. one 50l. one 40l. and one 2l.; the 100l. is No. 1724, dated the 22d of May, the 50l. is No. 702, dated the 6th of May, the 40l. No. 8398, dated the 26th of May, and the 2l. is No. 2108, dated the 15th of May, all in the year 1800.

Q. Were those large notes exchanged in the month of June? - A. Yes; the 100l. the 40l. and the 50l. were brought and exchanged for twenty notes of 5l. each, and forty-five of 2l. each; the numbers of the 2l. notes were from 2066 to 2110; the indorsement on the 100l. note is " T. Welsh, Kensington-grove, June 7, 1800.

Cross-examined by Mr. Knowlys. Q. Then you

delivered in all sixty-five pieces of Bank paper? - A. Yes.

ROBERT RAY sworn. - Examined by Mr. Abbott. I was shopman to Mrs. Nutterell, No. 31, Houndsditch.

Q. Do you know the person of the prisoner at the bar? - A. I know him by sight; he formerly lived nearly opposite.

Q. Do you remember him coming to your Mistress's shop at any time in June last? - A. Yes, June the 9th.

Q. What did he buy? - A. Two yards and a half of buff cord, for breeches.

Q. In what way did he pay you? - A. With a 2l. note, for which I gave him change; I desired him to write his name and residence upon the note.

Q. Do you recollect what he wrote? - A. He wrote Johnson, Whitechapel.

Q. Did you know his name before? - A. No.

Q. What did you do with that note? - A. I gave it to my mistress.

Q. (To Penn). Be so good as to shew the 2l. note to this witness.

Ray. I believe this to be the same note, but I do not recollect the 7th of June upon it.

Cross-examined by Mr. Knowlys. Q. It is very usual for persons to write upon Bank-notes the names of the persons from whom they receives them? - A. Yes, it is.

Mr. Abbott. Q. You desired him to write his own name? - A. Yes; if I know the person, I put their name upon it myself.

WILLIAM BRAY WEDLEY sworn. - Examined by Mr. Abbott. (Produces a pair of breeches). Q. Where did you get these breeches? - A. From the prisoner's lodgings, after the prisoner was in custody.

Q. How do you know it was the prisoner's lodgings? - A. He informed Mr. Parkin and myself where his lodgings were, and he delivered the key.

Q. (To Ray). Is that the same sort of stuff that you sold to the prisoner? - A. Yes; it is impossible to say positively, but it is like it.

Mr. Knowlys. To Wedley). Q. I believe he admitted that he bought these breeches of Mrs. Nutterell? - A. Yes.

Q. Did he not say that he put down the name of Johnson upon it because he had received it from a person of that name in Whitechapel? - A. He hesitated at first, and said he was not prepared for an answer, and about an hour after he said he took it of a person of the name of Johnson, in Whitechapel.

Mr. Abbott. Q. It was in consequence of this 2l. note that he was apprehended? - A. Yes.

Court. Q. You found these breeches at his lodgings? - A. Yes, and I brought them to Mr. Parkin's office, and put my own seal upon them to identify them; I asked him whether he had not purchased a breeches piece of Mrs. Nutterell, in Houndsditch; he said, yes; I then asked him whether he had not paid for it with a 2l. Bank of England note: he admitted that he had, after that the lodging was searched and the breeches found; Mr. parkin delivered them to me, and I have had them ever since.

Mr. Knowlys. Q. Did not you find some pawn-brokers' duplicates? - A. There were some duplicates.

Q. Did you find any Bank paper? - A. No.

Q. Though there were sixty-five pieces issued? - A. Yes.

HENRY HYDE sworn. - Examined by Mr. Fielding. Q. Do you know Hill? - A. Yes.

Q. You are a Supervisor of the Excise? - A. Yes; Hill was an Excise officer in my division; he had been under me six months and upwards.

Q. Do you remember, on the 6th of June, seeing Hill and the prisoner at the bar together? - A. I do.

Q. Did the prisoner make any application to you on account of Hill? - A. Yes; on the 5th of June, Hill requested leave of absence the next morning, the 6th. till ten o'clock; I left word at the chamber that I was going to Mr. Wright's, a wine and brandy merchant, at Hackney, with his books on survey, and he was to meet me when I had got to Church-street; I met with the prisoner between ten and eleven, and he said, Mr. Hyde, I have come from Mr. Hill to ask your leave of absence till noon, past twelve o'clock, this day; I granted the same, and I went on to Mr. Wright's, and Mr. Pooley went in along with me to the said house; I began to take the brandy stock, and in about five minutes in came Mr. Hill; I said to him, Mr. Hill, your friend has been here to ask leave of absence for you till past twelve; Mr. Pooley was close by me at the time; I proceeded on my business, and Mr. Pooley and my officer withdrew into the yard, and I went into the cellar to take the wine stock; they were both talking together; they followed me into the cellar; I proceeded on my business there, and Mr. Hill and Mr. Pooley drank a glass of white wine together; a very few minutes afterwards, he said good day to Mr. Hill, and good day to me, and went away; I saw him no more that day; the next day, on the 7th of June, at evening, past five o'clock, I saw them both together at the Black Horse Fieldgate-street, very near Whitechapel church.

ELIZABETH LAWRENCE sworn. - Q. You keep a lodging-house, I believe? - A. I let apartments.

Q. Where? - A. In Whire-horse-street, St. George's in the East; I know the prisoner per

fectly well, he lodged with me between four and five years.

Q. Did he lodge with you in June last? - A. Yes, he did.

Q. Do you know Hill? - A. Yes.

Court. Q. The man who was a witness here this morning? - A. Yes, I saw him; Hill called on the 9th of June upon Mr. Pooley; I was absent from home when he came, but he was there when I came home.

The prisoner left his defence to his Counsel, and called eight witnesses, who gave him an excellent character. GUILTY , Death , aged 34.

Case reserved for the opinion of the twelve Judges .

Second Middlesex Jury, before Mr. Justice Lawrence.


View as XML