22nd November 1852
Reference Numbert18521122-67
VerdictNot Guilty > unknown

Related Material

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

67. HENRY BINGLEY , forging and uttering an order for payment of 10l., with intent to defraud.

MESSRS. PARRY and ROBINSON conducted the Prosecution.

JENKYN DAVIES . I am a licensed victualler, at 107, Wood-street. On Wednesday, 3rd Nov., the prisoner came to my house—I had known him only for a few days previous—he asked me to change this check for htm; I told him it was not convenient for me to do so—he then asked me to let him have 4l. or 5l. on the check, as he could not go to the bank, and he wanted to pay his men, and he produced this check from his pocket, and handed it to me—(read—"10l. London, Nov. 3, 1852. Please to pay to Mr. Bingley, or his order, the sum of 10l., and place it to my account. William Jackson. To Messrs. Drommonds and Co., Charing Cross.")—I advanced him 5l. on it, believing it to be a genuine check, and he promised at the same time to redeem it on the following Monday—he did not redeem it on the Monday, and consequently I went to Drummonds on the Tuesday, but did not get the check changed—on my way back I called on the prisoner at 109, Wood-street, where he had taken a warehouse—I saw him, and he said he had had a letter to say that Jackson was gone to Australia, but he would send me the 5l. in a day or two—he did not pay me, and about 13th Nov., a Thursday, I went to Camden Town, where I saw him—he begged of me to let him have a day or two longer, and cried, and begged of me not to injure him, and he would pay me the money in a day or two—I gave him till the Saturday, when he said he would pay me between 12 and 2 o'clock—on the Saturday I gave him into custody.

Cross-examined by MR. DEARSEY. Q. Had not you known him since September? A. No; I had only seen him for a few days previous to this, since he had taken this place—he came to me in his right name—I do not know that he is the son of Major Bingley—I have ascertained that Bingley is his real name—when he told me Jackson had gone to Australia, he had a letter in his hand, but I did not ask to see it—he said he had received a letter to say that Jackson bad gone to Australia.

JOHN CHARLES COX . I am a cashier at Messrs. Drummonds. I know nothing of the prisoner—he has no account at our house—I do not know of any person named Jackson having an account at our bank—it is my duty to make myself acquainted with the signatures of the different customers—this is not the signature of any of them.

Cross-examined. Q. Are your customers' names entered in a book? A. Yes; I have examined them for some years back.

JOHN MARK BULL (City policeman, 151). The prisoner was given into my custody at a public house in Camden Town—he asked me to allow him to settle the affair with the prosecutor—I said I would not allow it—I asked him where I could find Jackson, mentioned in the check—he said he had sailed for Australia.

GEORGE ANSON . I am a carver and gilder, at 8, Little Camden-street, Camden Town. I have known the prisoner between three and four months, and have seen him write a dozen times at least—I should say the whole of this check is in his writing—he has lived some time in Agar-street, not far

from where I live, and I have had communication with him about some apartments he wanted to take of my mother.

Cross-examined. Q. Do you mean to say you have seen him write twelve times? A. Yes, that is the least; sometimes with pencil, and sometimes with ink.

MR. ROBINSON. Q. Has he done writing for you at your request? A. He has.

MARY ANN LYDALL . I am the wife of John Edward Lydall, of Camden-own, a clerk in the Birmingham Railway. I have known the prisoner five years, and am acquainted with his writing—I believe this check is his writing.

Cross-examined. Q. Who was it asked you to come and give evidence against the prisoner? A. The officer; my husband compelled me to come—a child has been taken away from me by my husband on Friday night—this case had been before the Magistrate on the Monday previous—I have seen my child for a little time since, but I was told I should not have it again unless I came here and said it was Mr. Bingley's writing; but I knew it was his writing.

MR. ROBINSON. Q. Who told you to say that? A. The officer came, and asked me if I knew his writing—I said I did, and I did; but I should not have said I did, if J bad known what it was for—the officer showed me the check—I said I thought the upper part was his writing, but not the signature—the signature is very like his writing, but the upper part I feel confident about—I told the officer so at the time—the child was not gone then—I was reluctant to come and give evidence against the prisoner—my husband came home the worse for drink, and took the child and said unless I let her go he would take her by force—the child was taken from me on the Friday night, and I went before the police court on the following Monday—my feelings are rather in favour of the prisoner.

COURT. Q. Who was it told you if you did not come and speak to the writing you should not see your child? A. My husband.


View as XML